Obama outlines health care plan for all - Page 8 - Big Big Forums

Jolie Rouge · 06-26-2009, 01:23 AM

Thursday, June 25, 2009[b]
Ezra Klein's Weak Defense Of Oba-Care[/i]

Writing in the Washington Post, Ezra Klein struggles for a rationale to defend Obama against Ed Morrisey pointing out that Obama fell into the trap of admitting he'd make sure that he and his family would go outside of ObaCare to get the best treatment money can buy.

To pass it, it's liberals who have to ignore reality and pretend that nothing would change in the private sector if there's a public option. Catastrophic care would likely be one of the first things to disappear from the private sector should insurers be forced to compete with the government in a system that everyone honest, even Democrats, has admitted is simply a step on the road to single payer.

Were it not a problem, Obama would have said so. He knew he was trapped.

The health care system can not deny treatment today. Even to the extent private insurance remains an option, once government begins rationing care - and they must to control costs - there will be no rationale for private insures to not do the same to remain competitive. That is not the case today. In fact, insurers can be exposed to massive law suits today for denying claims. However, the treatment was provided. That won't be true under Obama's system.

No private system can compete with a publicly subsidized government system without controlling costs over and above any steps the government takes to do likewise. And a public option would have to control costs in many ways to be competitive with the health care that most all Americans enjoy today - even the currently uninsured.

Quote:

I'm also not sure what to say about a post that argues that the problem with Obama's health-care plan is that it would force low-income Americans to "make sacrifices that wealthier, more powerful people — like the president himself — wouldn’t face." I could imagine a single-payer supporter making that argument. But someone who advocates that we "boost the private sector" in health care? The same private sector, I imagine, in which having more money buys you more things?

Honestly, it's like these people live on a different planet.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...perplexed.html

So says the reality-based community in embracing a non-reality to pass an eventually forced system that is ultimately bad for Americans in need of care.

http://www.riehlworldview.com/carniv...-of-obama.html

76/1,182

Jolie Rouge · 07-02-2009, 02:17 AM

Our celebrity President and his staged “town hall” meetings
Posted by: Sister Toldjah on July 1, 2009 at 6:23 pm

http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/20...hall-meetings/

Tom Maguire and Mary Katharine Ham both take the mainstream media to task on how they framed Bush’s “orchestrated” town hall meetings versus Obama’s, the latter of which took part in a town hall “discussion” on healthcare earlier today in Virginia. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/0...n-health-care/

Of course, it’s not surprising to see how the mainstream media is painting the issue of “orchestrated” town halls in a positive light in The Age of Obama. As Allah Pundit put it so well: http://hotair.com/archives/2009/07/0...ony-town-hall/

Quote:

“It’s in keeping with the media’s narratives about Dubya and Obama, though, the former shifty and stupid and therefore dependent on softballs, the latter “open” and ingenious and no longer required to prove his ability to handle tough questions.”

Yep.

And I note for the record that the cries of the usual whiners on the issue of “pre-screened” questions go oddly silent about it everytime it happens with Obama. http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/20...the-outrage-4/

With one exception: Believe it or not, Helen Thomas gave Robert Gibbs hell about it today at the daily WH presser (watch the video here http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...l_meeting.html ) Wonders never will cease.

Related/Prior:

Critics Attack ABC News for Refusing to Air Opposing Ads During Obama’s Health Care Special http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...-care-special/

O-TV: The only things missing were the Greek columns http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/20...greek-columns/

Quote:

MarkJ says:
July 1, 2009 at 10:50 pm

Judging from Obama’s “townhall discussion” in Virginia today, I think we’d see more hard-hitting, left-field, take-no-prisoners questions at a North Korean press conference.

Does Obama have any residual sense of shame?
Wait, I’ll answer that for y’all: no.

http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/20...hall-meetings/

Tom Maguire http://justoneminute.typepad.com/mai...sh-did-it.html

Mary Katharine Ham http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblog...obamas_tow.asp

Bush's 'Town Halls' vs. Obama's Town Halls

The New York Times is covering President Obama's health care town hall-style meeting today in Northern Virginia rather credulously. This is the orchestrated political event that will feature a hand-picked audience and pre-screened questions about Obama's health care plan for the nation.

In one story, the Times bills it as Obama's effort to "steer health debate out of the capital."

A blog post echoes that storyline, simply referring to Obama's "selling his plan to the public."

Those two write-ups, and an update on the town meeting, as it starts, all explain that the president will take questions from the audience (and, Facebook and Twitter!) without ever mentioning that the content of both the audience and the questions was governed by the White House.

It struck me that I remembered New York Times approaching coverage of President Bush's Social Security town halls somewhat differently, back in 2005 when Bush was similarly seeking to take the "debate out of the capital" and "sell his plan to the public."

Indeed, a quick search reveals that in February 2005, according to the Times, Bush was taking "Social Security to 2 'town halls.' That story notes the "orchestrated" nature of the political event:

Quote:

To make his case, Mr. Bush held two town-hall-style meetings with younger and older workers, events that recalled some of the most carefully orchestrated, and successful, moments of his re-election campaign last year. There were teachers, preachers, recent retirees and a widow, all embracing elements of his message.

In another story, the Times described one part of Bush's "road tour" thusly:

Quote:

At the "town hall" meeting in Kentucky, Mr. Bush sought to emphasize the benefits of his Social Security plan for rural populations, part of a strategy to win over specific groups of voters to using personal accounts as part of an overhauled program of retirement benefits for younger workers.

When does a "town hall" become a town hall, without need of scare-quote qualification, one might wonder? (When Clinton and Gore held Social Security town halls in the late 90s, they were just plain town halls. Although, one story notes rather deep into the article that the AARP picked questions.)

Both White Houses are entitled to hold such events, which are inherently and sensibly orchestrated to benefit each executive. The press is right to note that fact while reporting them. Odd that the Times chose to do that only for the Bush administration, huh?

I guess their journalistic skepticism is now more properly termed, "skepticism."

:crickets:

Jolie Rouge · 07-03-2009, 07:28 PM

Welcome to Obamacare Theater

The White House sure likes to put on a show. Fresh off its joint stage production with ABC News, the Obama administration broadcast another health care propaganda play this week under the guise of a citizen “town hall.” (Full video here : http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Full-...h-Care-Reform/)

Chicago consigliere and senior adviser Valerie Jarrett managed the floor and human props for Obama. In a telling moment as the event kicked off, she protested a wee bit much: “I want to emphasize that the President has not seen the questions ahead of time.” The audience responded with polite laughter.

But the denials of pre-planning and stacked decks deserve nothing but derisive mockery. Obama’s town hall was filled with backroom players and a supporting cast of socialized medicine activists and ideologues. One of the three lucky audience members whom Obama chose for questioning was Jason Rosenbaum. Rosenbaum works for the Washington, D.C.-based Health Care for America Now (HCAN). That’s the same K Street Astroturf outfit I reported on last week – the one with a $40 million budget to lobby for government-run health care. The one inextricably linked to left-wing billionaire George Soros.

Let’s look at who else miraculously drew a golden ticket. Another one of the three, softball-tossing citizen questioners at the White House forum identified herself as a member of the Service Employees International Union. That’s the same SEIU whose president, Andy Stern, boasted of spending nearly $61 million in members’ dues to elect Barack Obama. It’s the same union that produced Patrick Gaspard, former SEIU health care lobbyist and now White House director of the office of political affairs.

But the Obama health care “town hall’s” climactic moment came when the consoler-in-chief plucked Debby Smith from the crowd to tell her personal health care horror story. She choked back tears as she talked of her battle with kidney cancer, her joblessness, and her lack of insurance. Obama hugged the trembling woman and dubbed her “Exhibit A” for his massive entitlement program. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090701/...a_health_forum

Debby Smith, however, is no ordinary patient. While she may be “unemployed,” she has been rather busy working for the Obama campaign – as a volunteer for Organizing for America. It’s the old Obama for Change political machine now housed under the Democratic National Committee. Smith has also identified herself as a worker for the Virginia Organizing Project, which has been coordinating lobbying trips and health care forums with HCAN. Yes, that same HCAN. http://www.tricities.com/tri/news/lo...wn_hall/27797/

In December, Smith moderated a “a community discussion on health care issues” in Appalachia, Virginia and told her local paper that the meeting “would be reported back to former Sen. Tom Daschle, who has been directed by President Elect Barack Obama to form a committee to report on health care issues.” http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:...&ct=clnk&gl=us

Daschle may be out of the spotlight since his Health and Human Services cabinet nomination fiasco. But he is in constant contact with Team Obama. As he told the Associated Press earlier this week in a media meeting on health care reform: “We interact with them daily.” http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...9a79QD994J7780 No doubt.

Veteran liberal journalist Helen Thomas earned some accolades for challenging the tightly-controlled White House events. But where was she back in March, when Team Obama pulled the same stunt? http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/...ioners_we.html At a health care event in the East Room, the questioners included an Obama donor, a Democratic National Committee member, a former Democratic candidate for the Virginia statehouse who had publicly endorsed Obama, and a member of the SEIU. Yes, that SEIU.

The growing irritation of the once-smitten Beltway media is better late than never, I suppose. But one wonders what took so long for the sedatives to wear off the watchdogs. Team Obama has screamed “Kabuki!” from Day One.

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/07/03...acare-theater/

Emotion, few details, in Obama's health care pitch
Philip Elliott And Charles Babington, Associated Press Writers
Wed Jul 1, 7:08 pm ET

ANNANDALE, Va. – President Barack Obama wanted to put a human face on his plans to overhaul health care, and a Virginia supporter did just that Wednesday. Fighting back tears, Debby Smith, 53, told Obama of her kidney cancer and her inability to obtain health insurance or hold a job.

The president hugged her — she's a volunteer for his political operation — and called her "exhibit A" in an unsustainable system that is too expensive and complex for millions of Americans.

"We are going to try to find ways to help you immediately," he told Smith as hundreds looked on at a community college forum — and countless others watched on television. But the nation's long-term needs require a greater emphasis on preventive care and "cost-effective care," he said.

Smith, of Appalachia, Va., is a volunteer for Organizing for America, Obama's political operation within the Democratic National Committee. She obtained her ticket through the White House.

The health care changes that Obama called for Wednesday would reshape the nation's medical landscape. He says he wants to cover nearly 50 million uninsured Americans, to persuade doctors to stress quality over quantity of care, to squeeze billions of dollars from spending.

But details on exactly how to do those things were generally lacking in his hour-long town hall forum before a friendly, hand-picked audience in a Washington suburb. The lingering questions underscore the tough negotiations awaiting Congress, the administration and dozens of special interest groups in the coming months. Lawmakers will return to debating the issue when they return from a one-week recess on Monday.

Some of Obama's questioners Wednesday were from friendly sources, including a member of the Service Employees International Union and a member of Health Care for America Now, which organized a Capitol Hill rally last week calling for an overhaul. White House aides selected other questions submitted by people on YouTube, Facebook and Twitter.

Republicans said the event was a political sham designed to help Obama, not to inform the public.

"Americans are already skeptical about the cost and adverse impact of the president's health care plans," Republican National Committee spokesman Trevor Francis said. "Stacking the audience and preselecting questions may make for a good TV, but it's the wrong way to engage in a meaningful discussion about reforming health care."

Obama made no new proposals at the sometimes emotional event. But he vigorously defended his plans while fielding seven questions from the live audience at the forum and on the Internet.

The president would bar insurance companies from turning down applicants because of their "pre-existing conditions." He would establish health care exchanges that would spread the costs of treating patients such as Smith over a large number of people.

Obama called for shifting huge sums of money from current health care spending to new goals. About two-thirds of the overall new costs "will come from reallocating money that is already being spent in the health care system but isn't being spent wisely," he said.

He restated his pledge to cut $177 billion over the next decade from Medicare Advantage insurance plans. And he noted that doctors, hospitals, corporations and others have promised to decrease the annual rate of spending growth by 1.5 percent, or $2 trillion over 10 years.

Such savings are not guaranteed, however, and many Republican lawmakers say Obama's plans will prove too costly.

"The biggest thing we can do to hold down costs is to change the incentives of a health care system that automatically equates expensive care with better care," the president said. He said the formula system drives up costs "but doesn't make you better."

Obama did not make specific recommendations for changing the incentive formulas.

One questioner said limits on awards from medical malpractice lawsuits would bring down health care costs.

Obama replied, "I don't like the idea of an artificial cap" on such awards for a patient's injuries. He also said there was little evidence that various states' efforts to limit such awards have uniformly brought down costs.

Obama said, however, that he is working with the American Medical Association to explore ways to reduce liability for doctors and hospitals "when they've done nothing wrong." He offered no specifics for a problem that has vexed the medical and legal industries for decades.

The president repeatedly said the current health care system is not acceptable and must be overhauled this year. He urged the audience, which included people following on Facebook and YouTube, to reject critics who say his plans are too costly or a step toward socialized medicine.

Obama said a government-run "single-payer" health care system works well in some countries. But it is not appropriate in the United States, he said, because so many people get insurance through their employers working with private companies.

Still, he again called for a government-run "public option" to compete with private insurers, a plan that many Republicans oppose.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090701/...a_health_forum

Jolie Rouge · 07-03-2009, 07:30 PM

See also http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2008/10...obama-staffer/

Jolie Rouge · 07-08-2009, 05:59 PM

Dodd on Health Care: Hey, We've Passed Legislation Way More Irresponsibly Than This Before!

CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf and study author Phil Ellis testified before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) on the new draft of the Kennedy health care legislation today. The old version of the bill was estimated to cost $1 trillion over 10 years and would insure only one third of the 47 million uninsured Americans. http://blogs.healthleadersmedia.com/...-buys-so-much/

This version, which includes language for a government-run option, would cost substantially less, at $597 billion, and insure a far larger number of those currently uninsured. But neither version accounts for likely expansion of Medicaid, which the CBO estimates would cost an additional $500 billion for the feds, and likely much more for the states:

Quote:

It found that the cost of such an expansion "could vary in a broad range around $500 billion over 10 years." But the catch is that such an estimate is of the anticipated federal cost of the Medicaid expansion. In actuality, the federal government typically pays around 57 percent of the cost of Medicaid, while the remaining 43 percent is picked up by the states.

So what's the full cost of a Medicaid expansion at both the federal and state level?

Read Philip Klein's whole post for a full accounting of what burden the expansion of Medicaid would place on already cash-strapped states.
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/07/08...d-expansion-wo

In the course of the hearing, Sen. Orrin Hatch said, "We're spending over a trillion dollars and we don't even have any ideas about who's gonna be covered."

Sen. Chris Dodd, who is guiding the Kennedy legislation in Kennedy's absence, offered this telling retort:

Quote:

"Looking back over the past eight years, we've done a lot of legislation here where actually bills have been passed before we knew the numbers. I'm not trying to use historical precedent for all of this but..." he said, trailing off before thanking the CBO for its work in coming up with estimates for the in-progress legislation.

I'm not sure, "Hey, we've been as much, if not more, irresponsible in the past" should be the rallying cry for this complete overhaul of the health care economy, but Dodd can hardly be blamed for following the lead of the President and Democratic leaders.

In his health care town-hall style meeting in Virginia last week, Obama himself pressed the case for rushing complicated legislation before we know the numbers. Because, after all, the numbers might make people less willing to vote for it: http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Dail...Town-Hall.aspx

Quote:

And for those who say, well, you know what, this is something that is very complicated so we shouldn't rush into it -- that's what happens in Congress all the time. They have hearings, they write white papers, and then suddenly the lobbyists and the special interests start going at it, and the next thing you know, another 10 years has gone by and we still haven't done anything.

That's not what's going to happen this time. I am going to keep on pressing until we get it done this year.

Democratic leader Rep. Steny Hoyer laughed at the notion that he would read what was in the health care bill before voting on it, when asked about it Tuesday: http://www.cnsnews.com/public/conten...x?RsrcID=50677

Quote:

“If every member pledged to not vote for it if they hadn’t read it in its entirety, I think we would have very few votes,” Hoyer told CNSNews.com at his regular weekly news conference....

In fact, Hoyer found the idea of the pledge humorous, laughing as he responded to the question. “I’m laughing because a) I don’t know how long this bill is going to be, but it’s going to be a very long bill,” he said.

When is Douglas Elmendorf running for Senate? He seems to take this stuff rather more seriously than many of those doing the questioning.

Posted by Mary Katharine Ham on July 8, 2009 http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblog...hey_weve_p.asp

Confirmed: Deliberative democracy is a joke
By Michelle Malkin • July 8, 2009 02:43 PM

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/07/08...acy-is-a-joke/

Quote:

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

That was the reaction of Democrat House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer to the idea that members of Congress would actually read the health care takeover bill before voting on it: http://www.cnsnews.com/public/conten...x?RsrcID=50677

Quote:

“If every member pledged to not vote for it if they hadn’t read it in its entirety, I think we would have very few votes,” Hoyer told CNSNews.com at his regular weekly news conference.

Hoyer was responding to a question from CNSNews.com on whether he supported a pledge that asks members of the Congress to read the entire bill before voting on it and also make the full text of the bill available to the public for 72 hours before a vote.

In fact, Hoyer found the idea of the pledge humorous, laughing as he responded to the question. “I’m laughing because a) I don’t know how long this bill is going to be, but it’s going to be a very long bill,” he said.

“Members clearly–and staff and review boards, they read them in their entirety. They go over it with members, and members read substantial portions of the bill themselves, but the issue is–I don’t know who signed this (pledge), but frankly the opposition has been very vociferous, not of the verbiage and bill, but on the concept that it incorporates,” Hoyer said.

Let Freedom Ring, a Delaware-based conservative organization, is circulating a pledge that asks members of Congress to promise to read the entirety of the final text of a health-care reform bill before they vote on it. They also are asking that the full bill be made available for review by the public for 72 hours before Congress votes on it.

Obama lied, transparency died.

The joke’s on you.

and me... and taxpayers all over this country ...

And it keeps getting more and more expen$$$$ive every day.

Jolie Rouge · 07-08-2009, 06:29 PM

Wednesday, July 8, 2009
The arrogance of the majority

http://www.punditandpundette.com/200...-majority.html

Steny Hoyer finds cause for mirth in the suggestion that Congress ought to be required to read legislation before voting to impose it upon its subjects:

Quote:

Steny Hoyer, the No. 2 Democrat in the U.S House of Representatives, provided a valuable window on the mindset of the chamber's leadership Tuesday when he all but admitted that few if any members of Congress would read the healthcare reform bill before voting for it.

Quote:

"If every member pledged to not vote for it if they hadn't read it in its entirety, I think we would have very few votes," Hoyer told CNSNews at his regular weekly news conference.

Of course it is not as bad as all that because "... staff and review boards, they read [the bills] in their entirety. They go over it with members, and members read substantial portions of the bill themselves," Hoyer allowed before veering off in another direction.

He was referring to a pledge offered to members of Congress by Let Freedom Ring, where I am a senior fellow, asking them not to vote for any healthcare reform legislation they have not read personally. Hoyer apparently finds the idea that members should read the bills they vote on before they vote humorous, "laughing as he responded to the question," according to the news organization.

"I'm laughing because a) I don't know how long this bill is going to be, but it's going to be a very long bill," he is quoted as saying.

Hoyer's audacity in suggesting, laughing as he did—LAUGHING—that a bill to increase the government's control over more than 17 percent of U.S. gross domestic product won't be read by the people who have to vote to approve it because it is too long suggests there are problems with the issue and the process.

As Kerri Houston Toloczko, policy director for Conservatives for Patients' Rights said, "If it's too long to read, it's probably too expensive to pass."

Power has gone to his head. That doesn't make him unique among his peers. But the little people wonder how it can even be legal to pass a bill that no one has read. And to leave holes in it to be filled in later. This strikes regular people as un-American.

Next up, Henry Waxman:

Quote:

"It appears that the Republican Party leadership in the Congress has made a decision that they want to deny President Obama success, which means, in my mind, they are rooting against the country, as well,” the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman told WAMU radio host Diane Rehm on Tuesday morning, promoting his new book, “The Waxman Report.”

Wow. Dissent from the Obama agenda equals anti-Americanism.

Ed Morrissey puts this in perspective:

Quote:

This is more than just stupid, which it is by the truckload. It’s also dangerous. Making opposition to any politician’s policies or actions a case for treason amounts to an extension of the Louis XIV principle, L’etat, c’est moi, or “I am the state.” It’s also the same idea behind the fuehrerprinzip that allowed Adolf Hitler untrammeled power in the Nazi regime, and any number of other tyrants, great and petty. It is an essential construct of fascism, tyranny, and elitism.

I've come around to the opinion that the majority of the majority is knowingly complicit in converting our economy from capitalism to socialism. The bills that have been passed since January 20th are beyond liberal. Obama's multiple czar appointments, industry takeovers, and firings of watchdogs are consistent with a leader who wants to radically expand government and isn't shy about going against the rules to do so. Congress keeps passing bills that throw sand in the gears of the economy. Then they say it isn't working and talk about throwing more sand. They can't be this stupid. Their goals for the economy aren't our goals.

*Update: Ari David plans to challenge Waxman. http://boycottnrsc.blogspot.com/2009...challenge.html I know exactly zero about him but he can't possibly be any worse.

**And two words I forgot to mention: TERM LIMITS

gmyers · 07-08-2009, 06:48 PM

If you're going to be fined for not having it then we're in trouble because theres no way we can afford any type of insurance payment at this time.

Jolie Rouge · 07-09-2009, 01:43 AM

Here is a copy of the Healthcare Bill Draft!!!!! So if our elected officials are laughing at the fact they may have to READ the bill let’s read it ourselves!

http://tiny url.com/l6689f

http://www.capitalresearch.org/blog/...bill-draft.pdf

Jolie Rouge · 07-09-2009, 05:27 PM

Health Care Reform: Oh, You Mean We Have To Pay For It??

What's more costly, that our Democrat government is inept, or health care reform? Unfortunately, they are one and the same. Already behind schedule, they've suddenly realized they may actually have to figure out how to pay for it. I realize that's all but unheard of in Washington these days, but geesh. If they think they are going to change everyone in America's health care and a huge portion of the nation's GDP with some last minute, too important to read BS, they are going to be thrown out in droves come 2010. Unfortunately, for the Democrat majority, at least, that may already be inevitable. Still, they are intent on making it worse. I won't be sorry to see them go.

Quote:

On Wednesday, according to a Capitol Hill source, the Senate Finance Committee distributed to its members a list of about twenty ways to help pay for health care reform. Everything you could imagine was on the list: Taxes on soda and cigarettes. More savings from Medicare and Medicaid. A value-added tax.

It might sound like an ordinary and perfectly reasonable thing to do. And it would be--if this exercise were taking place, oh, six weeks ago.

But it’s the second week of July. By this point, the Finance Committee was supposed to be holding hearings in order to “mark up” legislation, so that the full Senate would have time to consider and vote on it before the August recess. Instead, the Committee is, in a sense, stuck at square one. Or at least square four, when it needs to be at square seven. Markup hearings won’t begin until there's language to mark up. And there won't be language until there's a basic understanding of the financing part.

What brought us to this juncture? Most immediately, it was Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s message to Finance Chairman Max Baucus on Monday, which was widely reported in the press but somewhat under-appreciated for its import.

Most observers focused on the fact that Reid made clear to Baucus the strong preference of Democratic Senators for including a public insurance option, something Baucus was ready to ditch in order to win Republican support. Reid said that alright. But that wasn’t the only thing he said--or, apparently, the most important.

No, according to several sources on and off Capitol Hill, Reid’s primary message was about the financing of reform. Baucus had hoped to get around $300 billion in funding over the next ten years by capping the tax exclusion on group health benefits. I’m not sure what the exact parameters of the cap were supposed to be, but it's safe to assume they would either have hit a small number of people, hit people with a small tax hike, or some combination of the two.*

This apparently was unacceptable to several members of the Democratic caucus. Highly unacceptable. If reform included a cap on the exclusion, Reid warned, between ten and fifteen Democrats would oppose it. That's why Baucus and his colleagues on Finance are back to looking for money.

Thursday, July 09, 2009
http://www.riehlworldview.com/carniv...ay-for-it.html

Jolie Rouge · 07-09-2009, 06:57 PM

Report from a health care counterprotest
By Michelle Malkin • July 9, 2009 03:13 PM

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/07/09...ounterprotest/

I was on Fox and Friends this morning to talk about the Tea Party movement’s next steps. As I noted, grass-roots activists are mobilizing on both the local and national levels to lobby for fiscal responsibility from both parties. A nationwide round of protests against cap-and-tax and socialized medicine is scheduled for July 17. But some folks aren’t waiting. Today, MoveOn.org organized its own series of rallies for Obamacare — but they were met and matched by counterprotesters who mobilized at the last minute to make their voices heard.

Monica in North Carolina e-mailed me this afternoon: “Just fyi, we heard that moveon.org was promoting a “Public health option” rally today at 12 in front of Kay Hagan’s office- D, NC. We spread the word and outnumbered them more than FOUR to ONE! We had a great time and even used some logic as we sparred with them, which of course, they don’t understand. Fun day nonetheless. I’ve attached a few pics.”

http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/m...2009/07/hc.jpg

http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/m...009/07/hc2.jpg

You won’t see these on the front page of the New York Times. But it’s happening more often than you think — and it’s all the more remarkable and newsworthy given that most Tea Party folks, unlike the Soros-funded astroturf protest mobsters, have full-time jobs and families

Michelle Malkin on Fox : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuxDrQlfrIQ

Jolie Rouge · 07-14-2009, 05:16 PM

We know the health care takeover tax hikes are coming.

Just waiting for the Democrats to unveil the actual vehicle sometime today.

CQ has the latest on desperate Democrat leadership efforts to resuscitate Obamacare:

Quote:

House Democrats will introduce their full healthcare reform bill Tuesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Monday while acknowledging she has much work left to do to win over members of her own caucus. “We’re still on schedule. We have plans to vote for this legislation before we leave for the August recess,” Pelosi said at a news conference. Pelosi said, however, that the bill to be unveiled would have to undergo further changes during committee markup to garner enough support among Democrats. “It is just the beginning,” she said.

“It won’t be the finished product,” Pelosi said. “In order for us to be on schedule, we have to roll out legislation this week.”

But even a Tuesday introduction, to be followed by possible committee action beginning before week’s end, represents a slight setback to the House Democratic leadership’s ambitious goal of passing a healthcare reform bill before the lower chamber departs for its summer recess on July 31.

House Democrats were supposed to introduce a complete draft of the bill on Friday but postponed their plans amid a furor raised by centrist Democrats, who offered Pelosi and the chairmen a list of complaints, including that the measure did not go far enough to reduce the cost of healthcare.

The Blue Dogs are barking. But will they have any bite?

The pressure is on:

Quote:

In other news, Health Economy Now, “a coalition of groups supporting the push for health care reform, is dropping $7 million on a new television ad campaign to build momentum for a reform bill and to keep six moderate House Democrats from walking away from supporting legislation as it moves through Congress in the coming weeks,” Roll Call reports in a separate article. All six are members of the Blue Dog Coalition, but none are “considered particularly vulnerable at this stage of the election cycle” (McArdle and Ackley, 7/14).

Here’s info on the GOP alternative:
http://www.reuters.com/article/gc07/...56C2W720090713

Quote:

Pushing back against Democratic plans to overhaul the U.S. healthcare system, Republicans on Tuesday readied a less costly alternative they say will make insurance more affordable.

Representative David Camp, the top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, said the plan offered significant reforms, including incentives for healthy living, protection for doctors against malpractice lawsuits and tax breaks to encourage small businesses to offer insurance to their workers. “We obviously think it’s important to make healthcare more affordable and to drive down costs,” Camp said in an interview before a planned news briefing on the plan on Wednesday.

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/07/14...-bill-to-drop/

***

Here it is.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/mar...overhaul-bill/

Quote:

The healthcare overhaul proposal offered Tuesday by U.S. House of Representatives’ Democrats will include an extra 5.4% tax on those earning more than $1 million.

One congressional aide said that would bring the top tax rate for the wealthy to 45%.

An additional tax of 1% would be levied on those couples earning more than $350,000. Those with $500,000 incomes would pay an extra 1.5%, according to the legislative documents. Increases could be triggered in 2013 to 2.0% and 3.0%, respectively. The millionaires’ tax would remain at 5.4%, according to legislative documents.

This ts Crowder’s video on Canadian health care. You should watch it now, then call your Congressidiot and your Senator.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2jijuj1ysw

Quote:

It won’t be the finished product, says Pelosi

— no problem, just vote and we’ll fill in the blanks later.

Quote:

“In order for us to be on schedule keep people from realizing we are wasting their money, we have to roll out legislation spend all the money this week.”

They know that if they don’t spend the money quickly, we won’t let them spend it. It’s sort of like a person on a diet. They want the whole cake. They know they can’t have the whole cake. But if they eat the whole cake quickly enough, they won’t have any cake to worry about not being able to eat.

These people are determined to ruin us. Pelosi and Obama must be the biggest shopaholics in the world. Of course they don’t use their own money.

***

Quote:

The cumulative job losses over the last six months have been greater than for any other half year period since World War II, including the military demobilization after the war. The job losses are also now equal to the net job gains over the previous nine years, making this the only recession since the Great Depression to wipe out all job growth from the previous expansion.

Here are 10 reasons we are in even more trouble than the 9.5% unemployment rate indicates:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1247...s_opinion_main

Read the whole piece. You may want to wait until this afternoon, when you can have an adult beverage after reading it.

“WE CAN’T AFFORD IT…”

The thing you tell your family, friends and anyone who will hold still when discussing CRAP & RAID, ObamaCare, amnesty or ANY OTHER STINKING THING THE ONE wants.

At least the first two are…by themselves…economy killers in a good economy.

The text is available : http://brainshavings.com/2009/07/tex...macare-bi.html