Saturday, August 15, 2009

Key Points in Health Care

Listening to Democrats on the Sunday talk shows it seems clear that they are actually backing away from the "public option." A Democrat in the Senate said that there never was the votes and there aren't the votes now. I cannot tell you how relieved that makes me. It was literally like a big rock lifted from my heart. If this reform goes through without the public option, then it will truly be the people's voices were heard. It will be amazing that the Democrats have all the power and this historical well liked President, and yet the people's desires will have WON. And this will have happened over the demonizing by Democrat leaders of the American people who dared to protest. Harry Reid recently called us "evilmongers." Pelosi said we carried "swastikas." It's beyond surreal that they thought insulting the American people was going to work. And it didn't.

Keith Hennessey,former Assistant to the U.S. President for Economic Policy and Director of the U.S. National Economic Council, has put together a memorandum that looks at what Obama said at this heath care townhall and debates some points that Obama made at the townhall. I thought it would be informative to go over some key points.

I'm going to try to whittle down some of it for you.

1) THE PRESIDENT: Under the reform we're proposing, if you like your doctor, you can keep you doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.

And yet here is what the CBO said about the House Bill:

CBO: In addition, CBO and the JCT staff estimate that nearly 6 million other people who would be covered by an employment-based plan under current law would not have such coverage under the proposal. That figure includes part-time employees, who coudl receive subsidies via an exchange even though they have an employer's offer of coverage, and about 3 million people who would not have an employer's offer of coverage under the proposal. Firms that would chose not to offer coverage as a resul of the proposal would tend to be smaller employers and those that predominantly employ lower-wage workers-people who would be eligible for subsidies thought exchanges also would not have coverage available though their employers. Whether those changes in coverage would represent the dropping of existing coverage of a lack of offers of new coverage is difficult to determine. (page 5)

So basically Obama is overpromising, and it's simply not true that everyone can keep the health care they like.

2) THE PRESIDENT: You will not be waiting in lines. This is not about putting the government in charge of your health insurance.

Keith Hennessey: And yet section 3103 of the Senate HELP Committee bill would give the Secretary of Health and Human Services authority to appoint a Medical Advisory Council that would determine what items and services are "essential" for a "qualified health plan," and by implication, which benefits are not essential. The House bill is parallel but less specific, creating an "independent public/private advisory committee." in which the members are chosen by the government.

So in reality government officials ( or people appointed by them) will determine benefit packages, co-payments and deductibles, premiums, plan expenses, and profits.

If that's not putting the government in charge of your health insurance, I don't know what is.

And pray tell how the President knows there will be no waiting lines?? With 47 million more people suddenly insured, you don't think the lines will be long?

THE PRESIDENT: And finally--this is important--we will require insurance companies to cover routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies...(later) And I would like to see a mental health component as part of a package that people are covered under, under our plan.

So the government will REQUIRE that all insurance companies cover these things and we are still suppose to believe that the government is not in charge of our health insurance? A little honesty here would be nice.

THE PRESIDENT: ...because there's no reason we shouldn't be catching disease like breast cancer and prostate cancer on the front end. That makes sense, it saves lives; it also saves money-and we need to save money in this health care system.

CBO: Although different types of preventive care have different effects on spending, the evidence suggests that for most preventive services, expanded utilization leads to higher, and not lower, medical speading overall.

In other words, it's fine and good to say we need to catch cancer and other diseases early on, but it's simply not true to claim it will save money. It will not. It will increase the medical spending. Mainly because expanding preventive care for everyone, will cost much more than the few it catches early to save more expensive care.

CBO: Judging the overall effect on medical spending requires analysts to calculate not just the savings from the relatively few individuals who would avoid more expensive treatment later, but also the costs for the many who would make greater use of preventive care.

This is probably the President's biggest falsehood:

THE PRESIDENT: And we will do this without adding to our deficit over the next decade, largely by cutting out the waste and insurance company giveaways in Medicare that aren't making our seniors healthier. (later) First of all, I said I won't sign a bill that adds to the deficit or the national debt. Okay? So this will have to be paid for.

*CBO says the House bill would increase federal deficits by $239 billion over the next ten years.

*CBO says the House bill would increase the deficit in 2019 by 65 billion, meaning the bill fails the President's "10th year test."

*CBO says the House bill would result in increasing deficits beyond 2019, because the ndew spending would grow faster than 8% a year, while offsets would grow only about 5% per years.

*THe House bill would not just slow Medicare growth, but would also raise taxes on high income individuals and small business owners.

THE PRESIDENT: We have AARP on board because they know this is a good deal for our seniors.

Simply untrue. The AARP has not endorsed any bill.

THE PRESIDENT: And so I do think it's important for particularly seniors who currently receive Medicare to understand that if we're able to get something right like Medicare, then there should be a little more confidence that maybe the government can have a role-not the dominiat role, but a role-in making sure the people are treated fairly when it comes to insurance.

Keith: But Medicare is fiscally unsustainable. The President already said that in an earlier discussion. So Medicare is not a successful model for a new system, because we can't afford it.

THE PRESIDENT: I don't have to explain to you that nearly 46 million American don't have health insurance coverage today. In the wealthiest nation on Earth, 46 million of our fellow citizesn have not coverage. They are just vulnerable. If something happens, they go bankrupt, or they don't get the care theyneed.

The Truth about those 45.6 million people:

*6.4 million are enrolled in Medicaid or SCHIP and just gve the Census taker the wrong answer. This is called the Medicaid undercount.
*Another 4.3 million are eligible for Medicaid or SCHIP and have not enrolled. If they need care, the hospital generally enrolls them.
*Another 9.3 million are non-citizens.
*Another 10.1 million have income more than three times the poverty line. They chose not buy insurance
*Leaving about 15.6 million remaining uninsured of whom about 5 million are childless adults.

In a country with 305 million people and only a little over 15 million truly uninsured, I think we can find a way to insure them and require the others to insure themselves without radically changing our healthcare system.

Friday, August 14, 2009

Will Obama lose American's Trust?

I have always loved Peggy Noonan. I love the way she writes. Needless to say I was a bit saddened and appalled by her being swooned by Pres. Obama. But she writes it as she sees it, and at the time she saw him as uniter, a different kind of politician. She saw him as one who would rise above petty politics and govern fairly.

She, like the rest of us, have learned that he is nothing of that. She has an excellent piece at the WJS on what Americans are feeling on this healthcare bill, and the impression Obama is giving of himself in defending it. We all know that Obama has the votes to cram this bill down our throats, whether we want it or not. Reasonable Democrats may resist, but they may not. So in this one sentence, Peggy illustrates perfectly what happens if this passes:

If he wins it, will be a victory not worth having. It will have cost too much. It has lessened the thing an admired president must have from the people, and that is trust.

And there it is. Whether this bill passes or not, politically, Republicans have won. If it doesn't, then we saved our country from this debacle. If it does, then Obama loses the people's trust, and the next three years will be very difficult. We will probably win back the House and Senate in 2010 and Obama will unlikely win re-election.

Obama has no one to blame but himself for the corner he is backed into now. He allowed the likes of Pelosi to craft a boondoggle bill that far overreached the concerns that many have on health care. Instead of listening to the people, he dismissed them. He ignored those at the townhalls. He allowed those on his side to demonize, not the Republicans, but the American people.

And they won't forget that.

Obama never saw it coming. Palin Power!

I see Palin's plan. Be the thorn in Obama's side.

This thorn is going to hurt.

You go girl!

God bless the sane Democrats

It's entirely possible that blue dog Democrats will save us from this horror of a health care bill. And that's not all they may save us from:

Aug. 14 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Senate should abandon efforts to pass legislation curbing greenhouse-gas emissions this year and concentrate on a narrower bill to require use of renewable energy, four Democratic lawmakers say.

“The problem of doing both of them together is that it becomes too big of a lift,” Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas said in an interview last week. “I see the cap-and-trade being a real problem.”

The resistance by Lincoln and her Senate colleagues undercuts President Barack Obama’s effort to win passage of legislation that would cap carbon dioxide emissions and establish a market for trading pollution allowances, said Peter Molinaro, the head of government affairs for Midland, Michigan- based Dow Chemical Co., which supports the measure.

Thursday, August 13, 2009

Score One Fo Palin!

Wow. Right out of the gate in her new role and she SCORES!

The Senate Finance Committee will drop a controversial provision on consultations for end-of-life care from its proposed healthcare bill, its top Republican member said Thursday.

The committee, which has worked on putting together a bipartisan healthcare reform bill, will drop the controversial provision after it was derided by conservatives as "death panels" to encourage euthanasia.

Underestimating her is the left's first mistake.

Big Pharma, Big Lies

Obama is having a bad week. Support for health care reform support has fallen dramatically, and he was caught telling a few lies at his health care townhall, not the least of which was saying that the AARP had endorsed his bill (Gibbs said he "mis-spoke).

Like I said earlier, I think I need only to quote Democrats from now on on health care because so many seem to be getting it. But to imagine that the Huffington Post, of all places, would break this story, is,'s just amazing:

A memo obtained by the Huffington Post confirms that the White House and the pharmaceutical lobby secretly agreed to precisely the sort of wide-ranging deal that both parties have been denying over the past week.

The memo, which according to a knowledgeable health care lobbyist was prepared by a person directly involved in the negotiations, lists exactly what the White House gave up, and what it got in return.

It says the White House agreed to oppose any congressional efforts to use the government's leverage to bargain for lower drug prices or import drugs from Canada -- and also agreed not to pursue Medicare rebates or shift some drugs from Medicare Part B to Medicare Part D, which would cost Big Pharma billions in reduced reimbursements.

In exchange, the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers Association (PhRMA) agreed to cut $80 billion in projected costs to taxpayers and senior citizens over ten years. Or, as the memo says: "Commitment of up to $80 billion, but not more than $80 billion."

Representatives from both the White House and PhRMA, shown the outline, adamantly denied that it reflected reality. PhRMA senior vice president Ken Johnson said that the outline "is simply not accurate." "This memo isn't accurate and does not reflect the agreement with the drug companies," said White House spokesman Reid Cherlin.

And like Ace points out, Big Pharma also agreed to spend $150 million on pro health care reform ads this month. We aren't sure if this is even legal, but we do know that the Obama administration has been lying about this. This was a secret memo, secret transactions, secret deals with Big Pharma. What happened to "transparency?" Please. That was a lie too.

The worst thing to me? Pres. Obama going on and on, claiming he can find additional "savings" in drug spending, when in fact he has already promised a deal with the drug companies to not get a penny more in savings from them.

Does Obama just think that people will shrug off these lies? This is one of the reasons support for health care reform is diminishing. People don't believe you when it's clear that you have been lying to them.

The crazy that is our government right now

I've never seen the left or the msm quite so unhinged as they are now, simply because American citizens have chosen to show up at townhalls and voice their concerns.

First Pelosi said that people at the townhalls were toting Swastikas. The media showed a collage of pics with this big photo of Obama with a Hitler mustache. Turns out that picture came from the Lyndon LaRouche people. If you aren't familiar with LaRouche, he's been bringing the crazy for years now. SNL did skits about him in the mid-80's called "Lyndon LaRouche Theatre." It's also interesting that when the left had huge paper mache heads of Bush as Hitler, the media forgot to be outraged.

Then some guy brings a gun strapped to his hip outside Obama's townhall and the leftwing media goes nuts. Turns out he's a libertarian and the open carry law is one that the citizens of his state like to show off. He is also the one who mangled the quote by Thomas Jefferson about the tree of liberty being watered by the blood of patriots. Suddenly he's our poster boy and the entire opposition movement to the healthcare bill is defined by this guy. At least according to the leftwing looney tunes on the net and MSNBC.

Now the DHS, in order to once again paint all of us as scary and threatening, issued another report about "rightwing extremism," using kook sites that in no way represent the right wing.

The fact that this govt agency is being used in such a political manner is appalling, and over at NRO, they explain it pretty well:

"Under Napolitano's watch, government officials who were supposed to be gathering real intelligence on domestic terror threats were instead surfing the web and reading whacky websites, all to create the public perception of 'rightwing extremism,'" [ALG chairman Bill] Wilson said.

The DHS report warned of allegedly impending domestic terrorist acts by gun owners, pro-life activists, people concerned about states rights, and returning U.S. military veterans. Wilson said the department prepared the report "without any intelligence sources, crime data, or actual evidence of planned attacks or any groups known to be planning attacks, or any groups with histories of perpetrating attacks that are currently conducting any types of operational recruitment, meeting, or planning attacks."

You can read a complete list of the web sites used by DHS
here. Prominent among those is the site of the Southern Poverty Law Center, a far-left non-profit based in Mongtomery, Alabama, that for years has seen all kinds of Nazis and KKKers behind every bush in America, but especially those located south of Mason-Dixon Line....

It's one thing for the left to distort, lie, and spin things against us on the right (we expect that), but quite another for our own government to be conspiring against us. First it's website where citizens are asked to tattle on other citizens, and now this.

It almost seems that every day I am confronted with a government that sees someone like me, a college educated wife/mom of four children, taxpayer, never broken the law, volunteer and activist and writer, as someone to watch.

It's beyond surreal.

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Palin fires back at Obama...


It's on. And she has footnotes.

Democrats, this is all on you....

I think from now on I will only quote Democrats on health care reform and Obama, since so many seem to be getting it:

Camille Paglia:

But who would have thought that the sober, deliberative Barack Obama would have nothing to propose but vague and slippery promises -- or that he would so easily cede the leadership clout of the executive branch to a chaotic, rapacious, solipsistic Congress? House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whom I used to admire for her smooth aplomb under pressure, has clearly gone off the deep end with her bizarre rants about legitimate town-hall protests by American citizens. She is doing grievous damage to the party and should immediately step down.

There is plenty of blame to go around. Obama's aggressive endorsement of a healthcare plan that does not even exist yet, except in five competing, fluctuating drafts, makes Washington seem like Cloud Cuckoo Land. The president is promoting the most colossal, brazen bait-and-switch operation since the Bush administration snookered the country into invading Iraq with apocalyptic visions of mushroom clouds over American cities.

You can keep your doctor; you can keep your insurance, if you're happy with it, Obama keeps assuring us in soothing, lullaby tones. Oh, really? And what if my doctor is not the one appointed by the new government medical boards for ruling on my access to tests and specialists? And what if my insurance company goes belly up because of undercutting by its government-bankrolled competitor? Face it: Virtually all nationalized health systems, neither nourished nor updated by profit-driven private investment, eventually lead to rationing.

I just don't get it. Why the insane rush to pass a bill, any bill, in three weeks? And why such an abject failure by the Obama administration to present the issues to the public in a rational, detailed, informational way? The U.S. is gigantic; many of our states are bigger than whole European nations. The bureaucracy required to institute and manage a nationalized health system here would be Byzantine beyond belief and would vampirically absorb whatever savings Obama thinks could be made. And the transition period would be a nightmare of red tape and mammoth screw-ups, which we can ill afford with a faltering economy.

As with the massive boondoggle of the stimulus package, which Obama foolishly let Congress turn into a pork rut, too much has been attempted all at once; focused, targeted initiatives would, instead, have won wide public support. How is it possible that Democrats, through their own clumsiness and arrogance, have sabotaged healthcare reform yet again? Blaming obstructionist Republicans is nonsensical because Democrats control all three branches of government. It isn't conservative rumors or lies that are stopping healthcare legislation; it's the justifiable alarm of an electorate that has been cut out of the loop and is watching its representatives construct a tangled labyrinth for others but not for themselves. No, the airheads of Congress will keep their own plush healthcare plan -- it's the rest of us guinea pigs who will be thrown to the wolves.

On a side note: Esquire, who endorsed Obama and gushed about him endlessly, seems to be catching on the real Obama.

The Theatre That Is Obama

So far in all the townhalls, I have yet to see any Democrat prove that anyone asking questions was planted there by "Republican operatives."

But it only took Michelle Malkin less than a day to identify all the plants (and there were MANY) in Obama's townhall on healthcare.

The audacity (pun intended).

Tuesday, August 11, 2009

It's the Economy Stupid....

Ok, let's take a break from the health care debate. The townhalls seem to working. Gallup: Public support for health care legislation drops from 56% to 35% over past four weeks. I'll take a little comfort in that. Especially since there is no comfort to take in the job numbers. If only we were expending the energy from the healthcare debate, on getting Americans back to work.

You know it's bad when Bob Herbert at the NYT even sees it:

You can put whatever kind of gloss you want on last week’s jobs numbers, but the truth is that while they may have been a bit better than most economists were expecting, they were still bad, bad, bad.


The country has lost a crippling 6.7 million jobs since the Great Recession began in December 2007. No one is predicting a recovery in the foreseeable future powerful enough to replace the millions of jobs that have vanished in this historic downturn.

Analysts at the Economic Policy Institute noted that the economy has fewer jobs now than it had in 2000, “even though the labor force has grown by around 12 million workers since then.”

Two issues that absolutely undermine any rosy assessment of last week’s employment report are the swelling ranks of the long-term unemployed and the crushing levels of joblessness among young Americans. More than five million workers — about a third of the unemployed — have been jobless for more than six months. That’s the highest number recorded since accurate records have been kept.

The Obama administration tried to find some silver lining in the jobless rate ticking down 0.1 percent last month, but as Hebert points out, it wasn't because more people found jobs, but because 450,000 people withdrew from the labor market. They stopped looking, so they weren’t counted as unemployed. This isn't something to celebrate.

It's ironic that so many in the black community looked to Obama to finally make things better in the country for them. Since Obama took office more black men are losing jobs than at any time since World War II. While unemployment in general is at 9.4%, for black men age 20 and up the unemployment rate was was 14.5% in June.

Pres. Obama imagines that having some beerfest with his Harvard professor friend and the cop that arrested him, will somehow help with racial issues. Prof. Gates represented the average black man about as much Paris Hilton represents the average nun. It was ridiculous.

There is a real need here in the black community, and it has nothing to do with cops and class. It has to do with jobs.

Everyone is hurting and I just can't believe we are wasting our time and energy on issues that can be dealt with at a later time. We can still talk health care reform next year. We can talk immigration reform next year. We can talk energy and cap and trade next year. They will all still be there. But NOW is the time to focus on jobs, and our government is doing everything but that.

It's bad folks, and if the Obama administration could take a breath and stop trying to create their little liberal utopia in the first year, they might realize that it's important to actually govern and get this economy moving.

A Bold Face Lie

Today in Pres. Obama's townhall, he completely lied. Here is his quote:

"I have not said that I was a single-payer supporter."

You have probably seen the video where he says he indeed supports a single-payer plan.

In this video linked above at a 2003 union conference he clearly says, and I quote EXACTLY, that "I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care plan."

From that speech:

"I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its gross national product on health care, cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. And that's what Jim is talking about when he says everybody in, nobody out. A single-payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. That's what I’d like to see."

It's one thing to say that he has changed his mind or that his belief has grown or become different. But that isn't what he says. He says "I have not said I was a single-payer supporter."

A bold face lie.

Does Obama just hope that most Americans will believe him and not see this video tape?

Why in the world would he lie?

I think this shows a gross arrogance on his part. That he can say what he wishes now, and not be held accountable for what he has said in the past.

via RedState

Even those on the left are beginning to see the Big Brother in this health care reform

Democrat leaders went ballistic over Sarah Palin's remark about "death panels" regarding the end of life measures in the health reform bill. But many reasonable people on the left are beginning to realize that she was right on the money:

This is the Big Brother nightmare of oppressive government that the shrewd propagandists on the right are always blathering on about. Except that this time, they could not be more right.

As HotAir points out:

The shading in of human particulars is what makes this so unsettling. A doctor guided by a panel of experts who have decided that some treatments are futile will, in subtle ways, advance that point of view. Cass Sunstein calls this "nudging," which he characterizes as using various types of reinforcement techniques to "nudge" people's behavior in one direction or another. An elderly or sick person would be especially vulnerable to the sophisticated nudging of an authority figure like a doctor.

Bad enough for such people who are lucky enough to be supported by family and friends. But what about the dying person who is all alone in the world and who has only the "consultant" to turn to and rely on? The heartlessness of such a scene is chilling.

Even I wondered why so many seniors were showing up at the townhalls from the beginning. They already knew what we are just beginning to learn. In this health care bill, it is the elderly that will pay the highest cost. And I'm not talking about taxes.

Media Caught in Bold Faced Lie About Obama/Hitler Poster

This was twittered last night, and as I was watching it I suddenly realized that my daughter was in it! She is interning in D.C. this summer. You have to look quick to see her, but she is at 1.44 and 2.32 in the video. She is the reporter with long dark hair holding the microphone.

Pretty cool, huh?

I'll be writing more about her internship later!

Keep Getting Angry!

I am a totally peaceful person. I don't lose my temper. I don't yell. I rarely argue, even with my teenagers. But if something were happening in my family that threatened it in some way, you can be assured I would yell my bloody head off.

This is what you are seeing at the townhalls. The left would LIKE for us to be "civil," so the media will stop covering the townhalls. But these people are scared and angry, and justifiably so.

Andy McCarthy at NRO says it best:

Re: Krauthammer's Take [Andy McCarthy]

With due mountains of respect to Dr. K, his suggested approach of "quietly and civilly raising questions," politely pointing out that the numbers don't add up, etc., is exactly how we have come to be stuck with the stimulus, the bailouts, and obscene trillions in budget deficits.

This is not a nice, ivory tower, Oxford debate. This is gut-check time about whether we are going to maintain the bedrock American relationship between the citizen and the state. We are in the battle against ruthless, radical ideologues who have the media and the daunting numbers on their side. On our side, we have the further burden of wavering moderates and in-Washington-too-long types who define success as making a deal — any deal — that they think they can sell as a bipartisan compromise that staved off something extreme (but what in reality would be a sell-out that is 3/4 extreme, with Obama simply coming back in 2010 or 2011 to get the remaining 1/4 ... plus).

If our side's approach lacks passion: (a) the brass-knuckled Rahmbo/Pelosi/Reid leadership will easily succeed in showing the potential Democrat convincables (without whom we cannot win) that they better stay on the team if they know what's good for them, and (b) the GOP moderates and old Washington hands will interpret civility as a greenlight to do the dealing they're dying to do.

I am not, and would not, endorse criminal mob behavior. But exhibitions of anger and spirit when one is justifiably angry and spirited are entirely appropriate. Making clear to a pol who is trying to insult your intelligence that you don't appreciate it is entirely appropriate.

I just don't get the detachment from the real world here. We're not talking trivia here. We're talking about what kind of country we're going to be from here on out. That's something worth getting whipped up about. If we're not whipped up, we lose. If we are whipped up and the Democrats try to use that fact as an excuse to ram this through, then they were going to ram it through anyway.

We are a heavy underdog. To prevail, the needle we have to thread is to convince enough Dems and RINOs that there will be electoral hell to pay if this monstrosity is enacted. That requires an authentic demonstration of fervor. It's unfortunate that some people will go overboard — as happens in any human endeavor — but that's no reason to treat this as if it were an academic exercise. If that's the approach, the game — like the country as we know it — is lost.

This isn't a game. This isn't just an "issue." This is truly about losing what America is all about. It is truly about losing control of our very health and our future. So I encourage any and all passion.

The future depends on it.

Rationing Care - the Government Option

Posted by BigDog

Falling out of Love with Barak Obama

...President Obama's appointee, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, who, according to a New York Post op ed article by Betsy McCauley, former Lt. Governor of the State of New York, stated, "Savings, he writes, will require changing how doctors think about their patients: Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, 'as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others' (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008)." He also stated, "...communitarianism' should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those 'who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens...An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia.' (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. '96). "


The government deciding who lives and who dies.

Its funny when Leftists try to refute criticism of the health care bill by quoting Obama. The bill itself is evidence as is the long publicly held beliefs of his administration's officials, advisers and associates. Saying 'that's not true because Obama says its not true' doesn't cut the mustard.

Monday, August 10, 2009

The Real Hillary

Remember when Hillary was first elected Senator and she dropped the pretty hairdo and makeup? People reacted and she got back on board. It's the same with her personality. She adopted this softer side when campaigning for President. But here the real Hillary, Hillary the feminist, peeks out from behind the mask.

Not a pretty sight, is it?

Compare and Contrast

When the right protests....

When the left protests....

Submitted without comment.

This is why people are scared.....

This man is not a Republican. He says he has voted both ways. Does anyone doubt his sincerity? These are the people protesting. Democrats have a right to oppose us, but stop accusing us of being part of some lobbyist funded protest.

via GatewayPundit

Snake Oil

The reason that this health care reform argument has become so chaotic, and the reason why so many people are angry, is because Obama has not been honest.

RealClearPolitics has an excellent article describing how past healthcare measures have always expanded benefits, while cost spiral out of control. This will be what will happen here, but on a much larger scale:

No president has spoken more forcefully about the need to control costs. Failure, he's argued, would expand federal budget deficits, raise out-of-pocket health costs and squeeze take-home pay (more compensation would go to insurance). All true. But Obama's program would do little to reduce costs and would increase spending by expanding subsidized insurance. The House legislation would cut the uninsured by 37 million by 2018, estimates the Congressional Budget Office. The uninsured get care now; with insurance they'd get more.

"You'd be adding a third medical entitlement on top of Medicare and Medicaid," says James Capretta, a top official at the Office of Management and Budget from 2001 to 2004.

What needs to be done first is to establish cost control.

Congress wouldn't create new benefits until it had disciplined the old.

How is it possible that we are talking about such a radical overhaul in health care when we are looking at Medicaid going broke in 2017? It's like we are ignoring this big elephant in the room. Is it any wonder that so many are having to yell to get people's attention? I've said it before and it bears repeating. In 1965 when Medicaid was established the government said that by 1990 it would cost 9 billion. The actual cost? 66 billion and about to go broke. Now the government is telling us that this health care reform will cost 1 trillion over ten years (which is completely mind boggling). Does ANYONE really believe that that will be the cost of this?

Congress has a nasty habit of passing bills and worrying about the actual costs later.

In addition I found this interesting article by Robert Reich (secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton). Reich loves Obama and loves the idea of universal healthcare, but......

But I'm appalled by the deal the White House has made with the pharmaceutical industry's lobbying arm to buy their support.

Last week, after being reported in the Los Angeles Times, the White House confirmed it has promised Big Pharma that any healthcare legislation will bar the government from using its huge purchasing power to negotiate lower drug prices. That's basically the same deal George W. Bush struck in getting the Medicare drug benefit, and it's proven a bonanza for the drug industry. A continuation will be an even larger bonanza, given all the boomers who will be enrolling in Medicare over the next decade. And it will be a gold mine if the deal extends to Medicaid, which will be expanded under most versions of the healthcare bills now emerging from Congress, and to any public option that might be included. (We don't know how far the deal extends beyond Medicare because its details haven't been made public.)

Let me remind you: Any bonanza for the drug industry means higher healthcare costs for the rest of us, which is one reason why critics of the emerging healthcare plans, including the Congressional Budget Office, are so worried about their failure to adequately stem future healthcare costs.

I find it amusing that so many on the left imagine that it is the right being funded by insurance companies and lobbyists. Why do you think those same people stood by Obama when he got the health care debate started? He made a deal with them. He knew he needed big pharma on his side to pass this boondoggle, and as you can see, they will make out like bandits. Does this make you feel like the American people's best interests are being considered?

Keep all this in mind when you see the onslaught of pro government run healthcare ads soon. It wil big pharma urging you to be on the side of Obamacare. After all, it's in THEIR best interest. Reich's continues:

Big Pharma isn't just supporting universal healthcare. It's also spending lots of money on TV and radio advertising in support. Sunday's New York Times reports that Big Pharma has budgeted $150 million for TV ads promoting universal health insurance, starting this August (that's more money than John McCain spent on TV advertising in last year's presidential campaign), after having already spent a bundle through advocacy groups like Healthy Economies Now and Families USA.

Are we getting this? This isn't some rightwinger telling you these things. This is a former Clinton cabinet secretary who loves Obama.

The truth that so many of you who supported Obama will have to face sooner or later, is that you were sold a bill of goods. He is the finest of snake oil salesmen. And we all know that the snakeoil never works and it never makes us feel better.

Wake up people. The future of your health depends on it.

Sunday, August 09, 2009

Listen and Learn

via HotAir.

The caller has a perfect summary who these protesters are. I couldn't have said it better myself.

Call Your Representative

Here is a list of of Representatives in the house. Find yours and call them and tell them to not vote for this health care bill when they come back from vacation.

Nothing could be more important than this. Call now, call later, call often this month.

What the townhalls are proving is that these are not just Republicans showing up to protest.

Keep at it folks, spread the word.