The Case Against Medicare-for-all

Here is the reality of the single-payer as it is called, national healthcare plan for all. Or socialized medicine as we say. Welcome to the nightmare.

New York Post — By Betsy McCaughey — October 16, 2018

Sen. Bernie Sanders says that because Medicare is “the most popular, successful and cost-effective health insurance in the country” everyone should have it, regardless of age.

But watch out for the bait and switch. Truth is, Sanders’ Medicare for All legislation actually abolishes Medicare and Medicare Advantage, as well as employer-provided coverage, union plans and plans people buy for themselves. Every person will be forced into a mandatory, government-run system with the phony name “Medicare for All.” Whether you want it or not. The quality of your medical care will plummet.

Medicare for All will plunge hospitals into financial distress, exposing patients to dangerous medical shortages and forcing pay cuts on health care workers. New York hospitals and their workforce will get clobbered the worst.

But 16 Democratic senators, including New York’s Kirsten Gillibrand, and 123 Democrats in the House endorse the legislation. Have they actually read it?

President Trump warns that Sanders is “eliminating Medicare as a program for seniors.” He cautions that “hospitals would be put out of business,” patients will face “long wait lines” and seniors will “effectively be denied” care they need.

Sanders calls Trump a liar. Fortunately there’s a way to determine who’s telling the truth. The answer is in the 96 pages of Sanders’ bill. Here’s what it says.

Four years after Medicare for All begins, all private insurance will be banned (Sec. 107), and Medicare and other government health programs will be terminated, just as Trump said. Everyone, including illegal immigrants, will be enrolled in the new government program (Sec. 106). Newborns will be automatically enrolled at birth (Sec. 105).

On paper, the new program guarantees hospital care, doctors’ visits, even dental, vision and long-term care, all paid for by Uncle Sam. Here’s the hitch: Hospitals will be forced to operate under conditions of extreme scarcity, with too little revenue and more patients than ever.

Right now, Medicare shortchanges hospitals, paying them less than the full cost of caring for seniors. But hospitals accept the low payments, because they can shift the unmet costs to younger patients who have private insurance that pays more.

But in the new scheme, hospitals will be paid at Medicare rates for all their patients, not just seniors (Sec. 611). With everyone on Medicare for All, no cost-shifting will be possible. The rates will be 40 percent less than what hospitals could get from private insurance plans. The severe short-changing will throw hospitals into crisis. Meanwhile, demand for care will surge, because it’s free to all comers.

Hospitals will have to jam more beds into rooms and corridors, skimp on nursing care and make patients wait. Sounds like the austerity in the British National Health Service, only in Britain, the public has an escape hatch. They’re allowed to buy private coverage. Not under Sanders’ Medicare for All (Sec. 107). Those alternatives are banned. You’ll be trapped.

The gold-plated union health plan or Medicare Advantage Plan you used to have will be a distant memory, as you wait in crowded clinics alongside people who never paid into Medicare or earned on-the-job coverage.

In New York, the austerity will be magnified. Hospitals here have more debt and slimmer operating margins than elsewhere, making them less able to withstand cuts. Gary Fitzgerald of the Iroquois Healthcare Alliance warns that Sanders’ bill would “devastate upstate hospitals.”

Doctors will also be paid 30 percent less than private insurance would pay them. To keep their doors open, they’ll have to see more patients per hour. That’s bad news for seniors, who take up more time. Doctors will avoid them like the plague.

The Sanders bill is a labor fiasco in the making. A staggering 1.2 million New Yorkers work in health care, more than in retail or manufacturing or any other industry. When hospitals are paid less, health care workers will see layoffs and pay cuts, too.

Bottom line: Under Medicare for all, patients will suffer, seniors will be shunned, hospitals will fail and health care workers will lose. Who exactly is supposed to benefit, except the politicians?

Betsy McCaughey is a senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research
See from: https://nypost.com/2018/10/16/trump-is-totally-right-about-the-dangers-of-medicare-for-all/

 

Well, Democrats do a great job of hiding the truth, don’t they? Of course they don’t want you to know what it really is or what it really does.

Dems politicized the nations entire healthcare in 2010 on a party-line vote. Yet it was only phase one. This is the second phase of the final solution.

Then they want people to have to go to the polls and vote for their personal healthcare in every election. Politicians are in bed between you and your healthcare.

This illogical nightmare while they extend it out to illegal immigrants. No one is supposed to know, or care, about the consequences. Just keep going back to vote for the hacks.

Who are the real beneficiaries of this?

Advertisements

Customer Appreciation: people helping people

This is sort of a customer appreciation piece. But not that type business to consumer. More like consumer to consumer. Everyone is a consumer at some point.

There is an incredible resource out there. It is not armed with gadgetry or 800 numbers, or high tech customer service centers — though many companies may have them.

No, I’m talking about the power in consumers, a knowledge base as a source for information. Face it, these days it is all about information. And with do it yourselfers it is no different. They need information too.

So the thing works like this: something breaks or you run into a problem and where is the first place everyone goes? That’s right, it all starts with a search on-line. Some people have gotten really good at it by putting the problem they are having into the search, or some people just put the product or thing in the search, and away they go on a mini-adventure. Sometimes it takes minutes, sometimes hours of research on a problem device or product.

But the great thing is there is a small army out there of people who help other people. It sort of restores your belief that there are good people out there who care and who aren’t taking advantage of people And it proves there are still plenty of honest people. The thing is these people often don’t have any ulterior interest other than helping other people solve or avoid a problem. All one has to do is access it, stumble on it or find it.

It is a resource within the resource of the internet. No the internet itself cannot answer all your questions, but people can and do all the time. For instance, product reviews are a helpful place for particular products. There is also an increasingly mountain of information besides that out there. All you have to do is find it, tap into it and read.

Okay, am I over glorifying the whole thing? I don’t think so. I only know what I have come across. So the real information is often not on store or manufacturer’s pages but from people out there like users and consumers. They more often than not have also been through a similar experience as yours and feel compelled to help you shorten an unpleasant experience, turning their bad into your good.

Funny how all the credit seems to be given to the wild, endless internet when in reality it is often the people behind or on the internet that make the difference. No, the internet cannot solve problems all by itself. That ability relies on people putting information on it. The internet is only as good as what is put on it.

For instance, you want to do an ancestor search. There are no guarantees the information you want is on the internet or available. It all depends (or mostly) on what other people such as professionals and users have decided to put on the internet. So the function and utility of the internet depends on people to make it useful.

I used to mock people when Twitter first started. They would put the most mundane stuff out there about what they were doing or where they were going. I said who are these people and who are they talking to? Almost like they were creating a diary on line.

I thought what a strange concept in culture. People wanted to publicize everything for whatever reasons those were, and some of those could require psychological analysis. Things settled down the more it was used. Emphasis shifted to the tool it can be, rather than simply a digital public diary.

Like every new technology, Twitter evolved into an entity of its own. Businesses use it, people use it and political activists and politicians use it. But when Donald Trump used it, “Holy cow, Houston we have a problem!!!”

They said, “whoa, maybe this is too much, how about we back off on Twitter? He needs to put the Twitter down.” It was only too much when Trump used it to his advantage. But Obama used My Space and Facebook. It turns out to be a highly personal thing; it’s how you use it that matters. You want some sense of consensus on something, look on Twitter.

Elementary my dear Watson.

It is not so different in all other areas of the internet. It is not about the apps though they are helpful. It is also about the people out there using the internet, and they will find lots of creative ways to use it because, after all, that is what we do. So the people are the engine of innovation. It is not just happening in tech laboratories.

Remember how Microsoft used to just dump its operating systems out there, every so often? Then let all the bugs and issues be found and put out patches and updates. Maybe that was not their intention but what happened. Imagine if you put a car out like that or a washing machine? “We will fix the issues and problems later as we find them.” They took advantage of the massive public rollout and their vast number of users out there.

Then when Microsoft decides to render something obsolete, they stop updating anything and say they no longer are supporting this system. Well, but you made it. They tell you we cannot possibly keep updating every old system. Enter the masses of consumers that through networking and other routes find fixes or work arounds for issues. Oh, those under appreciated consumers.

Those are some examples of the internet. There are plenty in other areas, almost in every category there are users and consumers who go the extra step. Someone does something because it needs to be done. Necessity is the mother of invention.

The same holds among DIYers. People do and then share that information. If one person was helped by it then technically it is a success and worth the effort someone made. And it is not really all about likes or views. From appliance repairs to Youtube help videos.

You are not alone either at home or online. There is information to be had sometimes a click away. All done because people care. Hats off to the underappreciated consumers.

Right Ring | Bullright

US Largest Global Crude Producer

Now here is something the left probably never wanted to be number one at.

San Antonio Business Journal

Sep 12, 2018, 2:46pm CDT Updated 2 days ago Production in the nation’s shale basins has helped the U.S. surpass Russia and Saudi Arabia to become the world’s largest crude oil producer, preliminary figures from the Energy Information Administration show.

American exploration and production companies are now producing an estimated 10.9 million barrels of crude oil per day, according to the EIA’s latest Short-Term Energy Outlook report released on Wednesday. Based on preliminary data, EIA officials believe that crude oil production in the U.S. surpassed Saudi Arabia in February and surpassed Russia twice — once in June and again in August.

The figures mark the first time that domestic crude oil production has surpassed Saudi Arabia in more than two decades. Although the EIA does not publish crude oil production forecasts for Russia and Saudi Arabia, the agency expects that U.S. crude oil production will continue to exceed that of Russia and Saudi Arabia through 2019.

https://www.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/news/2018/09/12/united-states-now-the-largest-global-crude-oil.html

Oops, the energy denier crowd is not going to like that. The second part of the oil issue is why the rise in gas prices? Now that sanctions will be back on Iran, it will be another excuse for higher oil prices. Though when they dropped Iran sanctions, the only beneficiary was Iran and a few of its trading partners. Of course on the left they would enjoy sky high gas and energy prices. At least for the time being congrats to US anyway.

DNC Melltdown

As midterm elections start to heat up, with all the primaries going off in every state, you might see enthusiasm among Democrats. You might even think they are the ones with the unified momentum. Well, you may be wrong if you do. I’m not spinning it, I don’t need to.

Here’s why, first. Take a good look at the bare cupboards in the DNC. Then take a glance at their big funders. You know who they are: Tom Steyer to George Soros and a basket of others. It is not as important who they are as what they are. They are the hair on fire, far-left radicals that drive the Party. But more importantly, drive any base. DNC is out.

–(Open Secrets)———-Total Raised——–Total Spent——Cash on Hand——–Debts
Democratic Party——–$510,732,825—-$405,218,739—-$139,922,483—-$11,902,719
Republican Party——–$630,554,660—-$426,703,807—-$150,139,527—–$1,650,056
Demo National Cmte —$110,040,264—-$112,645,182——$9,185,284——-$6,353,378
Repub National Cmte –$213,054,677—-$187,695,079—–$50,687,610————$0

And now there is a fairly new big player, not really new. The ACLU has been stepping in, or should I say kicking in to drive many races. So they are in more than ever. We are literally now running against ACLU and Planned Parenthood.Chelsea tipped their hand. Twist Roe into economics, if your economic message is as vacuous as your political one.

But then look at the DNC coffers. They aren’t just empty, they are in big debt. Not only are they on the financial verge of bankruptcy but the Party is bankrupt on ideas as well. They still blame Obama who left the Party in shambles. Then Hillary. There is very little cash on hand and a lot of debt. What do these factors mean?

Enter my opinion and just that. They will manage because they always find a way to flow some money. However, what is happening is the big funders, i.e. special funders and special interests will fill the gap. People are not funding the party, instead putting gas in the tanks of candidates and causes. Money is flowing around the DNC. Read again, Democrats are not funding their own Party. It is all but irrelevant, at least as any central Party apparatus. By design? I doubt it. They just cannot fund it. And who would put much confidence in it after the way it worked in 2016? So they are going around it. No credibility is telling.

Don’t just take my word for it, listen to others make the case. A WaPo opinion piece by Ed Rogers in June described the dire Democrat Party conditions as unraveling. (I refuse to call it Democratic) And now good reason to use that term instead of their preferred one.

In the meantime, the Democratic Party appears to be dismantling itself. Outside groups are fighting their own fights, donors are being pulled away, and potential Democratic presidential candidates show no sign of being party-builders. If you believe in the two-party system, you know this isn’t good. Party discipline has eroded, and that makes it harder to govern once a party is elected to power. We need reforms that empower parties and candidates and diminish the influence of deep-pocketed plutocrats and narrowly focused interest groups.

Well then, is the fat lady warming up her vocal chords? All he can do is make the case for the “two party system”. But is it really a two party system anymore, I mean really? Regardless of how the DNC finances look, is it half of a two party system? I don’t think so. Even the author points to the non cohesive and unconventional funding. What does that say? I don’t see a party unity. It’s a grab bag of mostly socialist ideas bickering for turf. While Bernie might be ecstatic, when the dog finally catches the car what happens?

I think they have big problems. Maybe they are all smoking some real good stuff over there but how about the unity and love? It’s not there. While the Republicans are unified, to some greater degree on issues and a platform, Democrats are flailing about making a lot of noise, with no central theme or purpose. Many years ago I would have prayed for this scenario, a disunited party and bad if any leadership. Worse yet for them, seems no one can reign in the Party or their dire finances. It’s broke. But the people of the party are broke apart too. The screaming and yelling make up for, or paper over, the empty shell that remains of a party. There’s nothing there.

They can trot out the Alinsky stuff, bring out the Marxist ideas, plug in their socialist values, get fired up for a few key races, do a few marches and fundraisers; but in the end, what do you really have? A hot mess that’s what. The great divide in overdrive.

It would be a mistake to try to run an election against an empty bankruted party. What do you focus on? There is nothing there? Call it what it is. Before you get too excited, we still run against the socialist party they are, only we are not running against a party structure. You are basically running against all these splintered special interest groups. Though the only thing that does tie any of it together is a socialist agenda. That is where the energy is. You can no longer say or talk to the moderate, sane ones, or adults in the room. peel off a few. There are none. Everyone is just out for their thing, whatever bad acid trip it is. But they are a long way from any resemblance to unity, virtually on anything.

Sure they agree on issues here and there, but not on direction or a central vision. They want to abolish ICE and do something to cops and hate Trump. They are the anti-party now. Their resistance is all that defines them or unites them. That may be where the solidarity is but there’s a random hodgepodge everywhere else, including in funding which does matter. That funding is a collection of special interests. You could call them a party of special interests, but even that wouldn’t be really fair. Even special interest have more cohesive unity than that. The people are not really united. It’s a giant illusion. We shouldn’t fall for thinking that it is some solidly united party. What is missing?

Any defining leadership – MIA. Nancy Pelosi recently made statements to reinforce her leadership but then she blamed the press and media for trying to divide them. Wow, a tell that is. Blaming the press now? Bad when you have to blame the strongest allies of the Party. And media has drifted along its own far left course. Nancy may be on an isle all by herself. Does she dare take on media? She can’t. They are all she has to try to control it.

In the last almost two months, I see nothing that has improved or changed for Democrats. It’s still a party of misfits. Interesting that this whole meltdown happens at this time, when Republicans are unified in issues and a message with Trump having consolidated his approval. It looks like a time to close the deal. I mean any questions have been resolved and Party unity high, we now know what he can do, we’ve seen it. All we need is the how. And that is where the midterms come in, with a new Supreme Justice on the way, and tax cuts in the rear view, we have a good economic message. So there are problems, so what? There are always problems. But this kind of unity can’t be wasted at such a time when our enemy (opponents) have none.

Put it this way, politically, the trends on the other side are not positive. They are negative. And what they are really running on is all negative. Who can get behind that with any enthusiasm? I know, never underestimate the Party of Stalin. But Republicans seem to have found their voice, finally, and the fog is lifting. They’re perpetually underestimated.

The fork is ready….the lady is standing in the wings getting anxious. Someone could say but in the end, the Democrats always unify. Except on what this time? There’s nothing cohesive there, like their bank accounts.

 
Right Ring | Bullright

Clown Express: last call to Washington elites for 2018

The increasingly irrelevant George Will may be defrocked but he is still bloviating about his political strategy — supposedly to stop Republicans.

Ed Morrow tore it up in this piece. George Will’s satchel of descriptors

George Will Willfully Wills Defeat

Consider the first paragraph of [George Wills’] recent Washington Post column, “Vote Against the GOP”:

Amid the carnage of Republican misrule in Washington, there is this glimmer of good news: The family-shredding policy along the southern border, the most telegenic recent example of misrule, clarified something. Occurring less than 140 days before elections that can reshape Congress, the policy has given independents and temperate Republicans—these are probably expanding and contracting cohorts, respectively—fresh if redundant evidence for the principle by which they should vote.

“Carnage,” “telegenic,” “temperate Republicans,” “expanding and contracting cohorts,” “fresh if redundant,” and two uses of “misrule”—all in two sentences!

https://amgreatness.com/2018/06/25/george-will-willfully-wills-defeat/

Will, indeed, is laying it on thick. Not content with opposing Republicans in 2016, he is back now opposing Repubs in 2018, counseling you to do exactly that. Sure he can explain his 3-cushion (attempted) bank shot. But why would anyone take Will seriously now?

Swamp Economy of Politics

Many people laughed at Bill Maher wanting the economy to crash, but it does show something more sinister.

Let’s not forget that the left politicized every department of government under Obama. Let’s not forget he weaponized much of it against his political opponents. Isn’t that what the Left wants government for?

So is it such a leap then that they are wishing for economic collapse to hurt Trump or drive him out, and hurt those supporting him? Not at all.

However, it says a modicum of truth about the left today. Forget all what liberals say they are about and care about. Like everything else, they want an economy politicized and weaponized against their political opponents. That is the economy they have in mind.

The next time they lecture us that they would be better stewards of the economy, they have revealed what they mean — an economy subservient to their political agenda.

They already showed us in all their protests and boycotts how they want to use the economy, to hurt their political enemies or reward their friends and allies. Just that Maher makes it clear. That is what the social justice warriors mean. It is only another extension of their ideological core and lust for power. Goal: a fully politicized, weaponized economy.

Right Ring | Bullright

Maher is now doing the walk of shame

Bill Maher is not letting any opportunity slide to bash Trump. He now hopes for a recession that would oppose Trump’s favorability. It finally came to this.

Well, the moonbats have gone completely crazy.

Bill Maher is ‘hoping for’ an economic collapse so he can ‘get rid of Trump’: ‘Sorry if that hurts people’

HBO host Bill Maher said Friday that he is “hoping for” an economic collapse because that is the only way the president’s opponents can “get rid of Trump.”

Maher first asked guest Shermichael Singleton to asses the current economy under President Trump.

“It is going well,” Singleton answered. “For now.”

“Thank you, that’s my question,” Maher added. “I feel like the bottom has to fall out at some point, and by the way, I’m hoping for it.”

“I think one way you get rid of Trump is a crashing economy. So please, bring on the recession. Sorry if that hurts people, but it’s either root for a recession or you lose your democracy.”

The economy appears to be improving under President Trump despite his ongoing trade war with both China and U.S. allies.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bill-maher-is-hoping-for-an-economic-collapse-so-he-can-get-rid-of-trump-sorry-if-that-hurts-people

How about maybe the bottom just fell out of Maher’s common sense reserve tank? He’s running completely on empty. At least now he said it, he is hoping for America’s demise. Are there any sane liberals any more?

First, they claimed the entire economy would collapse on Trump’s election. Now they are hoping it will. What’s left but sabotage? May Maher’s program be the first fatality.

I know, maybe we can fake out the Left somehow? They seemed much happier when the economy was tanking.

Market Maneuvers

Two things tripped my radar on the economy. First is the gas prices and the rise in oil prices.(71.00 ^) There is a point where it is counter productive to the economy.

I don’t know that exact number but already the gas prices are having an effect. And excessive inventories have gone down. Consumer demand goes down, even while the economy is heated up. So when does the lower demand cool the economy?

The second is a lesser known rise in lumber and building material costs. Lumber futures increased 66% over the last year. (Bloomberg) That’s stunning. What effect will that have on the economy? Maybe the better question is what effect will both factors have on the economy — and on growth? At a time when we are trying to break 3% growth.

The Illinois plague: can it be contained?

While not new, again causing problems in Illinois is the state of the pension plans. There do not seem to be any options for the state. Maybe Obama can chip in for old time sake?

Harvey, IL pension crisis ‘canary in the coal mine’

By Rick Moran — April 20, 2018 | American Thinker

Harvey, Illinois is in the midst of a financial crisis that represents the tip of the iceberg for literally hundreds of small towns in Illinois.

The city of 25,000 in the far northwest suburbs of Chicago is suffering from high unemployment (22%). An astonishing 32% of the population lives below the poverty level. This is a deadly mixture that has caused catastrophic shortfalls in revenue, leading to a crisis in funding pensions for the city’s retired workers.

Since state law prohibits municipal bankruptcy, Harvey has been forced into a situation Illinois has never seen. In February, the state began to garnish Harvey’s revenue to fund its pension liabilities. The city was forced to lay off 40 police and firemen – 25% of police employees and 40% of firefighters. This, in a city already known for high levels of crime.

The irony is that the state of Illinois’s own pension crisis is even worse. But fear is growing that unless a massive infusion of pension money is forthcoming from the state, dozens of towns will suffer a similar fate as Harvey.  ……./

Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/04/harvey_il_pension_crisis_canary_in_the_coal_mine.html

Or maybe by the time Obama gets his library built, he will have to hire his own police force and fire department there to protect it. Maybe pay for the plowing and road repair too.

China and the Left

I see a similarity of China and the Left here, aside from the communism ties. It is not a stretch, the political strategies align. You might say birds of the feather.

It is always about the goal with the left, as it is with China. The means are only the vehicle, to be discarded when the goal is achieved. And anything that achieves it is acceptable.

Regarding the trade deficit with China, and recent tariff announcements, Trump said that there may be some pain but in the end we will have a stronger country. That is the first time I heard a leader reference the long game of what we want. (okay maybe not first) A lot of people probably shuttered to hear that.

I bet that got the Chinese’s attention because he is referencing the long game. Something we don’t always stress. It shakes their predictability about us. In other words, that we would be willing to weather some pain to get to the benefit in the end.

See the strategy to Chinese is really as simple as the lefts’ is. Both are focused on the destination not on the means. Whatever the means matters little. The destination is king. That is the same with the Chinese. And If they really believe in their dominant end, and we know they do, then that tells the real story.

To Chinese they want to control or run the world. See if that is their goal then nothing else is important. Do you get it? If that is where they see themselves, at that point there is nothing anyone can do to them about anything — there’s nothing to negotiate. That may seem a fantasy to us, but if they believe it then it gives their strategy away. Once they are in the driver’s seat the game is over.

We, however look at this as a long term game that will continue. It won’t once they reach their destination. They will be the tyrants they want to be and it will be tough to anyone who disagrees. That is what they have in mind. Nothing like our goals or strategy. We want a working relationship, for the long term. They are just thinking as the short term until they get to their destination.They think none of this stuff will matter then.

It is the same type mindset the Left has. They look only at achieving their desired ends. Once that is done, nothing else such as rules apply. It is a king of the hill perspective. They plan on keeping the hill once they get it. That is the way their plans work. Do you see the similarity? Power is rule, and rule is permanent not temporary. At that point, all resources go to preserving and keeping that permanent rule. Sure, it is a scorched earth plan but so what? That is how they play. We are looking at it as a balancing act but they don’t want anything balanced. They want control and once you have it, you run the show. If we do not look at the end game, goals, of those like China, Russia, N Korea, or Iran, then we underestimate the game. The days of just ignoring it are dwindling.

This is why we, meaning media and talking heads, are concerned about a trade war. It’s a perpetual real war to China, and they plan on winning. So the state of a trade war does not matter to China at all. This is also why intellectual property is a major issue to us and not to them. Their end doesn’t see a problem with private intellectual property.

It is sort of the same thing as CNN or MSM worrying about so-called Russia collusion. while the rest of the country is concerned about trade. The two are not on the same wave lengths, like two different orbits. Which one matters?

Right Ring | Bullright

Privacy and use of info data

I’ve got a new thought. It might still have some wrinkles but I’ll throw it out there. All the attention focused on privacy and social media, I share your concerns. Then come all the news of Facebook selling your data info, without your permission or knowledge.

Surely they aren’t alone either. Obama pilfered data just fine. They cheered.

That said, who likes having their data used and sold off as a commodity? Then they promise you security. No, how about the owner of the info gets paid for their own information? What’s wrong with that? I like the idea that they pay me. Clicks and everything else is a cash cow for merchants of info. It is now a business model.

So how about they pay you for your data they want? We have a commodity they want, we create it. Why should we get cut out of the market? A middle man sells it off and you don’t know how it is used nor by whom. If it really is a market that is. That’s me. Glitches?

Right Ring | Bullright

The Left’s Hogg Business Model

Yes, give us a description how that anti-business model works. Inquiring minds.

The Media Matters thuggery behind the astroturfed boycott of Laura Ingraham Tolerance bullies.

Conservative Review — by Chris Pandolfo | March 30, 2018

Media Matters is once again using its tired, sleazebag astroturfing tactics to bully and intimidate those who don’t agree with its far-left agenda. This time, hiding behind a child, the despicable thugs are pushing for advertisers to boycott Laura Ingraham’s Fox News show after she mocked 17-year-old Parkland shooting survivor and anti-gun activist David Hogg, for which she has since apologized.

On Wednesday, Ingraham tweeted a Daily Wire story, “Gun rights provocateur David Hogg rejected by four colleges to which he applied,” adding “and whines about it.” Hogg responded on Twitter, asking about her “biggest advertisers” and tweeting “#BoycottIngramAdverts” [sic]. He later tweeted a list of Ingraham’s top twelve advertisers.

At 1:06 p.m. ET on Thursday, Ingraham apologized “for any upset or hurt my tweet caused him or any of the brave victims of Parkland.” Yet after she apologized, at 2:15 p.m., Media Matters published a story on Ingraham’s “bullying” and linked to a list of her advertisers. Hogg rejected Ingraham’s apology exactly two hours after she issued it, saying “an apology in an effort just to save your advertisers is not enough” and demanding that she “denounce” Fox News’ coverage of the Parkland anti-gun activists, saying “It’s time to love thy neighbor, not mudsling at children.” The calls for an advertiser boycott against Ingraham continue, and according to Media Matters, nine companies have pulled their ads from “The Ingraham Angle,” including TripAdvisor, Joseph A. Bank, Hulu, Expedia, and Johnson & Johnson.

So a leftist social media mob has been organized against Ingraham, and there are a few important things to note.

First, this is not a grassroots effort led by Hogg. Media Matters has a long history of organizing boycotts against conservative media figures like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. Hogg’s age and his victim status as a Parkland survivor are a shield that cowardly Media Matters is hiding behind to obscure its astroturfing. His voice is a sword the organization is taking advantage of to launch an attack on Ingraham (and other conservatives). The media is complicit in this abuse of a child.

Second, this is not a campaign against Ingraham. It’s still going on after she apologized. The real target is Fox News and anyone in conservative media. Media Matters founder David Brock has previously described the mission of his organization as “guerrilla warfare and sabotage” against the Fox News channel. In 2010, arch-progressive financier George Soros gave $1 million to Media Matters, noting, “Media Matters is one of the few groups that attempts to hold Fox News accountable for the false and misleading information they so often broadcast.” This group has an agenda, and it’s out to destroy those who disagree with it.

Third, it will not stop with Laura Ingraham. Media Matters has previously used its social media mob to go after several conservatives. This is far from the last time it will attempt this, especially if it succeeds in driving more advertisers away from Ingraham’s show. The Left takes pleasure in ruining the lives and livelihoods of conservatives who do not submit to their agenda. And if you do submit, if you do back down, if you do apologize, these petty tyrants will keep trying to grind you into the dust. Who will be next? Another conservative media host? A real estate agent who tweets something that upsets the Left? Will they destroy her business? Or a doctor’s? A mechanic’s? ~ ~ [see]

 
Being schooled by children? Ed-U-K-shun.

But we’re told to lighten up. Then we’re attacked for supposedly attacking or hating the kids. I know I was.  Like we just hate kids. Saying anything back to or about these kids constitutes an “attack”. What kind of nonsense have we slipped into?

Now businesses are supposed to kowtow to the whims of children, who make the rules, law and decide who you should do business with. They decide where you can advertise or, more importantly, where you can’t. That’s a business model?

The world is supposed to look at this and say it is normal? What is wrong with all those that comply? Okay, corporations, do you want to turn the reins of your company over to children who can barely drive? How responsible is that? What does that portend for the future of the country or business?

So you liked those eyeballs a few years ago when you were targeting them as your captive audience of TV viewers. But now that they are intervening in your board room and bottom line, you just have to suck it up. There is nothing you can do about it.

Who makes your decisions?

As I have said here before, is that really how much you care about your company? These kids were obsessed with Nickelodeon while you were building a brand. Now you are going to turn the integrity of that brand over to children? And you can’t do anything about it but give it to them? I guess I’m confused…and disappointed.

David Hogg lists a bunch of businesses to boycott because of tweets from Laura that some universities have rejected him. Shouldn’t he be boycotting the universities? Oops, seems he already is. I guess it is how he deals with rejection. Somehow she’s the bully.

What is it called when you bully businesses into taking actions or making decisions to suit you, on a sliding scale? And instead of these children going on a national political campaign, shouldn’t they focus on the local politics and policies that led to this avoidable shooting?

Right Ring | Bullright

Spinning Economy in the works

Just freaking incredible.

Okay, now that is about right, not so bad.

Say what? Welcome to that strange place that Twilight Zone never found.

What Discrimination?

How about another backwards thing? For years we’ve been lectured about discrimination by the left. I’m not sure why since it shouldn’t be a partisan thing. But they seem to think it is the right’s dream or agenda to discriminate. Well, a funny thing happens when you parse it all down to politics, which is what really drives the left.

The left is all worked up about Little Sisters of the Poor, birth control, the abortion agenda, Obamacare, and now baking wedding cakes for LGBTQXYZ’s. Tuesday is the day a case is going to the Supreme Court to decide. But you know the drill, you cannot refuse to bake them a wedding cake. Period! So there are activists going around trying to force bakers to make them a cake. If you refuse, they sue. It’s the new fad for the left.

Issue of the case: Whether applying Colorado’s public accommodations law to compel the petitioner to create expression that violates his sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage violates the free speech or free exercise clauses of the First Amendment.

But who cares about any of those Constitutional rights?

Details

The agency, however, dismissed that explanation as “a distinction without a difference,” and it ruled both that Phillips’ refusal to provide the custom cake violated Colorado anti-discrimination laws and that Phillips had “no free speech right” to turn down Craig and Mullins’ request. The Colorado Civil Rights Commission upheld that ruling and told Phillips – among other things – that if he decided to create cakes for opposite-sex weddings, he would also have to create them for same-sex weddings.

The problem with their discrimination complaints is that discrimination is the business model of the left. It is their M/O. They want to force people to do whatever they want them to do and they won’t take no for an answer. Discrimination is the enforcer.

Take their boycotts, for example, which are based on discrimination. That’s how they do politics. They want anyone to refuse to do business with Trump supporters or anyone who supports the Republican tax plan. They’ll use any businesses they can in their agenda.

They look for advertisers of Fox or Fox shows and then rally their activists against them, by phone calls, twitter or Facebook campaigns. They target businesses into submission to their agenda. Then the business or corporation is to take action against a particular person, show, or program host. Have a bad decision in court they don’t like? Well, organize the people and boycott the offending parties. Beat them into submission.

They like to black list or boycott anyone or thing that does not conform to their political agenda. But that is their model. They get things done by coercion, intimidation or force, by any means necessary, bullying them to cooperate. Or else you will be barred, marginalized or retaliated against just as those who disagree with them are. That is the big stick they use against you, discrimination. The Black Caucus discriminates based on ideology.

It’s the same principle that caused Senator Schumer to single out a woman in a restaurant in NY and berated her for voting for Trump. He followed her outside to continue his verbal assault on her. When Barack Obama was in office during the government shutdown he sent word out to the departments that the public, people, needed to be made to feel its effects. Obama’s IRS targeted individuals and harassed them due to their political beliefs.

In Senate nomination hearings, Senator Feinstein told nominee Amy Barrett that “dogma lives loudly” in her. The statements caused NYT and media to then take up that mantra in media and columns. So they operate as a caliphate. But a senior Catholic scholar took issue with their discriminatory track against Barrett.

Ashley McGuire said: “An accomplished professor and legal scholar at the University of Notre Dame, the qualifications and credentials of Amy Barrett are unchallenged. That the left continues to treat her Roman Catholic faith as an impediment to office is a testament to just how beholden they are to their anti-religious bigotries.”

So true; it is a validation of Democrats own bigoted, discrimination agenda.

In another infamous hearing, Chuck Schumer was so worried about “deeply held beliefs” that would disqualify the nominee. He was determined to make that the deciding factor on nominee Bill Pryor in 2003. (just in case we think this is a new phenomena)

Charles Krauthammer, at the time, took him to task for his bigoted discrimination:

Pryor has more recently been attacked from a different quarter. Senate Democrats have blocked his nomination to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on the grounds of his personal beliefs. “His beliefs are so well-known, so deeply held,” charged his chief antagonist, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) , “that it’s very hard to believe–very hard to believe–that they’re not going to deeply influence the way he comes about saying, `I will follow the law.”‘

An amazing litmus test: deeply held beliefs are a disqualification for high judicial office. Only people of shallow beliefs (like Schumer?) need apply.

Of course, Schumer’s real concern is with the content of Pryor’s beliefs. Schumer says that he would object to “anybody who had very, very deeply held views.” Anybody? If someone had deeply held views in favor of abortion rights, you can be sure that Schumer would not be blocking his nomination. Pryor is being pilloried because he openly states (1) that Roe vs. Wade was a constitutional abomination, and (2) that abortion itself is a moral abomination. — Chicago Tribune column.

So that about covers it. You see, ‘it’s the discrimination, stupid.’ Only now it is out in the open. They use words like “so far out of the mainstream” all the time. Code talk. Who gets to define “mainstream?” Of course, they or Schumer and Feinstein do. Judging by the direction the Democrats have gone in the past few years, mainstream is now in the San Francisco Bay. Don’t agree with abortion? A litmus test is discrimination.

If you don’t follow them into the Bay, or at least to the shoreline, then you too will feel the wrath of their discrimination. It’s only a matter of when and how. Discrimination is alive.

Though the left will be the first to raise discrimination objections as a defense. Rep Conyers is rolling out a whole discrimination defense. The radical left made discrimination the basis of an anti-travel ban campaign. They discriminate against conservatives on campuses, or Trump voters in the heartland, while accusing them of discrimination.

Saul Alinsky was probably their top cleric of discrimination. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” That’s the way, uh huh-uh huh, we like it.

Right Ring | Bullright

The political marketplace: weaponizing business

Check out this foundation article included which seems a bit misleading – to be kind. It is about the Hannity advertising scheme going on. Let the dis-ingenuousness begin.

You know the routine: libs feign outrage over something in conservative media and turn it into a war on sponsors. Or war against them as the case may be. It is all too common. Even worse is the will of businesses to comply to demands. See full article:

(Marketwatch) – “E-Trade, TripAdvisor and Conagra are among the companies that say they will stop advertising on ‘Hannity’ in the wake of Roy Moore allegations.”

“Stop” being the operative word. Just keep that in mind and decide if that is misleading. Some companies make statements who were not currently advertising anyway. But it makes for good fodder for Media Matters extortionists. See what you notice in it.

Back to the M/O

But even the left’s outrage is disingenuous because the offense is not the real objective, the voice of the person is. Libs don’t want to watch the content regardless of the offense. They want the person or show canceled via their protest causing sponsors to abandon it, thereby hopefully getting it removed. The offending material is only an excuse to attack the show/host. The left has a pattern of these attack campaigns. And none other than Media Matters specializes in attacks on anyone or media that doesn’t cow-tow to their agenda.

It has had some success I won’t bother to list.

So it is all routine to the radical left but claiming it is about this or that issue is very deceptive. It is about silencing opposition, simple as that. We all know it but it is important. If they can only shut up their opposition they can railroad their agenda. Only one thing stands in their way, the 1st amendment — free speech and freedom of press. Actions of leftists don’t support either. Sure, they talk a good game when convenient.

Again, we know that. However, nothing stops them from pushing the envelope of their agenda further and further. As is the case when they go down their extensive ‘targets’ list to silence; or down their list of advertisers to the program.

First of all, when someone advertises, it does not mean they are endorsing all the opinions or content of the program. It is not a political endorsement either. It is, in fact, an advertisement to reach eyeballs or certain people. Their objective is sales or exposure to viewers. Again, it is not an endorsement of content or politics. Consumers know this.

You cannot hold the advertisers responsible for what the show does, and you cannot hold the network responsible for what the advertiser says. The network is not the customer service center for the company. And consumers shouldn’t be calling the company because they don’t like the programming. Each are independent with their own interests.

However, advertisers turn into political fodder when they are manipulated by activists like Media Matters and used in a silencing campaign against their targets. Companies are objects of extortion or intimidation in an effort to politicize, and then weaponize them.

Yes, they can go along willingly, but they can be threatened to go along as well. When they comply, they allow their brand and its recognition to be used for specious political motives. So political activists hijack and freely use brands toward their own political objectives.

Normally the problem or damage comes when companies do not give in to the threats. Then they are smeared just as the original target is. Some businesses take what they think is the “easy route” by complying to the demands. It is like the old mob protection racket, where they promise not to break your windows if you just pay the protection. In this case the payment of protection is dropping your ads from a certain target. So, in effect, they are asking the store owner to go break one of his own windows, with the promise they’ll help with the damage. The store owner then, consciously or not, enters into a cozy alliance with the villain racketeers. As long as you support their agenda with your own business practices, they will not cause you further injury.

Does enslavement enter your mind? What about the concept of private property? Something radicals do not have personally invested in it.

Just think about turning over your brand, or proprietary info, to activists for safekeeping? All the years of building your company and brand mean nothing to these extortionists. They only care about what you do with it, or more like how they can use your brand for their political objectives. The definition of Terrorism is threatening or harming people for political motives. Would you turn your car or house over to someone to use to further their own political agenda? I don’t think so.

Now we conservatives don’t sit around and say I don’t like this media or this person and take note of their sponsors to harass them into pulling their ads. It’s not something we do. We don’t hate watch them to track sponsors. And we know that those sponsors are not endorsing the content or opinions, only advertising to eyeballs or ears.

Fast forward to this latest attempt to weaponize Hannity’s sponsors over an interview he did with Roy Moore. The content was not the issue. The statements of Hannity was not the issue. Shutting Hannity down is the only issue. Another priority is the election in Alabama. (or elections is now a priority to Media Matters) And this plays to both ends, the election and silencing Hannity. In the left’s sponsor shakedown they solicit statements from advertisers to not advertise on the show. Keurig was one such company — whether sucked in naively or not.

Only this time the viewers, conservatives and free speech advocates intervened. They promptly told Keurig it had earned a boycott for their trouble. It wasn’t for Hannity but the principle. Over a few days, Keurig realized they tripped over people’s wrath by complying with the fascist left, Media Matters. A boycott was off to a bang but was criticized by MM as dumb for Sean to do.(it wasn’t him) The CEO then apologized to its employees — not the public — that it did not intend to take sides. Ha, too late. They were now involved and had their company held hostage to the left’s demands. Apologizing to the employees does not help that.

Videos popped up of former customers ejecting their coffee makers. This time was different. They may have been threatened with a boycott by Media Matters’ goons, but now they got an actual protest….anyway. See what you get playing games, trying to appease the left? Then came the oops to employees. A funny thing happened on the way to appeasing the fascists: they realized they will get a protest even if they appease the left, and very possibly a boycott too.

Then Libs didn’t realize we we were 6 weeks from Christmas and this puts their season at some risk. Well, that is the cost of getting into bed with the left. Do they care about your business? Do they care about your bottom line? Do they care about your employees? No, and they don’t care about your name or brand either since they are putting that at risk with their political campaigns. Does that mean anything to them? Not a cent, they are only using, abusing, politicizing, and weaponizing these companies.

By Wednesday, NYT had this piece saying advertisers were walking back tweets.

But by Tuesday, those companies were clarifying — or even deleting — statements they had made on the platform that indicated they had pulled ads from Mr. Hannity’s show because of comments he made about Roy S. Moore, the embattled Republican candidate for Senate in Alabama. Those moves followed a backlash against Keurig that included fans of Mr. Hannity posting videos of themselves destroying the company’s coffee makers.

“It’s pretty unusual to see companies like this handling an issue so poorly,” said Kara Alaimo, an assistant professor of public relations at Hofstra University. She said it was especially surprising to see companies like Realtor.com and Volvo delete widely circulated tweets.

The problem is that in the case of Hannity, he has a following including free speech advocates. In Media Matters’ corner, you have radical political hacks and their trolls attacking anything it disagrees with. An actual product or show has a consumer base, where MM does not — it operates on opposition. So fans and advocates or speech spoke up. I guess MM did not anticipate that. Then advertisers realized they could incur as much wrath from taking a stand against Hannity. (which shouldn’t be a compan’s role) They may have figured it is better to appeal to someone’s loyal base, rather than just oppose it. See the dynamics? Interesting that the left has always operated with free reign, where the default position was usually to side with it. But all you need is that big crack in the wall.

From the company point of view, who would want to be brow beaten into doing something or told by others how to spend their ad dollars? Then who wants their company dragged through the mud of politics? Their business model is the bottom line not politics. To add even more damage, MM hacks have also taken the liberty to start speaking for companies, if they are with them or if they are against them. And they usurp a certain power (liberty) over companies in the process. Then they have the nerve to act or even say they represent the best interests of the businesses. No they don’t. Remember the protection racket?

That stand and attitude should bother anyone in business. The idea that a company you built or run is suddenly turned over to whims of a political agenda should be concerning. That a brand you have a proprietary value in is being toyed with by political activists, is equivalent to squatting on your corporate name. It should be seen as an infringement. I think it is time someone send a cease and desist letter to the Media Matters protestors to stop using their name as part of political campaigns. That might send some chills into the corporate extortionists.

Until that happens, when companies and their ad money stand up on their own, independent of political hijackers and extortionists, they can be sucked into a whole lot of bad karma for appeasement policies. It can be a bigger liability than dealing with the protection racketeers.

My opinion is that when companies participate in these campaigns they become tools, weaponized by organizers, little more. I know some may think they are taking a stand but any short-term gains might not be worth the long-term damage and pain it can cause. Not to mention sort of losing control of your business. The issue is bigger than this though. This is a market model.(I don’t believe in it but it is) When companies are activated like this it has an effect on the economy. It turns them into cheap political interests like every other political organ. But actually they become more; they are radicalized and expended as mere political tools. Why would corporations allow themselves to be reduced to that?

I know some companies still take a stand on their special political issues, but they don’t have to morph into special interests or lobbyists. Using a company that way is careless.

Right Ring | Bullright

Obamacare still sucks

A letter from a North Carolina resident illustrates Obamacare nightmare.

Note the last line “to make sure you have the coverage you want.”

Better hacks

Dems ask: How can we get a better deal? Well, by dissolving the Democrat Party.

Better Deal, resistance at all costs. Undermine and obstruct the government and rule of law. Better at deconstructing America. How can deconstruction of the economy be the economic message you are selling? Dems began their “better” plan.

‘We want our power back’ is the real purpose. Elections are all they care about. They don’t care about working people or values we keep hearing so much about. Unless by values they mean to obstruct and stick it to the American people.

But now, they declare “better” as their new buzzword. Better than what?

If being a political hack is the goal then they are no doubt getting somewhere.

So the Marxists take their show on the road. Trot out the most divisive, most radical, lust-for-power progressives to push their message. Note: they are not interested in selling their ideas, they want to force them on the people. Better force.

They roll out their plan — should I say ideas because they are not plans — and then comes Elizabeth Warren out to demonize corporations and large employers. What they need to do is to take them “head on,” she says. Back to fight, fight fight. Better fight.

That’s the way they are going to create a better deal, better jobs, better wages. Better than what? Is better the new dog whistle for resistance? Better resistance.

Are we to believe they are going to run this dual track agenda? On one hand run their resistance movement against the Trump administration, tearing down not building up; while on the other run a pro jobs program, demonizing the very people who create them.

Who could believe this utter nonsense? They don’t have any answers, they have problems. It is a bash the economy agenda. So out of all that bashing, they believe they will shake jobs down out of the trees. It will just happen.

They are 6 months late to the jobs agenda. But then it is just a lie anyway.
They can’t even think up an original message.

But if the objective is really for them to be better hacks, then call them successful.

Why can’t Democrat, progressive, Marxists, socialists ever tell us what they really stand for, and what their real agenda is, or what they really care about?

(meteorologists are now reporting Hurricane Hillary is moving off to sea. We’ll see. I hope someone will still keep an eye on her anyway)

RightRing | Bullright

The Migration of Money

As the world turns, money also moves from place to place. Well, I mean wealth. There was an interesting report a year ago showing the statistics of wealth moving about the world.

While not completely detailed with cause and effect and all, it is a 30 thousand foot view anyway of the movement among wealthy people of different categories. And a report about the supper rich and billionaires. This was for 2016, so I wonder what it is this year?

There were some surprises. Interesting trends.

Among countries losing millionaires(in their definition) by migration between 2015-2016 are: France, China, Brazil, India, and Turkey. In that order of loss.

The countries gaining millionaires by migration are: Australia, US, Canada, UAE, and New Zealand. Australia in the lead and the US second.

A total 41,000 leaving those countries, and a total of 38,000 moving to the gain countries.

The wealthiest places in the world ranked as having the most millionaires by region: Asia-Pacific 5.1, all North America 4.8, Europe 4.2, Middle East 0.6, Latin America 0.5, Africa 0.2.(the place with the diamonds?)

Existing wealth of billionaires by region: Asia-Pacific had 590 billionaires, US had 540 billionaires, Europe had 489 billionaires, according to Forbes in 2016.

See links in this order.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-country-is-no-1-for-millionaire-migrants-and-its-not-the-us-2017-02-27?mod=MW_story_top_stories

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/for-the-first-time-america-is-no-longer-no-1-for-super-rich-2016-06-23

Key Ref: https://www.worldwealthreport.com/

UBI: universal basic income

From Futurism

  • Bill Gates has said he doesn’t think a UBI system would work right now as countries do not have enough money and should first focus on helping specific groups of people.
  • With automation poised to displace millions of workers in the coming years, many countries do think UBI systems are worth testing out.

In theory, a universal basic income (UBI) would be great. Under such a system, all citizens of a country are entitled to an unconditional amount of money on top of income they already generate through other means. It could spur productivity, improve health, alleviate poverty, reduce crime, raise education, and improve quality of life. It’s also especially relevant, given the reality of automation taking over more and more jobs.

More: https://futurism.com/4-bill-gates-thinks-countries-arent-ready-for-basic-income-yet/

Many people claim 2017 is the year UBI sweeps across nations. But when even Bill Gates cautions that it may bot be ready for prime time — or we for it — well, that is not an encouraging sign for them.

I guess the left are busy pushing the 15-dollar minimum wage now anyway.

And why not just give everyone a portfolio of stocks too — a basket of their choosing within a fixed dollar amount? I mean while they’re at it.

The Mexican Fox is at it again

Under the radar and from south of the border comes this gem of a statement.

Seems Trump is not the only one tweeting

We haven’t forgotten that gift that keeps on taking, NAFTA, That did wonders for the USA, workers…and businesses, didn’t it?

The NAFTA disaster.