J's Cafe Nette

Archive for the ‘Nationalized Health Care’ Category

He doesn’t even know what will be in the final bill but it will be good for us!

Listen to him try to filibuster and Bret Baier doesn’t lob softballs.

Tweet This Post

The article by Dan Perrin quoted below is so well written that I will say no more than it will not disappoint if you read it in its entirety.

Having been up on the House side for the last two days, I can report that the fog of war has enveloped the Speaker and will attempt to explain why the Speaker is losing. CNN puts the Speaker down 11 votes, FireDogLake puts the Speaker down 25 — Yes at 190 — she needs 216.

This is a classic political battle: conflicting reports, disinformation and propaganda (two distinct things) moles, the light and dark roles of key operatives, overlaid with the impact of time — and those “inside the decision cycle” of their enemy.

The basic problem for the Speaker and her team is the enemy (to them, that’s us) is inside their decision cycle.

Tweet This Post

How far are the Democrats willing to go to force their nanny-state health care program down the throats of Americans?

The drama which has unfolded before our eyes has gone from sublime to ridiculous. If this issue were not so vital in its relation to our personal freedoms, one would rate it right up there with the worst soap opera ever produced.

The very fabric of both Houses of Congress is being shredded by its occupants, and worse, any faith we may have had in our elected leaders has been shaken to its core.

One great, big, Ball of Confusion:

Tweet This Post

…I do not think it means what you think it means.

On March 4, Reuters’ Chrystia Freeland explained the administration’s rationale for its renewed health care offensive: “The reason … we have the moral authority to do this is Massachusetts was just an act of God,” she related. “We had that seat; we got profoundly unlucky. … This election wasn’t scheduled to happen normally, so we shouldn’t allow this to knock us off course.”

Tweet This Post

In my first post titled, The Health Care Vote: Smoke, Mirrors and Brass Tacks, I go over Jim Geraghty’s vote counting this week.  Jay Cost, in Counting the Heads of House Democrats / Updated 3-5, has gone over the list of the 37 Democrats who voted No on health care in the fall to trace any potential flips to Yes. He did another update late this afternoon in which he wrote:

Eric Massa’s planned resignation takes him off the list. There are now 37 Democrats who voted nay in November who will be Democrats when (if?) the next vote occurs. With the House vacancies being what they are now, Speaker Pelosi will need 216 votes to pass the bill.

He has taken the names and grouped them into three categories.  In his “Very Hard to Persuade” list he counts 24 House members.  The “Hard to Persuade” list has 7 names and the “Persuadable” list has 6.  Bart Gordon, who was mentioned by Jim Geraghty as the closest he has seen as a possible flip to Yes, is in Cost’s “Persuadable” group.

Next Cost lists goes over the list of 8 Democrats who voted Yes in the fall, but have indicated they may not vote Yes on the Senate bill.  One on this list is Bart Stupak.  Cost finishes by going over an additional 11 Democrats he considers to be “Stupak Democrats”.  That’s 19 who voted Yes who are possible/probable flips to No.  Jay Cost’s conclusion:

Bottom line: Democratic leaders have a tough road ahead.

I highly recommend reading Cost’s column and looking at his rationale in sorting the Representatives into the various groups.  He writes that he will continue to update, and I’m sure Geraghty will as well.

If all the names and numbers make your head spin, print out their columns and read carefully through them and compare lists.  Bookmark the pages and check those names against the continuing saga of spin brought to you by Obama, Pelosi and Reid.  Don’t let the froth and frenzy of the blogosphere cause panic.  We should be marked be resolve and determination.

It’s not over ’til it’s over, and it’s not over yet!

__________
H/T: Real Clear Politics.

Tweet This Post

Maybe it’s the math teacher in me, but when I hear hype and hollering I want to know the facts.  Years of training of doing proofs and being taught not to advance to the next step without a sound logical reason, leave me always wanting to find the original source and reason behind the analysis or propaganda.  While politics and blogs feed on drama, the rumors and lies of smoke and mirrors should not cause panic or despair.

So, let’s get down to brass tacks with the health care votes. Jim Geraghty and Jay Cost have gotten down to some specifics of who is voting how.  In this post I’m going to look at what Jim Geraghty has written, and in Part II, I’ll summarize Jay Cost.

Jim Geraghty of The Campaign Spot has been doing an excellent job of keeping up with the yeas and nays of health care.  Earlier this week he wrote a column titled, Pelosi’s Suicide Squad, in which he surveyed the possibilities of nine Representatives who previously voted No on health care and who have been considered to be wavering.

Here are the six non-retiring members who previously followed their constituents by voting “no” but who now are apparently uninterested in continuing their service in Congress and are instead contemplating joining Pelosi’s Suicide Squad:

Rick Boucher of Virginia…
Suzanne Kosmas of Florida…
Frank Kratovil of Maryland…
Michael McMahon of New York…
Scott Murphy of New York…
Glenn Nye of Virginia…

He also mentioned the three retiring Democrats who might join Pelosi’s Suicide Squad:  Bart Gordon, John Tanner and Brian Baird. Of all nine, he placed only Baird in the near certain category.  In his blog he has continued to count noses and quote statements as he keeps tabs on the votes: here, here, here, here, here, here and here.  Yesterday he concluded:

There are quite a few Democrats who seem certain, or near-certain, to vote no without the Stupak language. Among then, Bart Stupak of Michigan, Dennis Cardoza of California, and Jim Oberstar of Minnesota.

Other Democrats have made comments that they’re not satisfied enough with the current legislation to vote for it, including Shelley Berkley of Nevada, Kurt Schrader of Oregon, Raúl Grijalva of Arizona, and Michael Arcuri of New York. Then again, they might just have brothers who would like to be federal judges.

Meanwhile, none of the nine Democrats who were mentioned as potential members of Pelosi’s Suicide Squad have indicated they’re willing to switch from “no” to “yes.” Three have indicated, either publicly, to other members, or to constituents, they’ll be voting “no” again: Frank Kratovil of Maryland, Michael McMahon of New York, and John Tanner of Tennessee.

In short, at this moment, if every wavering Democrat votes yes, and all of the pro-life Democrats vote yes, the bill passes. If any one of them flips, and none of the previous “no” votes flip, it’s game over, the bill can’t pass the House.

Yesterday the Susan B. Anthony List released their poll results of eight Democrats who voted for the Stupak Amendment last fall.  Geraghty looks at the numbers. Beside each name I’ve placed in brackets if the Representative voted Yes or No on health care last fall.

They asked, “Would you be more likely or less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman/Congresswoman [name] this year if (s)he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion?”

The percentage who said less likely, in each district:

[Yes] Steve Driehaus, Ohio’s 1st district: 55 percent.
[Yes] Charlie Wilson, Ohio’s 6th district: 64 percent.
[Yes] Marcy Kaptur, Ohio’s 9th district: 47 percent.
[No] John Boccieri, Ohio’s 16th district: 62 percent.
[Yes] Brad Ellsworth, Indiana’s 8th district: 65 percent.
[Yes] Baron Hill, Indiana’s 9th district: 61 percent.
[No] Jason Altmire, Pennsylvania’s 4th district: 58 percent.
[Yes] Paul Kanjorski, Pennsylvania’s 11th district: 53 percent.

“Makes no difference” scored between 10 and 13 percent in every district; “more likely” ranged from 14 percent in Boccieri’s district to 24 percent in Kanjorski’s district.

Last time, Driehaus, Wilson, Kaptur, Ellsworth, and Kanjorski voted yes; Boccieri and Altimire voted no. Of course, last time the bill included the Stupak language, which restricted private insurers participating in the exchange from offering abortion coverage as part of their policies. There is little to no chance the legislation will include these limits this time around.

Of the five who voted Yes on the bill in the fall, three might be in serious trouble in the 2010 election if they don’t vote No now because of the abortion language in the Senate bill. Kaptor might survive a Yes, but from these numbers Kanjorski would have a harder time squeaking out a win.  I am unfamiliar with other demographics of the districts that also might come into play.

Today Geraghty writes that the closest he’s seen to a flip from no to yes has been in a statement by retiring Congressman Bart Gordon.  He also notes that  Eric Massa, who voted No last fall, will retire on Monday.

In my next post, I’ll summarize Jay Cost’s vote count on health care.

__________
H/T: Wikipedia, NRO, The Campaign Spot, Susan B. Anthony List.

Tweet This Post

As Obama and the Democrats defy the opinion of a majority of Americans in their attempt to ram their health care bill through Congress in an abuse of the budget reconciliation process, abortion, ironically, may be the stumbling block that shatters their machinations.  It would be eminently appropriate to see them hoist with the petard of one of their most defining tenets.  Today in Abortion still the stumbling block for ObamaCare, Ed Morrissey quotes an NPR column that states:

Of the remaining issues with the potential to bring down the entire health overhaul effort, the one that lawmakers fear most is abortion.

Abortion is such a politically hazardous issue that sponsors of both the House and Senate health bills have said their object was to maintain the status quo….

But keeping the health bills abortion-neutral has proved impossible. And now the abortion language in the Senate-passed bill in particular could threaten the strategy Democratic leaders hope to use to get a final measure to President Obama’s desk for a signature….

…the way they are hoping to finish work on their health overhaul is for the House to pass the Senate’s bill — abortion language and all. Then they plan to pass a second bill that will incorporate a number of compromises between the House and Senate. For that they’ll use the so-called budget reconciliation process that only requires 51 Senate votes.

But as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi acknowledged Tuesday, those compromises probably won’t include a change in abortion language. “In order to be in part of the budget bill, it has to be central to the budget. That’s the rule. And it’s a very strict rule,” she said.

Which means anti-abortion House Democrats who originally voted for the House health bill will likely face this choice: Vote for a Senate bill that’s more lenient on abortion or vote against health overhaul. And it will make it that much harder for House leaders to get the majority they need to pass the bill.

This afternoon Jim Geraghty has posted on health care vote counts, The Weekly Standard makes conjectures, and AllahPundit has this on Pelosi scrambling for votes in the House:

And the status quo, thanks to the pro-life objections of Stupak et al., means she’s probably 10-12 votes in the hole at the moment.

Tomorrow the Susan B. Anthony List will release poll results from districts in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Indiana that are represented in Congress by Democrats who voted for the Stupak Amendment last year.

Respondents were asked whether they would “be more likely or less likely to vote for Congressman if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion.”

“Votes have consequences,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, President of Susan B. Anthony List, “and representatives in Congress who ignore the will of their constituents do so at their own peril. These poll results will drive our investment in the next wave of pro-life grassroots mobilization in the Midwest.”

Abortion’s impact on the health care bill has implications for certain Republicans as well.  In December, Jennifer Rubin made this observation:

…we have heard a lot in the last year from some snooty ostensibly-conservative pundits who would like to rearrange the conservative coalition and dump social conservatives overboard. However, the health-care bill is as good an example as we will find as to why this is politically idiotic. Here we see that it is social conservatives who remain the last men and women standing against liberal economic- and social-engineering projects. The numbers may just not be there for Stupak to disrupt the juggernaut, but it is instructive that the final battle is likely to be over abortion subsidies, not taxes or any other economic issue. Perhaps it’s not a good idea for conservatives to tell some of their most stalwart allies to get lost.

Principles and morality are not just matters for philosophical discussion; they are the foundation for actions that have consequences for the vigor or demise of a society.  The choices Congress makes on health care continue to reveal their beliefs about life and liberty.   In December, Ben Nelson revealed what he truly believes about the value of the life of an unborn child as well as his beliefs about integrity.  Through their manipulations the Democrats have written in large letters the manifesto of their beliefs about liberty.

In these final days of their determination to force our nation onto a path of unwanted government control of our health care, I am reminded of the ending of the book of Deuteronomy.  After setting forth His commands to Israel, God tells them,

“I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants, by loving the LORD your God, by obeying His voice, and by holding fast to Him; for this is your life and the length of your days, that you may live in the land which the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them.”

Congress is faced with a literal choice of life or death, and their choice has consequences for our present citizenry and for those who are yet unborn.

__________

H/T:  Human Events, Hot Air, NPR, National Review, The Weekly Standard, Christian News Wire, Commentary Magazine, Bible Gateway.

Tweet This Post

While growing up on an Indian reservation in Old Town, Maine, throughout the fifties and sixties, it was not unusual to see a shiny, black car with State Troopers driving it pulling up to our house and the distinguished gentleman inside get out and come to our door.

Other kids would ask what was going on and we would just tell them the governor was there. No big deal. Everyone has the governor come to their house, right? And our congressmen always go to your houses too, right?

Well, that’s what I thought. No big deal. It happens all the time. Sometimes I’d put my ear down at the keyhole in one of the living room doors that were now closed and see if I could hear any of the conversation by the “grown-ups” in that room. If I heard it didn’t interest me enough to remember it now.

These visits occurred shortly after our island reservation was finally connected to the mainland by a one-lane bridge. This bridge saved many lives. I vaguely remember when it was being built and I have at least one memory of riding to the mainland by the ferry operated by one of our fellow tribesmen.

The bridge saved many lives because many lives were lost when Indians on our reservation would attempt to cross the river to the mainland in the spring or just after the ice started forming on the river in the winter. The ice was there but wasn’t thick enough to safely walk on it—yet it was too thick to just paddle a boat or canoe through it. If anyone from our community wanted to cross to the mainland to shop, conduct business or just see a movie, he or she had to take a chance on the ice giving out while crossing in each direction, until the ice all melted in the Spring or froze solid in the Winter.

I come from a family of very strong women. Most of them had to be strong because they were either widowed or unmarried and had to support the family, including grandchildren, nieces, nephews and great-nieces and nephews. They gained respect in the “white community” enough for people to know they were trustworthy and good people who were firm in their convictions.

Many members of my family were instrumental in seeing to it that they lobbied the state legislators and the governor until we were finally able to convince the Republican leaders in Maine that we should be able to purchase a bridge with our own money so our people would be safer. It was our money but we had to put our hand out to the state because we were still considered “paupers” by the state and didn’t get the right to vote until the 1950’s. We were good enough to serve in the armed forces and die for our country, but we were paupers to the state and entitled to no rights.

It was through this lobbying effort, made possible by years of building a relationship with the lawmakers, that our family became acquaintances with the political leaders in our state. That’s why we saw them at our home. If they were in the area they stopped by and chewed the fat over politics, I suppose.

As hard as that struggle was, I think the struggle for the very soul of America is even harder. Last year at this time it seemed as though God had removed His blessing entirely from this country. And who could blame Him? We’ve kicked Him out of every facet of our public lives since Madeline Murray O’Hare got the Lord’s Prayer out of schools. How many of you remember reciting the Lord’s Prayer just before the Pledge of Allegiance in public school? Fortunately I was in high school before the prayer became forbidden and I did miss it when it was taken from us.

Last year I felt as though this country was headed for disaster that could never be repaired. Then came the tea party in April and another one in July, followed by the town halls held all over this country in August and September, followed by more peaceful demonstrations by grassroots Americans who just wanted what is best for our country. Each of these events made me get a glimmer of hope, and when I saw Sen. Arlen Specter getting torn to bits verbally by some of his constituents in Pa. I began to realize I wasn’t in the minority of opinion in this country anymore. They didn’t harm anything but Specter’s feelings, or any other senator’s or congressperson’s. It was the words they didn’t like and tried to tamp down, but the people would not have it.

We had gone through TARP, Stimulus, the House passing Cap and Trade, and watching Congress rush every large spending bill through without taking the time to study the consequences, while spending trillions of our dollars. No one really knew what was in the bills unless it was the staff of the Congresspeople or Senators. Yet they voted to pass these huge spending bills because they were “crises” and as Rahm Emanuel said, “We can’t afford to waste a good crisis.”

Now they were screwing around with our health care and we finally had had enough.

Since August the Congress has known we want no part of the current health bills passed by the House or Senate. We all agree it would be good to reform some things in our health care system, but we do not want the federal government stepping in and making a huge bill that will never be able to be fixed. We want it done incrementally and studiously, so we know our money is being spent responsibly. Many things such as the “undercover patients” mentioned by doctor and Senator Tom Coburn at Thursday’s pow-wow with Democrats will cost little, if anything at all. Of course it will cost something because Congress will create a separate department along with a bureaucracy for that purpose. Reforming our tort laws will cost nothing but the plaintiff’s attorneys’ support to the Democrats in government. No money lost to the taxpayer.

The point is not to create a massive bureaucracy in Washington, but to create a good bill with the least amount of disruption to our lives and the least amount of funds to do it properly. Slim government instead of bloated government. Surely we cannot address every problem in our health care system in one huge bill. Even a blind man can see that. Go in “baby steps” as Obama calls it.

Now the Democrats have decided they will take six weeks, ostensibly for the Republicans to give them “new ideas” and work out a bipartisan health care bill, or the Democrats will go to reconciliation if they cannot get the required 60 votes to pass a bill in the Senate.

I saw a headline at Politco.com awhile ago that says Democrats are “feeling out the next step” for the health care bill. This bill has had more lives than Morris the Cat, and like a fire you think is out, keeps coming back to bite you in the butt. Just when you thought it was safe, they go at it again.

Thursday’s “summit” was nothing but a group of grouchy, majority Democrats, barely hiding their contempt (if at all) at the Republicans who were at last invited to sit at the same table with them and discuss their ideas on health care reform. You know, the ideas the Democrats have claimed they didn’t have. They had some good ideas and came ready to discuss the legislation. Naturally, if you are going to discuss something that is in writing you are going to take the text to the meeting to reference it while speaking. At least that’s what Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia thought. Obama put him straight, though, when he told Cantor he was bringing “props”. Cantor had actually marked pages to flip to so he could do his presentation, and when accused by Obama of bringing a prop for political purposes told Obama that he thought since they were discussing the Senate bill it was only appropriate to have said bill in their presence.

The Republicans brought their A team to the meeting, while the Democrats seemed as though they had decided to just go through the motions and didn’t bother to prepare to speak about the language. Instead, they seemed to have been in some sort of contest to see which one could come up with the saddest story about people who have to pay insurance premiums or who cannot afford insurance. The winner in this contest (at least in my mind) was the ridiculously off-topic statement by Rep. Louise Slaughter of NY, when she told of one of her constituents who was wearing her dead sister’s dentures because she couldn’t afford her own. I don’t know about anyone else, but dental health has nothing to do with health insurance policies. I have dental insurance which is separate from my health insurance. By her reasoning I guess we should get the government to pay for our life insurance, car insurance, homeowner’s insurance and renter’s insurance if you rent. It’s about as related to health care as dental insurance.

Try to go to an eye doctor to get a regular eye exam and try to pay for it with your Medicare. You can’t do it. I was at the eye doctor’s office in January to get my yearly diabetic exam (paid for by my health insurance after a $30 co-pay) and another lady came in to have her eyes examined and asked if Medicare would pay for it. When she was told no she just hauled out the check book and wrote a check, so I know for a fact it is not covered by Medicare. You can’t get an exam for your vision with health insurance either. For that you either use the eye care insurance and come back another day for the same exam, except they’ll refract your eyes, or you can pay the cost of the refraction separately and not fool with your eye care insurance if you do not wish to have the same eye exam twice in one week.

We hear Obama and the Democrats bemoan the fact that 30 million Americans (I guess they’re all legal citizens) do not have health insurance, but you never hear them mention the 280 million or so Americans who do have health care insurance, or can afford it but think they’re invincible so they don’t get it.

Why can’t we go back to the innocent days of my childhood when saying no meant no? Not now. Not ever. Pelosi, Reid and Obama do not recognize that word or the will of the people. Obama is willing to throw out his congressional majority for his legacy legislation, and Pelosi and Reid are gullible or power hungry enough to help him. Remember, his last words were something to the effect that they could pass the bill and if the people didn’t like it that’s why we have elections.

Ah, the days of my childhood….to be so innocent and trusting as I was then.

Tweet This Post

As Barack Obama loves to tell us (and most Independents and right of center citizens are tired of hearing) he inherited a mess from President George W. Bush, who somehow managed to keep the Ship of State straight and the economy percolating for most of his eight years in office—despite a terror attack on New York, Pennsylvania and Washington DC.

As we all know from high school civics classes, the president proposes and the Congress disposes. This is not to say Bush didn’t waste taxpayer dollars while in office. The last two years of the Bush presidency were years controlled by a Democratic Congress. If Bush asked for additional war funding for our troops sent to Iraq and Afghanistan, he had to pay the price by allowing the pork-laden bills that were sent to him or he never would have gotten the funding needed for these two wars on the terrorists out to destroy our country and what it stands for.

Before that, the Republican Congresses spent a lot of pork and Bush signed that legislation, which is why the Democrats won the last two election cycles.

Obama claims he was not aware of the severity of the problems this nation faced until he took office. This despite the fact that Bush included Obama and McCain on any decisions he was making regarding the financial meltdown prior to the election, and consulted with Obama after he was elected.

Bush went so far as to say if Obama wanted Bush to be the one to pull the trigger on TARP monies he would do so and let everyone blame him instead of hamstringing the new president. Obama and McCain both voted for TARP when they were still campaigning and were still Senators.

Enter Obama at high noon on January 20, 2009, and he has been blaming Bush for everything that has gone wrong in this country ever since. Hardly a day goes by that he or one of his spokespeople doesn’t mention what a “mess” they “inherited” and weren’t prepared for it until they actually saw it.

He knew jobs were being lost by hundreds of thousands shortly after he took office, but instead of putting his priorities into finding ways for businesses to succeed and be able to keep or hire new people he decided to go for his pet social projects.

He took over two car companies, gave loans to large banks, passed a “stimulus” bill that was just a pork-laden bill that had no stimulating effect, pushed for universal health care for a year despite the rejection of the legislation as written, pushed for Cap and Trade to “reduce” carbon emissions, campaigned for two failed governorships and one failed senate seat, held secretive meetings in the White House with just the leadership of the Democratic Congress over health care, and generally never gave jobs a second thought.

He made it abundantly clear to Congressional Republicans that he “won” and their input wasn’t necessary for any programs he wanted to pass, so they could be bi-partisan and agree with him or he’d do it without them anyway. Republican input into the “bipartisanship” was not needed.

After a few illegal ballots and a court fight in Minnesota for a Senate seat, the Democrat (who was behind in the original count) was finally seated and good old Arlen Specter saw the writing on the wall and figured out he’d never get the Republican nomination for Senate from Pennsylvania so he jumped parties, giving Obama his 60 vote “filibuster-proof” Senate.

Now, everything would be clear sailing. No matter that the people back home raised Cain about the health care bill all of August, Nancy Pelosi was able to finagle her way into the right amount of votes to pass health care “reform” in the House, with two votes to spare.

Now it was up to Harry Reid to easily pass a bill through the Senate and go to conference with the House Democrats and get the bill to Obama’s desk in time for him to brag about its passage during the State of the Union address.

There was no logical reason for him to not have health care “reform” passed by the end of December, 2009. He had the numbers and with a bit of bribery by Harry Reid the necessary amount of senators required to break a filibuster was there and did his bidding.

Then came the Massachusetts Massacre in January and the Democrats lost their crucial sixtieth vote in the Senate, meaning health care would have to be worked over in private with Democratic leadership, Obama and Rahm Emmanuel to make it palatable to the Democrats in each of the two legislative Houses.

Suddenly, Obama got a brain storm and decided maybe he’d better at least give lip service to jobs and the creation of jobs.

Congress has passed a new debt ceiling increase of $1.9 trillion. This money will have to be borrowed and soon we won’t be able to make even the interest payments to China and other countries still giving us credit. Except for the fact our paper bills say “Legal Tender” the dollar is really worth nothing. Try to take a dollar bill to the bank and get a silver dollar for it. Or try to take a $5 bill to the bank and get gold for it. It is worth about 1.6 cents, the amount it takes to print the bill.

Instead of taking TARP money paid back by banks (if they were so desperate last year how can they pay the money back so soon?) and using it to retire the debt, the Administration wants to put it back into circulation and have another “stimulus” bill for jobs when the original TARP money was supposed to do that and still has about 2/3 of the funds still available.

The only entity hiring any significant amount of employees has been the federal government. No one is being treated equally in this country, as those making over $250,000 combined household income are to be taxed for everything you can imagine until they are at the poverty rate, waiting in line for their food stamps.

Work is not being rewarded, but earnings are being robbed. At least Robin Hood robbed from the rich to give to the poor, but Obama and his Congress are robbing from the middle and upper class to make everyone poor.

The one person who has had the most access to this president at this White House has been the president of the SEIU, the service employees union. That’s why the so-called Cadillac health plans had an exemption from taxes for several years built into the bills.

Until Obama and his band of Merry Men realize cutting taxes for all Americans and all businesses will actually increase jobs and bring in more revenue, since more people will be working and paying taxes, our unemployment rate will stay at least where it is now and probably climb higher. Housing prices will continue to drop like a rock (but your property taxes won’t) and new homes will not be built.

Presidents Kennedy and Reagan realized tax cuts would bring the economy around and raising taxes during a recession was a stupid idea. It worked both times. Real jobs were created and not some government “make work” jobs that were dead ends to nowhere.

Obama is singing a new tune in public now. Health care isn’t the big emergency it was (but he’s still trying to figure out how to get it passed by hook or by crook behind the scenes) and jobs are the number one priority of his Administration. That’s the outward appearance. Actions speak louder than words and, judging by his performance in his first year and his defiance after the Massachusetts Senatorial election, I wouldn’t bet the house on the fact he is actually hearing the people.

This is why we shouldn’t put community organizers in charge of the country. He’s never held a private sector job in his entire adult life and his political background is sketchy at best.

May God bless America in spite of her stupidity.

Tweet This Post

When I read the following quote in this piece all I could think of was the children’s lullaby “Hush Little Baby”.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi acknowledged in her weekly news conference that plenty of work remained if the House was to agree to changes to the Senate bill.

“We will go through the gate. If the gate is closed, we will go over the fence. If the fence is too high, we will pole vault in. If that doesn’t work, we will parachute in,” Pelosi said. “But we are going to get health care reform passed for the American people.”

Hush, little Congress, don’t say a word. Nancy’s gonna buy you a health care bill. If that health care bill don’t pass, Nancy’s gonna find a health care gate. If that health care gate don’t open, Nancy’s gonna buy you a health care fence. If that health care fence is too high, Nancy’s gonna buy you a new pole vault. If that new pole vault don’t work, Nancy’s gonna get you a parachute.

Doesn’t rhyme, but that’s all I could think of when I read that quote.

Tweet This Post

The link to the following video arrived in my email box this afternoon.

Ray Stevens (of “Along Came Jones” fame), performs “We The People.” Have a listen. I think the lyrics speak well to what many of us feel about the current situation in Washington.

Enjoy!

Tweet This Post

Too little too late on the part of Senator Ben Nelson:

Sen. Ben Nelson said Tuesday it was a mistake for the Obama Administration to take on massive health care reforms in 2009, and suggested efforts would have been better spent addressing the economy.

Tweet This Post

Max Baucus is slurring words and repeating himself during this rant on the Senate floor, which begs the question: is he drunk or exhausted from all those long hours of working?

I’m making no judgment. What are your thoughts?

And there was no pressure or bribes from the majority party? No bipartisan bill because the Democrats would not allow the Republicans a real voice in the bill-making process.

Tweet This Post

Incorporated in the below in reference to American citizens, is the following statement:

…you still believe that the strength of this nation is in the character and courage and ingenuity of the American people and not the politicians and bureaucrats.

This is your moment. Now is your time. Let your voice be heard

Representative Pence is correct. The Republicans and a few Democrats in Congress may not have the power to stop Pelosi and Reid from shoving more government control down our throats. It is up to us to do our part.

Call, e-mail and/or write your Senators and Representatives. Tell them to just say no to the Speaker and Majority Leader on the pending health care legislation.

Tweet This Post

Senator Lieberman this past week said he will not vote for a health care bill which contains the public option:

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) said Tuesday that he would support a Republican filibuster of a health care bill that includes a public option.

Lieberman’s comments confirm that Democrats in the Senate do not currently have enough votes to move forward the health care plan laid out on Monday by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). Other moderates in the Democratic Caucus, Senators Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, would not commit today to ending a filibuster.

“If the bill remains what it is now, I will not be able to support a cloture motion before final passage,” Lieberman said, reports CBS News Capitol Hill Producer John Nolen.

The Senator once more shows his (I)ndependent side and shows that he did pay mind to the citizens of this country and recognized their concerns.

However, we now have Senator Harkin who informs us that his colleague will change his mind..after all, the Democrats hold the hammer on his committee chairmanship:

“He still wants to be a part of the Democratic Party although he is a registered independent. He wants to caucus with us and, of course, he enjoys his chairmanship of the [Homeland Security] committee because of the indulgence of the Democratic Caucus. So, I’m sure all of those things will cross his mind before the final vote.”

HT: Mark Halperin
emphasis-mine

It’s all about diverse opinions and everyone being welcomed though, right?

Tweet This Post

Besides the convoluted explanation by Harry Reid yesterday about the proposed Senate Health Scam bill (who can understand what he’s saying when he doesn’t understand it himself? It is just a bait and switch tactic to get us to buy in on a public option.) I look at the reports and wonder how much it’s going to cost us to put a “Kick me, I’m stupid” sign on our backs. The government is at it again.

How much in premiums and additional taxes will our “free and improved health care” cost us? It won’t be free and it certainly won’t be improved.

After we pay into the system for 3 or 4 years the program will then go into effect. At that time or later the states will have the opportunity to “opt-out” of the government program, but their residents have already paid into the program and will continue to pay into it even if the state opts out. Double taxation.

All we can do now is work the phones and call our senators to tell them we do not want what is proposed and to wipe it all away and start over again, this time addressing only the problems that exist and not worrying about punishing anyone who dissents.

That’s for those of you who have Democratic senators, of course, unless you live in Maine, where a call to the twins Snowe and Collins would serve to increase their resolve to not vote for the plan coming to the Senate floor.

Calling Democratic Congressmen will be useless because, as John McCain said on Sunday, “the Blue dogs bark but they don’t bite.” You can pretty much expect some kind of public option from the House, so let’s kill the whole thing in the Senate. There is no time to waste. This bill is going to hit the floor as soon as the CBO gives the numbers on what it will cost.

Tweet This Post

In the words of a former co-blogger here at J’s, speaks for itself.

Tweet This Post

Rep. Alan Grayson,a first-term Democrat known for being provocative, made his comments on the House floor Tuesday night while criticizing Republican health care proposals. He highlighted his comments with a sign that that read: “The Republican Health Care Plan: Die Quickly.”

“Now Democrats have a different plan,” he said. “Democrats say if you have health insurance, we’re going to make it better. If you don’t have health insurance, we’re going to provide it to you. If you can’t afford health insurance, then we’ll help you to afford it.”

“So America gets to decide,” he added. “Do you want the Democrats’ plan or the Republican plan.”

Rep. Grayson represents the worst in partisan politics. He knows as well as everyone else in this country the Republicans do not want anyone to die quickly or otherwise because of no health care. No one is disputing our health care system needs to cover those who are not currently covered, but we don’t need to re-invent the wheel.

The Republicans didn’t have blank pieces of paper and do have a plan, but the Democrats won’t let them participate in any of the discussions about health care except the Baucus committee, and even Baucus has decided to go it alone with the Democrats.

America has decided and has sent a very strong message we are not in favor of what is being proposed by the Democrat-written bills before Congress right now.

It’s time to stop and start over with the best and fairest minds of both parties working for a solution to the problem that does not make the problem worse.

Tweet This Post

Silly American public.

We just do not seem to understand how the legislative process works in our country.

It’s so fortunate that we have Rahm Emanuel to define it for us:

Rose asked about possible Republican support. “There are going to be bipartisan ideas and policies in this healthcare bill, be it the idea that Senator McCain advocated during the presidential primary,” Emanuel answered, referring to a McCain health-care tax proposal that Obama attacked during the presidential race. “It will be in the bill. So the final product will be bipartisan. If Republican or individuals decide to vote for it, that’s their choice. But the policy making of the — “

“So the policy will be bipartisan, whether you get votes or not,” Rose asked.

“Right,” Emanuel said. Emanuel said the White House “will never, ever stop trying” to win Republican support.

[emphasis-admin]

So, let me get this straight. If you throw one bone to the opposition but garner no votes from the other side of the aisle it is considered bi-partisan?

Wow, we learn something new every day from this administration, don’t we. Must be all that change we kept hearing about.

My take, things look grim from the inside on this health care bill.

American’s have shown great opposition to any government takeover of their existing plans, and this White House and Congress don’t have the sense to table this issue and hope in 2010 the people forget their attempt to further control their private lives so, the next best thing, find a way to blame Republicans for their sins. What children.

Tweet This Post

Why in the world would anyone think the all knowing, all powerful, transparent Democrats in Congress would allow the proposed Baucus health care bill to be posted on line for 72 hrs. prior to being voted out of committee?

After all, who would want an angry mob of unruly teenagers perusing something which will affect their personal life?

HT: Lucianne

Jeanette adds video with this comment: It must be as Olympia Snowe says and it’s the Columbus Day recess that makes this a rush bill.

Tweet This Post

Watch Obama stutter, stammer and lie in this Stephanopolous interview.

My thoughts: You lie, Obama!

Yours?

Update*** Thanks to Politico.com there is a copy of the Baucus bill online here. Scroll down to page 29 of the bill (page 32 in the PDF file) and you will notice the penalty for not having insurance is called an excise tax. You don’t have to go beyond the first sentence under the heading “Excise Tax”.

Once again, Obama is either uninformed or lying.

Tweet This Post

Talk about tied up in knots. Washington has so many talking points recently on the topic of health care it’s hard for even the politicians to keep their stories straight, or at least believable.

Mob Boss, Union Boss. You Decide.

She is just to precious for words! HT:Lucianne

“I dropped the ball,” Emily Monforto confessed to a reporter. Yes she did.

The 3-year-old Laurel Springs, N.J., girl became famous overnight for throwing a foul ball back on to the field at Tuesday night’s Phillies-Nationals game — a ball her father had just caught and given to her. Video of the hilarious toss spread across the internet and cable news networks on Wednesday.

Tweet This Post

Republican Representative Joe Wilson of South Carolina said the only truth in the entire speech by Barack Obama in his joint session of Congress health care Hail Mary pass.

It seems Wilson got fed up with the lies and Republicans being called liars over different things in fancy ways by Obama, that when Obama finally said illegal immigrants would not be covered in the bill now pending in the House, Wilson could not restrain himself and blurted out, “You lie!”

But because we are not like the British, who take their leader to task every week, everyone on both sides of the aisle said Wilson was out of line and he apologized to Rahm Emmanuel after he was unable to get Obama on the phone.

Rep. Wilson, you have nothing to apologize for and you should consider running against our Democrat-lite Senator Graham in five years. Don’t run against Sen. DeMint, as we need him. I’ll vote for you for Senator and so will many more conservatives in this state. You told it like it is and I like that in a person.

Watch Nancy Plosi’s head spin when she heard the “You lie!” comment. I thought she was going to throw up pea soup.

Tweet This Post

The opposition which has been shown to the government take over of health care appears to be resonating.

Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin) either decided the best offense at his town hall meeting was a good defense, or he knows the votes in the Senate do not exist to pass a bill even if the nuclear option comes into play:

U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold told a large crowd gathered for a listening session in Iron County last week there would likely be no health care bill before the end of the year – and perhaps not at all.

It was an assessment Feingold said he didn’t like, but the prospect of no health care legislation brought a burst of applause from a packed house of nearly 150 citizens at the Mercer Community Center.

“Nobody is going to bring a bill before Christmas, and maybe not even then, if this ever happens,” Feingold said. “The divisions are so deep. I never seen anything like that.”

Feingold reiterated his appraisal a bit later.

“We’re headed in the direction of doing absolutely nothing, and I think that’s unfortunate,” he said when asked about the plight of uninsured Americans.

The Mercer session was spirited but civil – as Feingold himself accurately described it – with most people focused squarely on the health care issue, followed by the deficit as a runner-up concern.

During the discussion, Feingold said he could not declare whether he would support a health reform bill until he has actually seen one, and he said he would then seek out the opinions of Wisconsinites. The Senate recessed in late July with a deadlocked Senate Finance Committee unable to finish work on a bill.

“When I get a proposal I can look at it and decide whether I will support it,” he said. “I will let the people of the entire state talk to me.”

The senator, a declared proponent of health care reform in principle, nonetheless did not seem too concerned about a potential failure of the Obama administration’s effort. He said there was merit to the idea of trying a variety of proposals in various states first.

[emphasis mine-admin]

Senator Feingold was obviously prepared to take on opponents of this major initiative of the current administration.

If he is correct in his assertions, we should see the death of any legislation geared toward moving America one step closer to socialism.

Update: Senator Grassley and Senator Feingold seem to be in agreement on the strength of Senate support for the passage of a nationalized health care package:

Gang-o-Sixer Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), speaking to ag reporters on a conference call today, said he’s increasingly pessimistic the Senate can work out any deal with the White House, simply because the Obama administration is so confused.

HT: Mark Halperin

Tweet This Post

With the country in recession, recipients of Social Security checks who have received cost of living increases (COLA) can be pretty sure they won’t be getting a COLA increase for 2010 or 2011 according to this report.

In addition, those who participate in the Medicare prescription drug program will see the premiums rise, causing their check amounts to actually go down.

Medicare Part B coverage for doctor’s visits is also expected to go up, so it would be safe to say anyone on Social Security now will actually see a decrease in their monthly checks for the next two years.

Social Security cannot, by law, be reduced, but they are not really reduced in that the benefit amount is less, but that the premiums for the insurances are higher, thus making the checks smaller.

AARP is already calling for a one time bonus to be paid to the recipients and the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare group is asking for a COLA increase just the same, as most seniors’ expenses are rising due to higher health care costs.

Everything boils down to health care and maybe they think by publishing this information the seniors in our country, who have been opposed to the health care plan put forth by the House, will turn around 180 degrees and demand health care reform so they can keep the extra few dollars in their checks.

I have family members who live on their social security checks and I know how difficult it is for them. I hate to see an increase in premiums and maybe the “compassionate” government of the current administration and Democratic Congress will fore-go the increases in the premiums to keep the seniors at least where they are now. Sure they will, just as they will rescind the income taxes paid out of social security payments. Taxes, I might add, that were already paid while the recipients were working and having this money withheld from their paychecks. Don’t you just love the government?

Tweet This Post

The host actually went to Canada to check out their health care system.

Watch it and weep for the Canadians and for our country if the Democrats pass this in a reconciliation bill, because this will be us.

Tweet This Post

Whoa!

Representative Baird, (D-Washington), gets an earful courtesy of a Marine Corp veteran.

Not only does the gentleman tackle the health care issue, but also the name calling and socialistic tendencies of the current administration and Congress:

Via, Hot Air.

Bravo, David, bravo.

Tweet This Post

Many times commenters quickly pick up and spread the latest news on threads. Today someone at Hot Air mentioned something, that while off topic on that thread, is going to be the topic of news this weekend!

Sarah Palin has another Facebook Note up today. She goes for the jugular with this one:

President Obama’s health care “reform” plan has met with significant criticism across the country. Many Americans want change and reform in our current health care system. We recognize that while we have the greatest medical care in the world, there are major problems that we must face, especially in terms of reining in costs and allowing care to be affordable for all. However, as we have seen, current plans being pushed by the Democratic leadership represent change that may not be what we had in mind — change which poses serious ethical concerns over the government having control over our families’ health care decisions. In addition, the current plans greatly increase costs of health care, while doing lip service toward controlling costs.

We need to address a REAL bipartisan reform proposition that will have REAL impacts on costs and quality of patient care.…

Read the rest of this entry »

Tweet This Post

Not a bad video put out by the National Black Republican Association.

Hat Tip: Cao’s Blog (located on sidebar)

Tweet This Post

">/0.jpg" alt="YouTube Preview Image" />

In late January, 2000, my mother apparently had a seizure early in the morning and could not be reached by telephone. When my sister got there she found our mother lying on the bathroom floor, unresponsive, but still breathing.

After being taken by ambulance to the hospital my mother was put into ICU with a ventilator tube and feeding tube running down her nostrils and into her lungs and stomach. She never needed the ventilator and was breathing on her own, but it was put there in case she did need it.

She had been seen by a neurologist one time, and that was on a Sunday while I was in the room. My sister and I asked her not to talk about the possibility of our mother dying in that small area because we felt she could hear us. The doctor talked anyway.

We had several meetings with the new doctor, since my sister had fired the original doctor before I got there, and this doctor always told us we needed to prepare to take her off life-support. I asked what kind of life-support she was on and I was told her feeding tube was life-support. I thought feeding was a basic human right and not life-support.

One day the neurologist called the primary physician and told him it was time to let my mother die. I was furious, panicked and sad. I called her office and left a message that if she wanted to kill someone to at least run some tests on her to be sure she was brain dead.

She wasn’t available when I called but called me back in a few minutes, when I repeated what I had told the receptionist. The neurologist kept telling me it wasn’t her job to run tests but to “interpret” them. Since none were run I don’t know what she interpreted.

That evening the primary physician called my sister and me into a conference room and told us it was decided to take my mother’s feeding tube out and to let her die.

I cannot begin to tell you how I begged him, with body-wracking sobs, to give her three more days, but he said no. My mother had contracted an infection and it was his opinion she would have one infection after another. I asked how long it would take for my mother to die, and my sister (who is a nurse) and the doctor both said about two weeks. Thank God I didn’t yet know about Terry Schiavo or I would have been horrified at what I would be forced to watch.

I felt like a murderer, even though the doctor literally took the decision out of our hands.

Fortunately for my mother the infection took her the next day just as my sister and I entered her room.

I will always be bitter toward that doctor and the neurologist for just letting my mother go, although my sister did insist they keep the feeding tube in her without food, but in case she needed something for pain or seizures.

This was a Medicare patient, only seventy years old, who had been walking and talking the night before she fell and was walking and had eaten her breakfast the day she passed out.

Then they had the nerve to ask if we wanted an autopsy and I told them there would be no autopsy because she had been through enough and they were to leave her body alone.

Here we have an example of how medicare treats our elderly citizens with the help of Indian Health Services, which was mentioned in an email from my congressman as a good example of government-run health-care.

Don’t believe it. If it’s not their loved one they will not fight for yours unless you have a very pro-active doctor who won’t let the system push him around.

Don’t go down the road of socialized medicine, whether they call it a public option or a co-op. Once the government gets their hands into it you will have no choices.

Tweet This Post