A letter from a North Carolina resident illustrates Obamacare nightmare.
Note the last line “to make sure you have the coverage you want.”
A letter from a North Carolina resident illustrates Obamacare nightmare.
Note the last line “to make sure you have the coverage you want.”
I think a letter is in order to McCain. He McCan’t do anything that might help the GOP even though he had them all helping drag him across his last election.
Now, what GOP, what help? “I don’t need any stinking GOP.” No, he is happy basking in the glow of the left as a proud member of the Resistance.
Last repeal he said was not in AZ’s state interest. This time the governor endorses it and McCain finds an excuse to oppose it on process. Well, John, process this!
You used your conscience for your excuse. Your conscience would not allow you to support it. Maybe you shouldn’t have used that excuse.That very convenient, expedient conscience of yours that most of us didn’t know you ever had.
Those chilling words, “I cannot in good conscience…” Funny how look at everything else his conscience allows him to support. How about the help for those other missing POWs? His conscience was fine with burying all that, and he used as much of “the process” as he could for the means to do it. In fact that is what the process was for, to bury inconvenient things. Process he created to obstruct and confuse the process. How about the process of Campaign Finance Reform, where he used the process to try to control free speech?
McCain was the willing dupe that the left used over and over again through the years. He was media’s go to darling to attack the GOP, since McCain never attacks the left but reserves all his animosity for his own party. (his own party is being generous)
Maverick McCain — nothing Maverick about selling out or trading out. The Maverick who referred to Evangelicals and the right as Agents of Intolerance. We always deserve broad brush names but liberals deserve his best compliments, like Chappaquiddick Ted.
That is another point, John constantly told us that he came in under the Reagan Revolution. Indeed, Reagan had already won and laid the groundwork. All McCain did was attach himself like a leach to the Reagan train. A foot soldier he calls himself. What did he fight for? What part of that Revolution was his? He promptly started a revolution within against the revolution that helped usher him in. And he’s a keeper?
Eventually he would hookup with his stepbrother, Ted Kennedy. Never realizing he was a useful mark for the left, always was. But his heart was in it. That is where his true loyalties lie, with the left. Democrats had him figured better than he did them. Then Republicans granted him wide berth because he called himself a Maverick. More like the 1970’s ford Maverick — cheap, dated, unwanted and obsolete. A Maverick, what’s he given us?
In the 80’s McCain and fellow Senators gave us the Keating five scandal on Lincoln Savings and Loan. That cost the taxpayers over 3 billion and many people lost their life savings. But McCain wasn’t gone. He was worried about himself, not investors or losses. He was one of two Senators who survived to run for reelection. But then he went right back to being the stab in the back Senator.
Then he’d go on to run for president. Kids, don’t try that. He jokes about having lost a few expensive aircraft in his Navy days. He’d go on to basically throw the election for Obama, whom he could not criticize. Sarah Palin could not make up for his compromised campaign.
Failure McCain goes on to deliver the dossier to the FBI in 2016. He flirted with not endorsing or voting for Trump. He came around to run on the same platform declaring he would lead the repeal and replace charge to Obamacare in the Senate. That saved his tough reelection. But afterwards, he promptly went back to opposing Republicans.
So on Obamacare repeal, he claims his conscience just wouldn’t allow him to vote for it. But then he knew his was the decisive vote to kill it. Even prior to taking that vote, McCain went over to huddle with Democrats telling them he was a “No.” That overjoyed Chris Coons, as just one in the group with Chuck Schumer. And he told Dems to take up the defense bill as soon after that vote as they could. He was already maneuvering and moving on after leaving American people in the lurch by his pompous vote. That conscience….
Not quite done wrecking our agenda, he now plans on upending the tax reform bill, if he can. And on and on for the foreseeable future, as long as he is there.
So it’s time, John McCain, to bid you farewell, good riddance. Your so-called conscience has put you way beyond remediation on anything else. A conscience I cannot recognize.
On Tuesday’s election, McCain tries to validate himself — using the left’s talking points:
(CNN)”I predicted this, OK? And unless we get our act together, we’re going to lose heavily,” said Sen. John McCain, …pointing to two recent speeches he’s given where he warned about the President’s divisive rhetoric and impact on the Republican Party going forward.
Your conscience called and wants its excuse back… with interest. Maverick Maniac.
Right Ring | Bullright
What do these fine Senators all have in common?
If you guessed not on the ballot in the next election, you guessed right. And they all voted against the ‘straight repeal’ amendment on Obamacare.
“Sens. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn.; Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va.; Susan Collins, R-Maine; Dean Heller, R-Nev.; John McCain, R-Ariz.; Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska; and Rob Portman, R-Ohio, joined all Democrats to defeat the amendment, which would have given Congress two years to devise a replacement to the 2010 Affordable Care Act.” Fox
So now that all those above are safe in their seats for the midterm, they stand ready and willing as the opposition. They should be marginalized and isolated. Then it wouldn’t hurt Trump or others to do some campaigning in their states.
Most of them fought tough elections and now don’t have a care in the world about accountability. Remember Lisa Murkowski was originally appointed by her father to fill his own seat, after he won the gubernatorial race.
They are the enemy within and will be there for the duration of Trump’s term.
In the Senate, we are told the one major legislative accomplishment was getting Goresuch to the Supreme Court. Mitch is credited for that. But it was mainly achieved in opposition to Obama. And some Senate Republicans had weak knees and wanted to cave on that. So Mitch proved effective at opposition. Now it is a different story.
Right Ring | Bullright
These are some random thoughts that have been bouncing around in my head for a few years but the current situation brings them to the surface again.
I’ll make this brief to the point. Lately, all the talk about Obamacare repeal highlighted all the major problems. Now as the floods hit Texas, the same issues arise with FEMA and flood insurance programs. It is all relative to revenue and liability.
It isn’t necessary to go into all the particulars of insurance problems and expenses. I am concerned with one issue at the center. Its a simple and important principle.
Every conversation or debate always comes back to the people with existing and major health issues. In floods it is people in flood-prone areas. These problems make them “high risk” customers or property owners. In short, they represent a higher risk than average or the median in the pools. Keep that in mind.
Any conversation is always directed back to those “high risk” people, and what to do with them. Now you may say ‘but that is complex, not a simple subject.’ The principle is basic. It’s all about risk. The left likes to surround and cloud that in doom and gloom.
My frustration is these are private and some government programs. And a higher risk of some individuals, through their fault or not, does exist. So naturally the debate always revolves around those particular people. Almost as if the larger numbers of others are hostage to these higher risk. Maybe it’s extortion.
Then they talk about creating high risk pools, who’s in them and who isn’t? That is why proponents for single payer or high flood risk government programs sound the alarm. But if it is just about high risk, then I have a problem with their solutions.
In the insurance industry it is all about risk, an essential purpose of their business. I don’t understand government always taking on extra risk. Why should government assume the highest risk? That is my central problem. These private sector companies are experts with a risk-based business model. We are removing and assuming the highest risk from them under a pretense of reducing costs for other customers. That is their rationale.
If you are in the insurance business, then anything reducing or limiting your risk is a benefit. So if government comes along and assumes the worst, “high risk” people you have a liability windfall. Government taking on that risk reduces insurance companies’ risk.
Since their entire model is based on risk, then that is a huge benefit. You alleviate their liability for the worst risk. Can you say cha-ching? Now that is my problem. I don’t like government assuming the highest risk from the pool. And if we do it in this sector of the market, we can do it in others. Why does government want to willingly take on all that risk, which becomes another term for liability? I want to know why?
It also equates to a bailout, along with the other potential bailouts for insurance companies. So we the government are supposed to assume the highest risk/liability, then subsidize the companies on their other risks. They will also come anticipating a bailout, after we already removed the highest risk. Those are the basics discussed.
My thinking is if you want us to assume the greater liability for the highest risk then we want something significant in return. It is not a giveaway. But the left has their eyes on single-payer, so they don’t care about that. It becomes more rationale for their system. The more problems, the more justification for their system. What about risk?
The progressives see this whole issue completely backwards as a non-problem: “why not? Government should do it.” (and more) But I think we see the big problem with this.
Right Ring | Bullright
Forget Obamacare and healthcare, we are a sick country. Sick in the way of very ill needing extraordinary, urgent treatment to get it off the sick bed.
But the sickness is coming from Congress and the swamp in DC. And so far it is collectively refusing the treatment. The antibiotics are there and the IV waits. But we have a body and culture that persistently refuses to take the medicine.
RightRing | Bullright
Lavish on, for the first 5 minutes McCain lectured and praised the institution of the Senate. Lecturing on cooperation within the Senate and trusting each other again, he languished on about “serving the people who elected us,” into attacking outer-chamber voices:
“Stop listening to the bombastic loudmouths on the radio, and television and the internet. To hell with them! [applause] They don’t want anything done for the public good. Our incapacity is their livelihood. Let’s trust each other… return to regular order.”
The hack is back …with his invincible straw man.
So he is back to criticizing those outside voices and those who try to hold Congress and the Senate accountable. Yes, the problem is those outside voices. Sorry, we are worried about the inside voices who do the real damage. That America is fed up with the kind of shit-sandwiches your body is trying to serve up, should be a clue how we feel about it. You are not interested in the will of the people. No, you are an elitist who only uses the words “servants of a great nation” as cover for your real agenda of arrogance. Arrogance that has no limits to wall off the will of the people. Any different than Hillary’s “Deplorables”?
After all, what are elites there for but to do what the people oppose — the corrupt comradery we resent — by scheming against us in every major action. Especially when they team up against us. But that is the bipartisanship McCain stands for. He’s back to branding us Agents of Intolerance. His only real fight is with any outsider opposing him.
So they want to shut us up or shut us down. Marginalize us. There is the resistance and then the resistance within, like John McCain. But if anyone is the opposition it is him.
At a later point, he said we Americans “don’t hide behind walls, we breach them.” A clear attack on Trump and the Americans who want to secure our border. Don’t lecture us about walls. We care about our nation’s security. Stop warring with the will of the people.
RightRing | Bullright
Holding fast to conspiracy narratives pushed by Hillary Clinton (and her campaign of trolls) on Russia meddling, misogyny, racism that cheated her out of her destined Ovalating Office. Unfortunately, she is right, that media will follow her lead every time. While she and the entrenched media establishment are baited and trolled by Russia. They would take career Russian propagandists word or version of events over Trump’s almost every time.
It’s really easy if you are in the Kremlin hell-bent on sowing discord in America. If destroying credibility in American institutions is their goal, then the Left hands them a victory flag. So even when Trump goes to Poland to make a classical academic defense of western civilization, especially then, they have a collective panic attack and cannot recover. But intensive care could not treat their disease.
Then came his next trip to France with liberal Macron, their macaroni boy of Paris they fell for head first. This time MSM decided to downplay coverage of the visit ignoring most of the ceremony, except the presser to push Russia questions. Even the centennial of WWI and France’s Bastile Day got marginal coverage. Jake Tapper called it just a photo-op for Trump. Right a 100 year anniversary is just a photo-op , world history just gets in the way. After all, that is the way they see it.
So now, once again, another historical marker pops up that media seems too preoccupied with Russian propaganda to notice — or give due diligence to. It’s like you have this Russian spy novel playing out in the background to obfuscate any real news.
Saudi Arabia has lagged the U.S. in oil production for the last four years, according to federal data compiled by University of Michigan economist Mark Perry.
Perry created a chart Saturday showing just how far behind Saudi oil production has trailed U.S. production. Rising U.S. production combined with OPEC policies drove crude oil prices down to new lows. Monday, a barrel of oil costs $46.26, while the same barrel would have sold for $109.04 in June 2014.
U.S. oil production, on the other hand, is increasing. The U.S. imported about 60 percent of its oil in 2007, but by 2014, the country only imported 27 percent of its oil — the lowest level since 1985. Rising oil production has reduced demand for Saudi oil abroad too, keeping prices low.
Saudi Arabia can likely handle cheap oil better than other Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) nations, but cheap oil is still devastating the country.
Read at Daily Caller
And yet they wonder why we call MSM Fake News? Everything positive — as they define it — about their messiah’s golden throne was heralded from the mountaintops to make sure it echoed to anyone. It was unavoidable. They ran his Saturday addresses to tout all the great, but invisible, good news. It was good because they said so. Job numbers, even when bad, were called good. Or, as the Bible says, “those who call evil good and good evil.” And it worked, or saturated the airwaves to a point no one else could be heard.
Spending, national debt, budget issues. Remember Obamafiles claimed he halved the budget ‘deficit’ to cover the 2o trillion dollar explosion. The fairy dust worked, put some lipstick on that pig and sell it like the sweety-pie lie it is. He depleted the military, and budget, but who cares about that thing? All is good, they said. ‘These are the good times.’ Never mind that you did not see or feel it. You weren’t alone though. Most didn’t, still you had to listen to regurgitated talking points of how great things were going.
No, we weren’t wrong. Our instincts were not misguided. We weren’t misinformed. We were not too stupid to understand. We were not uneducated halfwits. We were just being constantly lied to on such a level, to such a degree, that Americans never were subjected to before. Even low information voters knew something was wrong. Economists, real ones that is, were not impressed. But even they had a hard time getting any information out. It was all being blurred, blotted out, and intentionally drown out by the so-called good news coming directly from, and being dictated by, the White House.
But it was all good in those days and there were no questions to ask, because no questions were necessary. Just report the White House talking points, life was easy for reporters. Obama would even tell press what stories they think should be covered, and what stories they didn’t think deserved time.
Guess what happened?
Remember Benghazi, IRS, Lois Lerner, or Fast and Furious? Leading from behind was actually a defense strategy they could get behind. Meaningless red lines were all the rage. Russian intervention? It really is not intervention when you are inviting them into Syria and altering your national policy to their liking and getting nothing in return. Of course that is not intervention. That is failed US leadership like we never experienced before either. It was complicit failure. Now they are paranoid about intervention? They opened the door, invited them in, coalesced with them. Is it any surprise Russia wasn’t the greatest or most respectful house guests, when Obama shows no respect for our own house?
Then, to top it all off, when Obama left he had them all declare that he had a completely scandal-free administration, not even a little one. Remember that? So it was an insult on reason and intelligence. It was a fraud. Obamacare was created, built and sold on lies. They named it the Affordable Care Act.
The article above, while it is good news to be ignored under Trump, will likely be co-opted for propaganda value by Obamafiles — who are just as active outside the Office as they were in the White House. So they are quite anxiuos to take credit for anything good. It is what they do. Though our growth and oil business in particular was in spite of Obama’s war on energy, not because of it. But that doesn’t stop them from laying claim.
Anyone dishonest enough to prop up Obama’s regime for 8 years is certainly going to use any dirty trick to that end, to credit Obama with a net positive. A guy like Obama that never had to live under or feel the effect of his own policies. Calling evil good was quite popular, getting even easier with practice. It was instant revision everywhere.
So now that we have oil production growth, who do you think can find fault with our achievement? That’s right, the same people who will gladly try to lay credit to it. But the Left’s “green” team will condemn it as a negative. Oil, fossil fuels is bad juju. Which is why we knew Obama was never supportive to the industry. Yet he wants credit? In your dreams, Obama. And if America was not as innovative, like we’ve always been, this could not have happened. Certainly it was nothing Obama had a hand in.
However, we shouldn’t be afaid to admit good news, because some of it took place under Obama’s tyranny. It began and was under way before him. Like Clinton had the benefit of the tech boom. But Obama did about everything he could to step on it.
Under Trump, all good news will be summarily buried, or tortured by Obama revisionists if it refuses stay in the hole. Since the Left controls the media, that is the way it is. And whatever they can tie to Obama’s Legacy of Lies, they will. Memory Lane is not a place I’d want to live, if I were Obama
RightRing | Bullright
Forfeit the issue, argument, resistance — whatever you call it — of Obamacare? Painful thought. But it seems that is exactly what is being prepared in cesspool headquarters.
So we aren’t de-rooting Obamacare but fertilizing it and guaranteeing its survival. And I am pretty disgusted about it.
As if that were not bad enough a thought, it appears as though they put it in such a central position as to take down, or at least compromise, the entire Reepublican agenda. So Obamacare has found new life holding an entire agenda hostage. And it is not giving up.
Hostage negotiators? Well they are on the scene, but seem prepared to negotiate away the very hostages held captive. I.e. we the people and whoever else cares.
Is this the way it all goes down after 8 years of work and grassroots effort? A horrid thought. Is this how it ends by Republicans morphing back into the one-party duopoloy?
Haven’t we seen this movie before? We know how it ends. And that brings us right back to why we are here in the first place, Namely disgust and the sheer American will to break the chains that bound us — ‘mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.’
Before anyone goes berserk to blame it all on Trump not being conservative enough, much of this obfuscation is coming right from the Republicans. Certainly in the Senate. They have a stranglehold on government that I doubt we have ever seen before.
Trump? Well, he can come and go but these Republicans will remain, to some degree. Enough to take down or prevent any new agenda from taking shape., Enough to kill it in infancy. Would Repubs even agree on the epitaph?
My good friend Pepp forwarded me this Breitbart article. Have a look and see what you think. I am afraid Rand Paul is pretty much right on the mark.
I’ll go back to asking how many healthcare stocks are in all their portfolios in the cesspool capital? Bad enough to cede the Obamacare issue, but it seems poised to hijack the rest of any Republican-led agenda, from Taxes to economic liberty or trade. It is just my opinion how much effect it has on everything else.
Republicans seem positioned to allow it to happen. The Dems don’t have to do it. The insurgency within is enough to derail anything on the table.(or under it) Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey announced the reason they had no plan to replace Obama care is they didn’t plan on winning the election. Good excuse Pat. Well, this kind of train wreck is not caused just from Democrats. With media running opposition for Dems, it is hard to get a descent message out. Climate of disgust remains high 6 months in.
RightRing | Bullright
This is inconvenient, for a lady who claims to be a stalwart Catholic, familiar with Catholic doctrine, who also often finds herself out of step with traditional teachings on life or other cultural issues.
But in this episode, in San Fran Nan’s zeal to attack the Republicans’ alternative plan to Obamacare that passed the house, and her rush to defend Obamacare — Affordable Healthcare Act — she really muddies the water on religion and politics.
Pelosi made her remarks at her press conference shortly after the passing of the latest Obamacare alternative in the House. But it was a repeated lie she had already used against the former Republican bill, which was pulled and did not get passed.
She rattles off a list of organizations opposed to the Republican plan (many of which originally supported Obamacare) She then lists churches or faith-based institutions along with the United Methodist Church.
First let’s start with the previous bill, on 3/09/17, at her press conference, Pelosi said:
So again, on three fronts, of course, the Affordable Care Act and all that it means to families is very important. The United Methodist Church, in their statement, said people will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care. AARP, the American Medical Association, the hospital association, nurses and physicians, patients, insurers, and consumer groups all oppose the GOP bill.
Again, last week on 5/4/17 Pelosi says: (at an open press conference)
“Sister Simone Campbell said, ‘this is not the faithful way forward and must be rejected.’ The Catholic Health Association wrote, ‘we strongly encourage the full house to reject this replacement bill.’ And the United Methodist Church said, ‘opposing Trumpcare, this is what they said, people will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care.’
Lutheran services of America said, ‘Trumpcare will jeopardize the health care and long-term service and support of millions of Americans.’ The Episcopal Church said, ‘Trumpcare falls woefully short of our spiritual calling to care for the least of these, as well as the noble values upon which our great nation was founded.’ End of quote. And all that was said before the Republicans decided to destroy the protections of Americans with pre-existing conditions. — [Pelosi- press conference on 5/4/17]
Below is apparently the UMC statement from the article Pelosi was referring to:
Note the author says she is the General Secretary [excerpt]
The General Secretary’s statement on Congressional Efforts to rollback health care
by Rev. Dr. Susan Henry-Crowe on March 07, 2017
“We must not allow our leaders to take away affordable and accessible health care from the communities who need it to live and live abundantly.
This bill has been promoted as a “fix” to the health care system in the United States but will do nothing to improve access and affordability. Instead, it will harm many in the congregations and communities in which we live and serve. People will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care.”
That is basically marked as the General Secretary’s personal statement. How could it be conferred as the statement from the national conference board of the UMC? It s one member’s personal position, though it is posted on the GBCS.org website.
It was one member of the UMC church, as influential as she may be. It does not speak for the entire church itself, as Pelosi suggested. No, she insisted on two separate occasions that it was a statement on behalf of the United Methodist Church.
Dr. Henry-Crowe stated in conclusion: (note the pronoun I)
“I will be calling my members of Congress to urge them to vote no on the bill, and I encourage United Methodists in the United States to join me in advocating for a health care system that leaves no person behind.”
She encourages other members to take that action……on behalf of herself, as the Secretary. But she does not speak for the entire church. Again, she has it posted on the GBCS website. Henry-Crowe, not a medical doctor, also offers no proof for the claim that “people will die”.
Another UM news outlet disected Pelosi’s dilemma: [excerpt]
Good News – Walter Fenton- [*GBCS is General Board & Church Society]
“We were confident no such [“people wiill die”] statement existed. The UM Church, thankfully, does not make a habit of pontificating on every bill that comes before Congress. Only the General Conference, which meets every four years, can pronounce authoritatively for the UM Church. What we suspected was that Rep. Pelosi had read something a UM bishop or the General Secretary of GBCS had said about the bill. And sure enough, Henry-Crowe had recently opined, “People will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care.” Pelosi gladly took Henry-Crowe’s personal prognostication that “people will die,” as the UM Church’s official word on the bill. It is not.
Henry-Crowe, who holds two degrees in theological studies, and for 22 years served as the dean of the chapel and religious life at Emory University before her role at GBCS, offered no evidence to support her hyperbolic claim. Her remark is particularly interesting in light of a recent column by New York Times columnist Ross Douthat. To be sure, like Henry-Crowe, Douthat is not a health care expert. But unlike her, he actually references reputable studies that find claims about how many lives this or that insurance plan will save to be overblown. As Douthat notes, since the expansion of Medicaid under the ACA, Americans have not become healthier or experienced lower mortality rates (they’re actually higher in some of the states and counties where Medicaid was expanded).
It is hard to understand why, in a church with rank-and-file members from across the political spectrum, GBCS has felt compelled to march almost uniformly to the left on most issues. And it often seems incapable of even acknowledging people of good faith and good will might find alternative prescriptions to be reasonable, responsible, and compassionate. GBCS has a propensity to close off options and stifle conversation before it gets started. So if you don’t stand with Henry-Crowe and GBCS on the recent bill before Congress, you’re evidently comfortable with a plan that will allow “people [to] die. (read full article here) ”
Listen to two more excerpts in the same article which make the point:
“GBCS [General Board] seems to have no dialogue partners in a church that desperately needs them.”
“This is odd and even unhelpful coming from an organization appointed to serve and represent the whole church, not just its left wing.”
“Progressives often style themselves as community organizers for social justice, but you seldom get the impression that GBCS folks are actually out organizing among the grassroots. Instead, they are more often found provoking laity and pastors with progressive pronouncements issued from their Capitol Hill offices in Washington D.C.”
“In the future, we hope Henry-Crowe can find the good in other proposals and refrain from conversation stoppers like, “people will die.”
So, in the end, Pelosi was duped or lied. Though she should have at least looked at the statement — it is not a UMC dicta. Maybe other Methodists were even hoodwinked by Pelosi’s careless public assertion about a specious commentary, coming from one member who happens to be a Secretary.
Though if Pelosi is going to go out and make a proclamation representing an entire organization, or church, she should have confirmed it first.
It’s also interesting in light of President Trump’s executive order over the Johnson Amendment. For years, there have been threats to churches about taking part in politics, yet, as the author above states, some members freely associate the church with left-wing politics on current issues. That political activism is celebrated, just as this was by Pelosi, as a formal church position on progressive, liberal political issues. That is no problem at all.
Funny how whenever it is abortion or other cultural, traditional issues then people claim it is over the line, off bounds for the church. There are plenty of examples.
When churches or clergy sign a petition to Congress to investigate aid to Israel, no problem with that lobbying. But there is never any dialogue, criticism of left wing positions the UMC adopts…. even taking advocacy positions on sanctuary cities or sanctuary status for UM churches — I’ll call them Sanctuary Sanctuaries. No harm or foul in that.
Let’s get this straight: the guy who lied about Bengazi, lied about Obamacare — just to get it passed — who promised Putin and Russia more flexibility after his last election, (when he’d no longer be accountable to voters), who rejected accountability, the guy who voted present in Illinois on all the tough votes — Obama.
That guy deserves a Profiles in Courage award?
“It is my fervent hope, and the hope of millions, that regardless of Party such courage is still possible. That today’s members of Congress regardless of party are willing to look at the facts and speak the truth, even when it contradicts party positions.
I hope current members of Congress recall that it actually doesn’t take a lot of courage to aid those who are already powerful, already comfortable, already influential; but it does require some courage to champion the vulnerable.”
The “vulnerable” – unless, of course, it is babies or life in the womb who deserve abortion. And call that “social justice.” too. You channel that courage so well, Obama.
Was it for courageously meddling and intervening in Israel’s election, in Egypt’s election, supporting the Muslim Brotherhood, refusing to call it Radical Islamic Terrorism?
Obama, the guy who lacked a strategy to deal with ISIS, who called them a JV team. The guy who drew a red line and ran away from it. The guy who wore the race card on his lapel to provide immunity from criticism. The guy who only wanted positive reports back from our military operations. Courage, expedience… he lectures Congress?
Those courageous feats, and more, earn him the Profiles in Courage Award from the JFK Library. The words Obama and courage do not belong in the same paragraph.
H/T to the Guardian
Now that the nation’s healthcare is hostage to the government, is everyone happy? Of course not. Those are the stakes, like it or not. It’s hardly debatable. Pardon the rant.
Who do we have to blame that on? Barack Obama and his pack of radicals. We tried to tell people 7 years ago, when they politicized the healthcare system, that it was a bad thing to do. No, they wouldn’t listen. So Obama and Obamacare weaponized the nation’s healthcare and used it against us. Our medical system is subservient to government.
So if you resented the idea of a government bureaucrat between your doctor and you, look out. Now you have the entire federal government between you and your healthcare. But that is exactly what progressive liberals and socialists wanted. The state will do with it what it wants. What does that make you? Why not just call it Serfcare instead?
The politicians are up to their eyeballs in your healthcare. What’s next, asking them if you can have that knee surgery? Yet the whole thing is considered a healthcare right.
The implications are far and reaching. That means every election is potentially a referendum on our healthcare. Each administration, or Congress itself, can take it upon itself to rewrite the nation’s healthcare. Sure, we used to think that was too big a reach for them to do. Not so anymore. To redo Obamacare may be an arduous task which gets easier the more it is debated and voted on. If changed, the next administration can change it back, almost like an Executive Order. Now we see the truth.
What effect does that have on the industry itself? Who knows. Doesn’t offer much for stability, does it? That is not a calming feeling to the people.
Bad enough that now we already have accountants doing yeoman’s work being questioned from customers about their individual healthcare tax implications. They have to tell people what their tax penalty is and the in and outs to comply with the nannycare system.
Now many pundits see the writing on the wall. Charles Krauthammer said that in a few years there won’t be any debate about government involvement in the system.
Krauthammer told Chris Wallace:
“I think historically speaking we’re at the midpoint,” Krauthammer answered. “We had seven years of Obamacare, a change in expectations. And I would predict that in less than seven years we’ll be in a single payer system.” – Blaze
Now I don’t want to accept that as point of fact. I don’t want to think single-payer is now inevitable. Certainly it has gotten closer simply because of the government usurping and controlling the whole issue. So he is right in that once that began, the game and paradign has shifted. We can try to get it back but that will just be our version of the government based/tied system. The next political leaders have a chance to have it their way. We’ve already had how many elections with healthcare at the center.
Could it be permanently fixed in that position? I mean every election, indeed political candidate decision, may be factored by your healthcare or medical situation. Is that what politicians want; what people want? Politicians have enough problems doing the job they are sworn to do now, but have each one be a de facto lieutenant for healthcare?
And that was the problem with politicizing healthcare in the first place. Then passing Obamacare and a federally controlled system etched it into a permanent political issue. We saw that coming. Did libs? Did they care? They only wanted a single-payer system anyway. That’s the problem. What will future townhalls look like?
The process we are engaged in is even worse. Every argument conservatives used against Obamacare7 years ago is now used by Democrats against Republicans. That’s absurd. You cannot argue the failing points of Obamacare against a new plan, when you gladly endorsed Obamacare despite all the lies and problems. Now Dems repeat 7 yr-old criticisms that were used against them. They dug up all the old valid complaints on Obamacare, including wanting to kill off people. I thought it was rich but it is an orchestrated campaign.
First, Dems claimed their protests were duplicating what conservatives and Republicans did in Tea Parties. Then they started to disrupt and mock politicians at townhalls, saying that’s what conservatives did. They claimed it was the beginning of their mid-term come back — right after election — calling it the resistance. Faux imitation is not flattery.
So all of it supposedly follows the Tea Parties’ formula. (much as libs delegitimized those) Sigh. Even to the floor of Congress when Republicans passed the bill singing “nah nah nah nah, hey hey, goodbye.” Confident, aren’t they? But it is not healthcare or issues they care about, it’s power and politics. Even as a minority they are adept. Healthcare is a ward of the state. Screw up the nations healthcare, and supposedly it is a political victory?
RightRing | Bullright
Some people may hope so, as the ride gets really bumpy.
NYT does not offer already-disgruntled Obamacare
patrons victims a life preserver.
“As you can see on our map of those counties, an Anthem departure could leave coverage gaps in substantial parts of Georgia, Missouri, Kentucky, Ohio and Colorado, as well as smaller holes in other states. In places where no insurance company offers plans, there will be no way for Obamacare customers to use subsidies to buy health plans.
Without an option for affordable coverage, they would become exempt from the health law’s mandate to obtain coverage. A result could be large increases in the number of Americans without health insurance.”
So far, no carrier has come forward publicly to say it will serve the counties in Tennessee that Humana is leaving.
Obamacare is already in critical condition. Yet all we hear from MSM in response to alternatives or repeal plans is “but people will lose their healthcare.” Really? It’s hard to mandate something that is not affordable or available.
Three things you can always be assured of: death, taxes and liberal hypocrisy. No region on earth is more saturated with it than California — proudly known as the incubator and purveyor of liberal thought.
Since that is an established fact, it would be an overload to list examples. Liberals, i.e. Democrats in lockstep, are demanding San Fran and the sate divest and boycott any construction companies who cooperate on building the wall.(seems even bidding)
It’s okay to discriminate against them — it’s encouraged. But if we threaten to withhold federal funds to sanctuary cities refusing to follow the law, they threaten to sue.
Move along to Maryland, wonderful little Rockville. Here they have a crime where two illegals (undocumented) raped a 14 year old girl in a bathroom in school. One 18 and the other a minor. Outrage erupts from sane people. But Montgomery county is a sanctuary area, so good luck nailing them. How much more should a school be a sanctuary for citizens of a community? But never mind.
In fact, liberals want to declare all Maryland a sanctuary for illegals. They are threatening that any town or county doing otherwise would have its state funding cut.
You see how backwards this all is? It’s completely upside down or reversed. They’ve made official, unlawful resistance to law the new normal. (not the exception) Oops, we’re sorry, there are no exemptions You can’t opt out of it — that would be unlawful.
Another case in the South is in Texas. We all know they take a stand, right? Well, they have Sanctuary Sally, an elected sheriff officially denying her oath and refusing to cooperate with federal law. Even worse, she ran on a platform of defying the law.
Add her to the coalition of Resistance. At least Governor Abbot is trying to resist ol’ Sanctuary Sally. Not so much in Maryland or California. They get rewarded there.
I have a new medical term for this craziness: Sanctuary Psychosis.
Their biggest fear or problem is how to obstruct or avoid the federal law.
Meanwhile, Trump rolled out his second national security executive order that was immediately met with an act of defiance from Hawaii to halt it. Yes, national security is the very last thing government should be concerned with. Preserving lawlessness is a priority.
Let’s go even deeper — not into the abstract but into the liberal hypocrisy epidemic.
Ryan and Trump try to pass the repeal and replace Obamacare plan. Whamo, it meets with stiff resistance. Okay, you might expect as much. But the same problems Obamacare had, has are the same ones they accuse are in this plan. Liberals sent their mutiny of militia to townhalls to protest, claiming they were just like Tea Parties.
As the bill got yanked, when it did not have the votes, liberals ran to the microphones. Nancy Pelosi declared it a huge victory for the people — who have a failed system that is doomed to implosion. That’s a victory. Your skyrocketing premiums and deductibles you can never meet are… “a victory.” Fight to save that.
We’ve now seen hypocrisy on a scale never even imagined before.
N. Korea, Syria and Russia became 5-alarm problems the day Trump took office. Obama hadn’t done a thing but hey, now that they are Trumps’ probs, they are super urgent.
Obama never lifted a finger in office to fix his Obamacare , but now Dems scream it needs to be fixed. Now they say premiums and deductibles are too high, and claim it is Trump’s problem to fix — that he’s responsible for it. Really?(or so they assert)
So we’ve been there, done that and have all the scars to prove it.
Now they tell us how ugly those scars are.
RightRing | Bullright
By Paul Bedard • 2/25/17
A majority of online and social media defenders of Obamacare are professionals who are “paid to post,” according to a digital expert.
“Sixty percent of all the posts were made from 100 profiles, posting between the hours of 9 and 5 Pacific Time,” said Michael Brown. “They were paid to post.”
His shocking analysis was revealed on this weekend’s Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson, broadcast on Sinclair stations and streamed live Sunday at 9:30 a.m. Her upcoming show focuses on information wars and Brown was describing what happened when he had a problem with Obamacare and complained online. [more]
Funny how media all care about Russia trying to influence the elections and politics but don’t pay any attention to dopey Obama trolls trying to manipulate public opinion. They do care about what conservatives do though. A real grass movement… of green.
Obama hits the trail for Hillary. A lot has happened in 8 years and a lot hasn’t happened. The campaign difference between then and now is stark and Obama is caught in his hypocrisy. “Come on, man!”… as Obama repeats in his mocking way.
How can Hillary have been so wrong in 08 be so right for president today? Come on, man. So after setting up a server to avoid the public, those pesky citizens, and exploiting the office in a pay to play scheme never before seen, Hillary is suddenly ready for the White House. In fact, Obama says she is the most qualified person ever. So he was wrong then, and that was before her most recent scandals: servergate, pay to play and Benghazi.
Draining the Swamp is a great metaphor for Washington. Hillary is its ultimate poster child. Her sole identity is the Queen of the Swamp and the greatest single creature in it. Hillary is the metaphor for the Swamp metaphor. According to their rules for radicals, the Aliskyites’ goal is to personalize the issue. And Hillary Clinton personalizes the Swamp perfectly. She is the Swamp creature. Hillary is the bin Laden of the Swamp.
Obama said premiums are only going up for a handful of people who are not subsidized by government, so apparently it is a non-problem. Right, who cares about people that are not subsidized? I guess that was never a concern for Obamacare. Gruber admitted that they lied to get it passed. What happened was a lot of people wrongly believed that Obamacare would not affect them or their own plans. So all Obama had to do was
fool deceive enough people that it would not affect them. Who cared about the truth volcano to follow?
Forget about all the real national security threats, the greatest national threat besides Obama is now Hillary Clinton. We cannot Drain the Swamp if we don’t keep Hillary out of the White House.
Yet Obama says Hillary Clinton is just picture perfect for the job, and she’ll focus on protecting kids and families. That is really not just a little green algae in the water.
Come on, man.
RightRing | Bullright
“They are getting whacked.” Hoodwinked, bamboozled, whatever. Crazy Bill opines.
More a case that the Crazy Clintons are running for denial.
Of course people have been whacked by Obamacare since the beginning, as Jonathan Gruber admitted. It’s built on lies.
They’d rather have Obamacare than the truth. New Econ 101: Lie and keep on lying.
“Give me a break, this whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.”
Here’s a stunning revelation from the Obama administration. Attention G-Mart shoppers!
In a country with 325 million people, the word most is a big number.
I guess you get those subsidies while paying your subsidues.
I’ll try hashtag get smothered by big-gov now.
The US and American people are being held hostage to Obama’s personal political agenda. You can stop reading there because that’s the whole point in a nutshell.
As a matter of his personal political ideology we see country collapsing around it. The Left can’t compare it to Bush and say it is the same thing. The only suitable comparison is to Putin. But even that does not work because Vlad is acting in Russia’s interest, whether you agree with what he is doing or not. Putin does believe in his country at least.
With Obama the only thing that matters is Obama’s ideology, corrupt as it is. Any means to the end. So now we see Obamacare collapsing. Not a problem to Obama. 12 out of 23 states had their co-ops crash. The initial seed money is lost. Silence from Obama. The agency said enough people were not forced into the ObamaCare by loosing their employee insurance. Jonathan Gruber admitted the plot was to lie to the people just to ram it through. Obama basically said what’s it matter, so what? He sends earthquakes again into medical coverage. Did he say anything?
His comrades have declared a war on cops. Again, not a problem for Obama. Even when the FBI director tells us that police are backing off due to all the social chaos and cop-killing, so crime is up. Obama says you cannot cherry pick data or use anecdote to make public policy. But Obama is doing exactly that: cherry picking and using anecdote to make policy.The FBI is not making policy but stating the trend, facts.
Obama declares the Keystone Pipeline dead. The Climate Caliphate is gearing up for a year-end push of their agenda. All he cares about is his environmental agenda. Meanwhile, months back his own administration contaminated a pristine river and region in Colorado.(an interstate disaster) Obama said nothing. He was not up in arms firing people. No, it was business as usual: lie and make excuses. First they denied the amount and damage.
He told the EPA to go ahead and roll out his anti-business agenda and war on coal regulations, despite whether it is Constitutional. Who cares about the effects, or their impact on people? He weaponized the IRS and used it against his political opponents. He said there is not a smidgen of corruption. then his DOJ declared there was nothing to prosecute Lerner for.
This all and government is just an extension of Obama’s personal ideology. And he’ll go to any end to force it on the people.
Invasion of illegal immigrants, Obama’s executive orders, his forced amnesty, gun control, racism, riots, and even his scandals are all a product of his personal political agenda.
Whatever you think about all that, one thing is clear: Obama is holding America hostage to his own, personal political agenda.
The story here is not only that truth became politically incorrect to Obama but also, more importantly, that anyone endorsing or trafficking in truth became the opposition to Obama. Imagine that, just by aligning oneself with the truth turns one into an enemy of Obama. And by extension, considering his position, it thereby turns one into an enemy of the state. We see how all this works. In effect, truth has become Obama’s chief enemy, and thereby an enemy of the state.
Of course it would be a difficult thing for media to accept. Fortunately, they don’t have to worry about such a thing. That would admit being played or hoodwinked by Obama.
The Iran deal reveals a chunk of this truism about Bary Soetoro. Go back to his campaign days where, asked about Iran, he always favored talking to Iran. His supporters loved it. Conservatives took issue with that for exactly the reasons we witnessed, of “negotiation” with the talks. Of course we were told we were wrong that talks do not equal negotiating. But they do and did. Now we also see how that negotiation turned out .
So they made it so complex, attaching side deals, which no one will see between Iran and IAEA, that it would be purposefully hard to understand. Trust us, they said, it is a good deal. (a good deal of BS) See it would require trust. However, trust does not make it a good deal. But “trust” is the fallacy that Obama has peddled all along, since his early days as Senator, to his first campaign to today. We are always to just trust him, with little or no basis for it, and then we get screwed in the end. Trust though is a central ingredient in his modus operandi and agenda. It’s the top necessary ingredient with Obama. Which is why I called his a faith-based campaign: “Hope and change” and “change you can believe in.”
The side deals, as they are referred to, are unknown to Kerry and even Obama. By law, all materials of the deal must be given to Congress. So how can they sign off on something they don’t know the details of, and cannot see? But that is what Obama is asking of Congress. It’s a good deal, trust us, “peace in our time.” Trust is the operative word.
Remember Reagan’s maxim of trust and verify?
We always verify after the fact that he lied to us. But it always shows in the end our trust was without merit. We always get a raw deal or royally screwed. He is not happy enough to screw us in the present, he wants to stick to future generations too. There are normally multiple layers of screwage. He also sets it up where future negotiations with Iran will be necessary. Then the future administration(s) will have to deal with Tehran. We really made Iran some kind of a partner.
Every step along the way on issues Obama abused our trust and destroyed the grounds for it. I can’t say he actually destroyed our trust because people cannot accept that their trust was shot through, because that would be admitting they were taken, lied to, or hoodwinked. Who wants to admit being a mark? But they continue to trust him.
It is a serial abuse relationship Obama has with even many of his voters and base. (they aren’t all communists though they endorse Marxist people, which is another subject) To admit it is more than they can take. Each step Obama requires people to just trust him.
Seeing is believing, or not.
We know it is not the transparency he promised, another lie. So behind their backs he is abusing their trust in him. A few, and I don’t know how many, are probably privy to this whole charade Obama plays but who also believe in the destination anyway, so it is acceptable. Remember the professor of Obamcare, Jonathan Gruber, and his repeated statements that they had to lie to us. Which is more profound, that they believed they had to lie to us or that lying is such a necessary tactic in their agenda?
Well, it was the same premise in the Iran deal, they had to lie to the American people. From the beginning they said we would have anytime anywhere access and that would be in any agreement. Now we see we don’t have anywhere anytime access. Then Kerry said that anywhere anytime was not promised, or part of the plan. He denied that there were any side deals and, low and behold, there are side deals. They denied that sanctions were working though they claim that sanctions, in fact — ones congress not Obama imposed — were the pressure that brought them to the negotiation table. Then they condemned any talk of new sanctions or reinstatement of the previous ones, which Obama lifted. They claimed eliminating the prospect of a nuclear Iran was the objective, while they in effect enshrined their nuclear ability. They also denied that containment was their strategy, but voila theirs is a strategy of containment.
Furthermore, let’s back up again to the campaign trail. Obama claimed his mission was to stop proliferation. In fact he wants to eliminate all nuclear weapons. We now see he has proliferated them starting a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. He said he would do these things with, he assured us, the purest of motives. Now we look at what really motivated him.
The political strategy, lie a lot — early and often.
Probably the biggest parallel theme to things though is the lies. Its a tactic and an overall strategy of his. Tell us anything in order to get his way, pass legislation, accomplish his mission or goal — preferably the opposite of what he is doing. Obamacare was built on lies and illusion. He sold the initial idea that it would only affect those who didn’t have insurance or medical coverage. Hello, it affected everyone. He said if you liked your plan you could keep your plan. Wrong, you couldn’t. He said if you liked your doctor, you could keep your doctor. Wrong. He said it would lower the cost of your insurance, saving average family 2500 per/yr. In fact, it increased the cost and for some families by 2500 a year. He said it would lower our debt while it added to it.
But probably the central, critical lie he used from the onset was that, since there was a majority of people already covered, it would not affect them. That made it very palatable. It basically was only going to help those who had no coverage. So people went along because they believed it would not affect them personally, least not negatively. And many of those are the very ones it affects the most, and in the worst way. Now they have soaring premiums and deductibles. It was a pack of lies, actually built on a foundation of lies. Sound familiar? Then came Professor Gruber who said just that. Well, then it was the lie that he was nothing and not connected with drafting the law. Actually he was an architect of the law. See?
So now we have an Iran deal following the same formula. Tell the people anything at the beginning, lie and promise them anything. Whatever means to the ends. Then deny what you said and did. But then Gruber’s admission was even worse than admitting they lied. It was, yes we lied to the stupid American people. But it even went a step deeper than that.
Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber said that lack of transparency was a major part of getting Obamacare passed because “the stupidity of the American voter” would have killed the law if more people knew what was in it.
Catch that? First he told us they had to lie to the stupid people. Then he suggested they had to lie to us because we are stupid. In effect, we are the cause for their lying. It’s our fault they lied.(that’s something like the ultimate lie) Like: I’ll admit I lied but the reason was because you made it so necessary. It’s all our fault and we’re stupid, so we probably can’t even understand that. Geesh. Maybe one day we’ll come up to their level and be able to understand — surely it won’t be soon. By then they will be even smarter. It’s not even that government knows best, it is that the progressives know better than all.
Then there was Senator Hillary CLinton’s statement to General Petraeus that his report “requires the willing suspension of disbelief.” Take that from the Liars Club. Ironically, that is exactly what Obama and his administration, including Hillary, requires from us — “suspension of disbelief.” We know he’s lying to us, but let’s not pay much attention to that detail. Instead, let’s accept what he says as the truth. Most places would call deceit on that level fraud. Just like the kind that ushered Obama into office. But in his campaign, at the time, he was busy pointing out Hillary’s lies. Round and round it goes, where it stops only Obama knows. But it never will stop because he cannot allow the lies to end.
RightRing | Bullright
The evolving dictionary has found another term that needs defined. All the talk is about white privilege. But there is an obvious term that has not been used called liberal privilege.
We know it’s there, it doesn’t require proof. Obama has played that card often. He doesn’t want to follow or enforce certain laws? No problem, just whip out the old “liberal privilege card” and he doesn’t have to. Whether it was DOMA or writing/rewriting legislation from the Oval Office, no problem. Liberal privilege covers it all. It’s the card with no limits and works anywhere. If they don’t accept the card, force them to, it’s the liberal way.
If you don’t believe in following a particular law, don’t and call it civil disobedience — works great for rioting and looting. If you are an official or politician and do not want to enforce a law, pull your liberal privilege card. Voila you no longer have to. Look how well it worked for Lois Lerner. Does the damage matter? Apparently not. In fact, no one usually pays the penalty, that’s where the card really comes in handy. Hillary Clinton uses hers regularly.
So here’s a slogan candidates could use:
Got Liberal Privilege? Check it!
RightRing | Bullright