Mistake In ’08, Part IV – The White Working Class And Health Care

Those poor pot-bellied hicks, with missing teeth and outdated hairstyles, bad eating habits of melted cheese and beer with a Pepsi on the side, are not dumb. They are not dumb at all. They know when they are lied to and they know when they are condescended to as well. The real stupid are the self described “creative class” of Dimocratic snobs who believe all the above stereotypes of the White Working Class.

We have documented our case that (1) the White Working Class along with other core groups of the Democratic Party of FDR have been run out of the party by Barack Obama only to be replaced with a “situation comedy” coalition; (2) the Democratic Party had a chance in 2008 to heal the breach in the FDR coalition caused by Lyndon Johnson’s brave and correct signing of the 1964 Civil Rights Act; (3) Hillary Clinton’s embrace by the White Working Class was the vehicle to heal that breach and Barack Obama would sunder the party to pieces; (4) the elections of 2009 and the Scott Brown election demonstrate the validity of our thesis; and that (5) the Obama Dimocratic Party is doomed to continued failure and the only solution is to reject Obama and his cult in favor of the FDR/Hillary Clinton coalition.

We began this “Mistake In ’08” series of articles to detail how:

“The selection of Barack Obama is an historical mistake which will continue to unravel the Dimocratic Party for generations. Only now are honest Democrats beginning to assess the damage done. “Mistake In ‘08″ is the first installment in a multi-part series which will detail how big a mistake was self-inflicted by Democrats in 2008.”

In Part I of “Mistake In ’08we detailed how the Democratic Party “10-year plan”, which took shape after the 2000 elections, will likely be destroyed this November. In Part II we discussed the power of Hillary Clinton supporters. In Part III we discussed The White Working Class And The Racism Smear.

The shouts of “racist!” arise any time questions are asked about Barack Obama, his cult, or the dangerous course the United States is headed down. Just to discuss the White Working Class is considered “racist!” by the Obama Hopium guzzlers.

White Liberal race-baiters are celebrated and only a few voices on the Democratic Left dare challenge the offensive attacks on the White Working Class and what increasingly has become their political haven and powerhouse, which the unthinking Liberal “creative class” deride as “teabaggers”.

Bob Somersby, who has persistently worked to expose what happened in the 2000 election, is one such usually courageous voice (he fumbled and caved in 2008) who does not disguise his contempt for the race-baiters and bigots of the Establishment Left:

For ourselves, we aren’t inclined to agree with the Tea Party crowd. We don’t share their views about health reform. In a new poll, only 15 percent of Tea Party folk self-identify as Democrats; we vote for the Dems every time. We wouldn’t want to rally alongside a sign which semi-recommended the use of a Browning. On the other hand, anti-war rallies of this past decade featured dumb signs too.

King is a man of the DC elite, and he sometimes acts it. He could have taken his big fat keister down to Capitol Hill that day; as a journalist, he could have asked members of this crowd to explain their thoughts on various topics. What did they think of that Browning sign? What are their views on race—on gay issues? But bigots always think they can know the souls of Those People without having to dirty themselves by entering into their presence. And in every generation, fine members of high elites try to keep themselves free of the rabble.

This was a deeply unintelligent column, written by a man of the DC elite—someone who compliantly swallowed his cohort’s Kool-Aid in the Clinton/Gore years. (Call it the price of membership.) Here’s our question: How many members of that Tea Party crowd would say or write something as unfair, nasty and dumb as this? [snip]

Work like this churns hate in return, and it slows the wheel of progress. And there’s another problem with work of this type:

It makes liberals lazy and dumb.

Dr. King never behaved this way. It’s amazing how people can follow the work of a moral giant without absorbing a single drop of that leader’s revolutionary wisdom.

Those people all look alike, Colbert King said. At their best, they’re rabble. And not only that—they won’t go away! Where have we heard this before?

King’s column made us think of the previous century’s bigots, though not in the manner intended.

Postscript: Frank Rich wrote a variant of this column on Sunday—but then, he always does. Work like his makes liberals dumb.

Somersby was writing about Colbert King and a typically hate filled column by that Hillary Hater. As noted Frank Rich wrote a similar “racist!” shouting article to smear those who reject Obama and his Obamanations.

The “racist!” smears will continue. People who should know better will continue to denounce the Tea Party activists instead of recognizing the genuine expression of anger at the Tea Party core. The mere mention of the White Working Class will be deemed “racist!”. The truly stupid, the intelligentsia who believe themselves to be the “creative class”, will continue to scratch their collective heads and wonder “why won’t the white working class vote for us?” The “creative class” idiots, will mock the White Working Class for “voting against their interests” but the White Working Class is indeed voting for their interests.

Ron Brownstein, who on occasion will fall completely under a Hopium addiction, sometimes goes “cold turkey” and writes with intelligence. Here is Brownstein, off the Hopium, on health care and the White Working Class:

“In a mid-March Gallup survey, 57 percent of white respondents said that the bill would make things better for the uninsured, and 52 percent said that it would improve conditions for low-income families. But only one-third of whites said that it would benefit the country overall — and just one-fifth said that it would help their own family.

In both that Gallup Poll and the latest monthly survey by the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation, nonwhite respondents were much more likely than whites to say that the bill would help the country and their own families. Those responses reflect not only experience (African-Americans and Hispanics are more likely than whites to lack insurance) but also minorities’ greater receptivity to government activism. By meeting a tangible need in these communities, health reform is likely to solidify the Democratic hold on the one-quarter (and growing) minority share of the electorate, especially if Republicans define themselves around demanding repeal.

But whites still cast about three-quarters of votes. And if most remain convinced that health reform primarily benefits the poor and uninsured, Democrats could find themselves caught in an unusual populist crossfire during this fall’s elections.

Imagine that! White people vote! “Three-quarters!” What a revelation!

Even more of a revelation is that White people do not think Obama’s health scam will help them so they are against it – but that to the PINO idiots is “racist!”. Voting for what you perceive as your interest is “racist!” according to the Obama Dimocrats.

Brownstein tries to blame Republicans for what actually is common sense even among those in what remains of the honest Left, that Obama has rewarded the culprits:

“Obama has already been hurt by the perception, fanned by Republicans, that the principal beneficiaries of his efforts to repair the economy are the same interests that broke it: Wall Street, big banks, and the wealthy. The belief that Washington has transferred benefits up the income ladder is pervasive across society but especially pronounced among white voters with less than a college education, the group that most resisted Obama in 2008. Now health care could threaten Democrats from the opposite direction by stoking old fears, particularly among the white working class, that liberals are transferring income down the income ladder to the “less deserving.”

It is not just Republicans that see the culprits getting the money. It is an obvious fact. Is the White Working Class “racist!” because they perceive they will be shunted aside and their tax dollars funneled to Obama’s prize constituents – the very rich? The White Working Class sees the threat – they are not dumb.

“In the Kaiser poll, even fewer noncollege than college-educated whites said that the plan would benefit the country. In one sense, that’s ironic: Census figures show that noncollege whites are more than twice as likely to lack health insurance as whites with a degree. But these working-class whites have grown more skeptical than better-educated whites that government cares about their needs. And the searing recession has only hardened those doubts. In a recent memo, Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg warned that these anxious and alienated voters are approaching a “tipping point” that would send them hurtling toward Republicans in November. House Democrats seem aware of that risk: Of the 34 Democrats who opposed the final health care bill, 28 represent districts with an above-average share of whites without college educations.”

The White Working Class voters might not have actually heard Donna Brazile and David Axelrod throw them to the curb, but they know when they are threatened. When Donna said we don’t have to just rely on white blue-collar voters” the White Working Class understood the threat. When David Axelrod declared “The white working class has gone to the Republican nominee for many elections… This is not new that Democratic candidates don’t rely solely on those votes” the White Working Class voters understands the “back of the bus” condescension.

The White Working Class sensed Hillary Clinton was fair to their interests and she did not condescend to them. The White Working Class rallied to Hillary’s banner at a time that the Dimocratic establishment declared Obama the Mess-iah and their nominee. Now the White Working Class understands that the Obama Dimocratic Party is antithetical to their interests and they are rapidly moving away from the Obama Dimocratic Party because the Obama Dimocratic Party is retrograde to their interests.

Brownstein:

“These trends frame perhaps the Democrats’ greatest political challenge today: convincing economically squeezed white voters that Washington understands their distress. [snip]

Simultaneously, Democrats hope that the approaching Senate debate on financial reform will portray them as advocates for average families — and Republicans as defenders of banking and investment interests that are resisting tougher regulation. [snip]

That could be. But despite a Gallup Poll showing a post-passage bump in support for the health care bill, skepticism that government will ever deliver for them is bred in the bone for many white voters, especially those in the working class. Health care reform won’t win sustained acceptance — or politically benefit the Democrats who finally shouldered it into law — unless it begins to excise those deeply embedded doubts.”

Whatever “bump” in the polls Brownstein referenced is now gone, gone, gone.

The delusions of Dimocratic pollsters and the “creative class” will be shattered in November. The shouts of “racist!” and “racism!” will continue to be directed against the White Working Class because they oppose Obama and his Obamainations. But how can you call “racist!” those that voted for Obama?

Millions of white men who voted for Barack Obama are walking away from the Democratic Party, and it appears increasingly likely that they’ll take the midterms elections in November with them. Their departure could well lead to a GOP landslide on a scale not seen since 1994.”

The White Working Class is not dumb. The White Working Class is moving against the Obama Dimocratic Party because the Obama Dimocratic Party opposes their interests. In 2008 some in the White Working Class were so fed up with George W. Bush and so terrified of the economic situation they either stayed home and did not support John McCain or they actually voted for the flim-flam Chicago man.

Democrats like Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton won because they garnered support from the White Working Class. Obama fooled enough of the White Working Class in 2008, but those days are long gone, gone, gone.

” For more than three decades before the 2008 election, no Democratic president had won a majority of the electorate. In part, that was because of low support — never more than 38 percent — among white male voters. Things changed with Obama, who not only won a majority of all people voting, but also pulled in 41 percent of white male voters.

Polling suggests that the shift was not because of Obama but because of the financial meltdown that preceded the election. It was only after the economic collapse that Obama’s white male support climbed above the 38 percent ceiling. It was also at that point that Obama first sustained a clear majority among all registered voters, according to the Gallup tracking poll. [snip]

Pollsters regularly ask voters whether they would rather see a Democrat or Republican win their district. By February, support for Democrats among white people (male and female) was three percentage points lower than in February 1994, the year of the last Republican landslide.

Today, among whites, only 35 percent of men and 43 percent of women say they will back Democrats in the fall election. Women’s preferences have remained steady since July 2009. But white men’s support for a Democratic Congress has fallen eight percentage points, according to Gallup.

White men have moved away from Obama as well.”

The changes in voting patterns are not theoretical. We have recently witnessed real life demonstrations of the White Working Class revulsion:

“The migration of white men from the Democratic Party was evident in the election of Republican Scott Brown in Massachusetts. His opponent, a white woman, won 52 percent of white women. But white men favored Brown by a 60 percent to 38 percent margin, according to Fabrizio, McLaughlin & Associates polling.

It’s no accident that the flight of white males from the Democratic Party has come as the government has assumed a bigger role, including in banking and health care. Among whites, 71 percent of men and 56 percent of women favor a smaller government with fewer services over a larger government with more services, according to ABC/Washington Post polling.

Obama’s brand of liberalism is exactly the sort likely to drive such voters away. More like LBJ’s than FDR’s, Obama-style liberalism favors benefits over relief, a safety net over direct job programs, health care and environmental reform over financial reform and a stimulus package that has focused more on social service jobs — health care work, teaching and the like — than on the areas where a majority of job losses occurred: construction, manufacturing and related sectors.

The job losses are concentrated in areas of the job market for the White Working Class. Instead of addressing the needs of the White Working Class, the Obama response is “let them eat cake”.

The White Working Class has witnessed the Democratic Party abandon them before.

“In 1994, liberals tried to explain their thinning ranks by casting aspersions on the white men who were fleeing, and the media took up the cry. The term “angry white male” or “angry white men” was mentioned 37 times in English-language news media contained in the Nexis database between 1980 and the 1994 election. In the following year, the phrases appear 2,306 times.

Tarnishing their opponents as merely “angry” was poor politics for the Democrats. Liberals know what it’s like to have their views — most recently on the war in Iraq or George W. Bush — caricatured as merely irrational anger. Most voters vote their interests. And many white men by the 1980s had decided the Democrats were no longer interested in them.

Think about the average working man. He has already seen financial bailouts for the rich folks above him. Now he sees a health care bailout for the poor folks below him. Big government represents lots of costs and little gain.

Meanwhile, like many women, these men are simply trying to push ahead without being pushed under. Some once believed in Obama. Now they feel forgotten.

Democrats in 1994 trashed Bill Clinton and “bubba” and they lost big. In the 1980s the Democrats lost big too because they could not communicate with the White Working Class as well as the “great communicator”. When Democrats do not have barely veiled loathing for the White Working Class, but rather concern, Democrats win. “FDR’s focus on the economy was single-minded and relentless. Hard times continued, but men never doubted that FDR was trying to do right by them.”

Unlike with FDR and Bill Clinton, the White Working Class knows Obama is not trying to “do right by them”. Obama and his Dimocrats think the White Working class is “bitter” and “clingy” and not worth caring about.

Sean Trende asked the question Can The Clinton Coalition Survive Obama? He noted that the winning Republican Bob McDonnell in Virginia essentially recreated the Clinton coalition. The FDR/Clinton Coalition is the only way to win.

But what about the demographics?” shout the “creative clueless”. America will soon be a “majority minority” country so the future is with the “situation comedy” coalition – forget about the White Working Class!

Not quite yet.

“The estimated time when whites will no longer make up the majority of Americans has been pushed back eight years — to 2050 — because the recession and stricter immigration policies have slowed the flow of foreigners into the U.S.”

The prognosticators of future demographic politics must reassess the prognostications. If the “majority minority” America does emerge this century, the White Working Class will still be a significant portion of the population which is to be discarded only by fools. Senior citizens, also discarded by the Obama “situation comedy” producers, will triple by 2050 to 18.6 million. These same “situation comedy” coalition Hopium guzzlers should also realize that the best laid schemes…

“The actual shift in demographics will be influenced by a host of factors that can’t be accurately forecast — the pace of the economic recovery, cultural changes, natural or manmade disasters, as well as an overhaul of immigration law, which may be debated in Congress as early as next year.

As a result, the Census Bureau said the projections should used mostly as a guide.”

The White Working Class is rejected by Obama Dimocrats and the White Working Class will reject Obama Dimocrats this November. Already the supposed health care “victory” which was supposed to become popular continues to sink. Increasingly the Obama health scam is called “a bad thing”. Republicans, the supposed losers, are increasingly viewed as the winners in the current debate.

As Politico notes, the supposed bounce, has bounced away. The lies about Obama opponents continue to be exposed. The ‘they’ll love it once we pass it’ theory of Obama Dimocrats is falling apart with every poll that emerges:

“One week after the passage of historic new healthcare legislation, Americans remain worried about the bill’s effect on costs — both for the nation as a whole and for them personally. A majority of Americans say healthcare costs in the U.S. and the federal budget deficit will get worse as a result of the bill. Half of Americans believe that healthcare costs for themselves and their families will get worse.”

Are all these Americans “racists!”? Or is the White Working Class smarter than Obama Dimocrats believe? The wake-up call gets dialed in November.

Passover Antics

Passover starts tonight. The Obama Passover antics have been going on for a while.

Over the weekend we witnessed more Distract From Disaster publicity stunt ploys. One Passover Antic was a trip to Afghanistan and another Passover Antic was a hypocritical and foolish spate of “recess appointments”.

Obama Hopium guzzlers celebrated the recess appointments. These are the very same Hopium guzzlers who kvetch over outdated Senate procedures and rules but the hypocrites celebrated this most outdated of presidential prerogatives.

Recess appointments were once meant to “maintain the continuity of administrative government” at a point in American history in which “both Houses of Congress had relatively short sessions and long recesses between sessions during the early years of the Republic.” Until the 20th century Congressional sessions lasted less than half the year. Hopium guzzlers who once decried the imperial presidency and lately whined about the filibuster and Senate rules now hail the conquering hero. Hypocrites.

The Hopium guzzlers at the New York Times attacked George W. Bush recess appointments as a “constitutional gimmick“. The Hopium guzzlers at the New York Times hailed the Obama recess appointments as a “muscular show of his executive authority.” Hypocrites.

The recess appointments will last until January 3, 2011 when it is not impossible to imagine a Republican Congress that will prove the recess appointments to have been foolish. The Obama recess appointments will expire at the very moment Republicans celebrate their November victories. So not only are the recess appointments from “uniter not divider” Obama hypocritical, they are foolish.

An earlier “uniter not divider” made recess appointments and Barack Obama labeled those appointments “damaged goods”. The Obama hypocrisies are many.

As terror bombs exploded today in Moscow the world is once again reminded that there are regimes who employ terror as a tactic. Also today, the FBI charged a man who threatened a congressman with death. No, the death threatened Congressman is not a Dimocrat, nor an African-American. The threatened Congressman is Republican Eric Cantor, who tonight will commemorate the Passover. Big Media will not flog the threats against a Jewish Congressman on Passover because the now debunked “spitting” threat is a so much greater threat. Big Media will persevere in the bogus Death Threat menace narrative perpetrated by Obama Dimocrats. Hypocrites.- Oh, and the thwarted killer is an Obama donor.

The disasters are mounting and flim-flam men know when to get out of town. The Obama health scam is finally under examination and every day new mandates are uncovered. As our commenter “Tim” posted, family physicians will leave their practices because of the Obama health scam.

Today the Associated Press confirms what “Tim” wrote and physicians will be indeed leaving their practices for greener pastures.

The Obama health scam disasters indeed do mount. Today BusinessWeek confirms that premiums will go up and you will not be able to keep your insurance coverage plan if you want to. Things will be forced to change by Obama – for the worse. The response from Dimocrats in Congress is more threats and more terror.

“On Thursday and Friday, the companies — so far, they include AT&T, Verizon, Caterpillar, Deere, Valero Energy, AK Steel and 3M — said a tax provision in the new health care law will make it far more expensive to provide prescription drug coverage to their retired employees. Now, both retirees and current employees of those companies are wondering whether the new law could mean reduced or canceled benefits for them in the future.

The news is an embarrassment for Democrats. As President Obama and congressional leaders tout the purported benefits of the new health care law, some of the nation’s biggest companies are saying it will mean higher costs and fewer benefits — not exactly what Democrats want to hear in the days after their historic victory.

So Waxman has ordered the executives to explain themselves at an April 21 hearing before the Energy and Commerce Committee’s investigative subcommittee.”

As matters of health go from bad to worse, it is no wonder that the Dimocrat promised love for the health scam has not materialized. 54% of likely voters want the Obama health scam repealed and that includes 59% of independents. Americans are against the Obama health scam and the opposition has not diminished from before the vote. Rassmussen, Gallup, and even the Washington Post acknowledge that, at best, Obama is a dead cat bouncing.

* * * * * *

But it was Afghanistan that took the trophy for the Distract From Disaster publicity stunt follies this Passover.

In order to distract from his very own foreign policy disaster snub-and-thug behavior towards Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, Obama took a day trip to Afghanistan.

Obama snubbed Hillary Clinton, snubbed Florida, Michigan and 15 million Americans repeatedly during the primaries, snubbed White Working Class voters, Obama continues to snub “red” states, snubbed American troops, and now he snubs the Israeli Prime Minister.

The Prime Minister of Israel acted in accordance with American policy in East Jerusalem:

“It was only two months ago that George Mitchell had the following colloquy with Charlie Rose about the demand for a settlement freeze in Jerusalem:

GEORGE MITCHELL: … So what we got was a moratorium, ten months, far less than what was requested, but more significant than any action taken by any previous government of Israel for the 40 years that settlement enterprise has existed. …

CHARLIE ROSE: And you and Secretary Clinton praised Prime Minister Netanyahu for agreeing to that.

MITCHELL: Yes.

ROSE: It does not include East Jerusalem. There’ve been announcement in the last 48 hours of new settlement construction in East Jerusalem where the Palestinians want to make their capital.

MITCHELL: Yes.

ROSE: And it’s in the midst of Palestinians.

MITCHELL: … But for the Israelis, what they’re building in is in part of Israel.

Now, the others don’t see it that way. So you have these widely divergent perspectives on the subject. Our view is let’s get into negotiations. Let’s deal with the issues and come up with the solution to all of them including Jerusalem which will be exceedingly difficult but, in my judgment, possible.

The Israelis are not going to stop settlements in, or construction in East Jerusalem. They don’t regard that as a settlement because they think it’s part of Israel. …

ROSE: So you’re going to let them go ahead even though no one recognizes the annexation?

MITCHELL: You say “Let them go ahead.” It’s what they regard as their country. They don’t say they’re letting us go ahead when we build in Manhattan.

But Obama is upset with American ally Israel. Obama wants to be the “Arabs’ lawyer”.

Israel is determined to survive and Obama’s flowery words or Mess-iah presence won’t change that determination to survive. Soon after the Obama snub, the Israeli Prime Minister slapped Obama and made it clear Israel will not bow to Obama the way Obama bows to foreign potentates.

“Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu convened his senior ministers in Jerusalem on Friday afternoon to discuss the demands made by US President Barack Obama and his overall trip to Washington – a trip that, because of negative atmospherics and amid a paucity of hard information, has been widely characterized as among the most difficult in recent memory.

Late Friday evening, Israel Radio reported that Netanyahu holds to the view that Israel must not change its policy in Jerusalem, despite the fact that this was the main point of contentions between Israel and the United States. [snip]

Earlier, officials in the Prime Minister’s Office threw a complete blackout on the Netanyahu-Obama meeting, and also gave very sketchy information about the commitments that the US is demanding of Israel as a precursor to starting the proximity talks with the Palestinians. According to officials, the US wants these commitments by Saturday so it can take them to the Arab League meeting in Libya and receive that organization’s backing for starting proximity talks.”

Now Obama has another self-created mess on his already messy hands. As much as Obama wants to thug Israel, the U.S. Congress, full of Obama enablers, won’t support the Obama thuggery of the reliable American ally. Three-quarters of the United States House of Representatives, a bipartisan coalition of 327 members slapped Obama down with a letter warning him off and empowering the Israeli Prime Minister.

So it’s off to Afghanistan to distract from the Middle East mess. And and opportunity for Obama to pretend to be a military leader.

A military leader or “serve as the Arabs’ lawyer”:

President Barack Obama’s relations with the Israeli government have hit a new low, but the tensions on display this week between him and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may be reviving another presidential project: Obama’s quest to improve America’s image in the Arab and Muslim world.[snip]

Now, Obama’s return to the question of Israel’s continuing construction in East Jerusalem has signaled an acceptance of some Arab criticism of Israel. At the same time, Obama’s willingness to cross swords with the Israelis comes at a domestic political cost: The pro-Israel group AIPAC released a letter Friday with the signatures of three-quarters of the members of the House, pressing the administration to retreat from public confrontation.[snip]

“The administration has used [the Jerusalem conflict] as an opportunity to bring back the settlement issue and to show that they’re willing to talk tough on settlements,” said Stephen Gordon, a Mideast scholar at the Brookings Institution. “I think that has sent the signal that, yes, we are committed to the peace process; yes, we are going to be evenhanded; and, yes, we recognize that this conflict is important to people in the Arab world.”

Obama’s new focus, and the intense pressure his administration has placed on Netanyahu, have stirred deep concern among Israel’s allies on Capitol Hill, they say, because it represents an acceptance of the Arab narrative that Israeli intransigence lies at the heart of the Middle East conflict. And some observers see it in the context of a subtle, but major, shift in American strategy toward resolving it.

“I think, inadvertently, Netanyahu enabled the White House to restore a little bit of momentum to the idea that they are going to approach the Middle East problem in a new way,” said David Rothkopf, a former Clinton administration trade official.

The new model drawing attention from Democratic foreign policy hands, he said, is to build support among Arab leaders for a U.S. plan and then present that to Israel — to serve as the Arabs’ lawyer, rather than as Israel’s, in one formulation used to describe the effort in the region.[snip]

But the confrontation also comes in the context of a long, unprecedented attempt by Obama to reset relations with the Arab and Muslim worlds.[snip]

Obama explained the logic of his actions in a private meeting with Jewish leaders that July, explaining the need to give Arab leaders “credibility” with their “street,” according to detailed notes taken by a participant in the meeting, “by creating space between us and Israel.

Happy Passover!

Obama Sickens America: The Arrogance Of Palaver

It’s Friday news dump day – made especially dumpy by the bad-news-delayed-until-after-passage-of-the-Obama-health-scam disclosures. The latest disclosures emerge after Barack Obama on Thursday performed a John Kerry fake boast “bring it on!” We know how well Kerry’s boast went over – when the attacks came, Kerry folded.

The “bring it on” boast was also reminiscent of Gary Hart’s “follow me around” bravado which destroyed Hart. George W. Bush tried the same chest-thumping with “Mission Accomplished” and “you’re either with us or against us“.

Back in Iowa for a publicity stunt Obama said “Bring It On!” “Go for it” to Republicans who demand a repeal of his health scam:

“Obama says those who try to overturn the sweeping changes will have to face voters who see immediate benefits from the law. Speaking at the University of Iowa on Thursday, Obama cited changes including tax breaks for small businesses and a requirement that insurance companies allow young adults to stay on their parents’ insurance until age 26. Other reforms will take up to four years to implement.”

Obama boasted and primped at his publicity stunt and spewed his Jay-Z style bravado:

““My attitude is: Go for it,” Obama said. “If these congressmen in Washington want to come here in Iowa and tell small-business owners that they plan to take away their tax credits and essentially raise their taxes, be my guest.” [snip]

Obama said health care reform is the “law of the land,” and the crowd chanted “Yes we did” – a new take on the slogan from his presidential campaign.

Obama grinned and replied, “Yes we did. Yes we did.”

Obama tried to reignite the passion of those campaign glory days in a speech at the University of Iowa.[snip]

Despite the nostalgia, it was hard not to notice how much had changed in three years.

In May 2007, Obama told Iowans that “as president, I will sign a universal health care plan into law by the end of my first term in office.”

On Thursday, as Obama pitched a watered down version of his original proposal, he had to omit some of the key words in his original promise.

“Just a few months into our campaign, I stood at the University of Iowa hospital right around the corner and I promised that by the end of my first term in office, I would sign legislation to reform our health insurance system,” he said.

Much of Thursday’s speech read like an Obama ‘08 special.”

Did you “Spot The Bot” talking point? HCR is now become the HIR Obama scam.

Obama’s Arrogance Of Palaver, idle, ceaseless chatter, sickens America.

* * * * * *

Today the truth began to seep out in Big Media about the Obama health scam. Big Media will eventually claim, after the health scam is proven a failure, that news reports on the Obama’s health scam disclosed the information that was required to make an informed decision. But we know that was not the case. Very few Big Media outlets did the necessary dissemination of information about the Obama health scam needed by the American people in a timely manner. Now the truth seeps out.

One way to spot a BOT (Barack Obama Thug) is the quick switch made by Big Blog boys in the acronym used by them to describe the health scam. The acronym for Obama’s scam used to be HCR (“health care reform”), now the BOTs use HIR (“health insurance reform”). That’s an easy way to play “Spot A BOT”.

Barack Obama and his BOTs have destroyed the possibility of health care reform and now flog the scam which is the HIR scam – a transfer of taxpayer wealth to Big Insurance and Big PhaRma with the IRS playing the Frank Nitti enforcer role.

Must be defeated in 2012 BOT Claire McCaskill today is already running away from the Obama scam:

“The side on which I’m on, that voted for the bill, probably is overpromising, [has] not been clear enough about the fact that this is going to be an incremental approach over time, [and] the benefits aren’t going to be felt by most Americans immediately,” McCaskill told MSNBC’s Mornine Joe.

Too late McCaskill begins to squeal out the truth.

The Associated Press today also decided to begin to disclose the Obama scam reality. Only now we hear the impact of the Obama scam on the economy:

“The health care overhaul will cost U.S. companies billions and make them more likely to drop prescription drug coverage for retirees because of a change in how the government subsidizes those benefits.

In the first two days after the law was signed, three major companies — Deere & Co., Caterpillar Inc. and Valero Energy — said they expect to take a total hit of $265 million to account for smaller tax deductions in the future.

With more than 3,500 companies now getting the tax break as an incentive to keep providing coverage, others are almost certain to announce similar cost increases in the weeks ahead as they sort out the impact of the change.

Figuring out what it will mean for retirees will take longer, but analysts said as many as 2 million could lose the prescription drug coverage provided by their former employers, leaving them to enroll in Medicare’s program. [snip]

American industrial companies that are struggling to compete globally against companies with much lower labor costs are particularly likely to eventually drop retiree coverage, said Gene Imhoff, an accounting professor at the University of Michigan.[snip]

As many as 1.5 million to 2 million retirees could lose the drug benefits provided by their former employer because of the tax changes, according to a study by the Moran Company, a health care consulting firm.”

Obama and the Dimocrats were aware of these detrimental changes, but the American people were denied the information, until now that it is too late. Too late, unless November brings “change”. (There are also the bipartisan Attorneys General lawsuits with even more AGs wishing to join the battle against the Obama scam.)

While they were confessing, Associated Press also threw in a Friday news dump article about the 2009 “growth” numbers:

“Most of last quarter’s growth came from a large bump up in manufacturing — but not because consumer demand was especially strong. In fact, consumer spending weakened at the end of the year, even more than the government previously estimated, contributing to the slightly lower reading on overall economic growth.[snip]

Analysts predict the economy will expand at only between a 2.5 percent and 3 percent pace in the first quarter of this year. The next two quarters should log similar growth, they say.[snip]

Sizzling growth in the 5 percent range would be needed for an entire year to drive down the unemployment rate, now 9.7 percent, by just 1 percentage point.”

So much for all those “honest” numbers from the White House.

Oh, and the Congressional Budget Office had this to add:

“President Obama’s fiscal 2011 budget will generate nearly $10 trillion in cumulative budget deficits over the next 10 years, $1.2 trillion more than the administration projected, and raise the federal debt to 90 percent of the nation’s economic output by 2020, the Congressional Budget Office reported Thursday.”

The attacks on the Obama health scam are not only coming from Republicans. The attacks are coming in from the Left of the political spectrum too:

“Now that we have an insurance bill, can we move on to healthcare reform?

As an organization of registered nurses, we have an obligation to provide an honest assessment, as nurses must do every hour of every day. The legislation fails to deliver on the promise of a single standard of excellence in care for all and instead makes piecemeal adjustments to the current privatized, for-profit healthcare behemoth.

When all the boasts fade, comparing the bill to Social Security and Medicare, probably intended to mollify liberal supporters following repeated concessions to the healthcare industry and conservative Democrats, a sobering reality will probably set in.

The nurses assess the sick joke which is the Obama health scam:

“Though the federal government will provide additional subsidies to states, those expire in 2016, leaving the program a top target to budget cutting governors and legislatures.[snip]

The mandate forcing people without coverage to buy insurance. Coupled with the subsidies for other moderate income working people not eligible for Medicare or Medicaid, the result is a gift worth hundreds of billions of dollars to reward the very insurance industry that created the present crisis through price gouging, care denials, and other abuses.[snip]

1. Insurance premiums will continue to climb. [snip]

2. There is no standard benefits package, only a circumspect reference that benefits should be “comparable to” current employer provided plans.
3. An illusory limit on out-of-pocket medical expenses. But even in the regulated state exchanges, insurers remain in control of what they offer and what will be a covered service. Insurers are likely to design plans to attract healthier customers, and many enrollees will likely find the federal guarantees do not protect them for medical treatments they actually need.

No meaningful restrictions on claims denials insurers don’t want to pay for.

1. Provisions permitting insurers and companies to more than double charges to employees who fail “wellness” programs because they have diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol readings, or other medical conditions.
2. Permitting insurers to sell policies “across state lines”, exempting patient protections passed in other states. [snip]
3. Allowing insurers to charge three times more based on age plus more for certain conditions, and continue to use marketing techniques to cherry-pick healthier, less costly enrollees.
4. Insurers may continue to rescind policies, drop coverage, for “fraud or intentional misrepresentation” – the main pretext insurance companies now use.
Taxing health benefits for the first time. [snip] With no real checks on premium hikes, many plans will reach that amount by the start date, 2018, rapidly. Erosion of women’s reproductive rights, with a new executive order from the President enshrining a deal to get the votes of anti-abortion Democrats and a burdensome segregation of funds, that in practice will likely mean few insurers will cover abortion and perhaps other reproductive medical services.
A windfall for pharmaceutical giants. Through a deal with the White House, the administration blocked provisions to give the government more power to negotiate drug prices and gave the name brand drug makers 12 years of marketing monopoly against competition from generic competition on biologic drugs, including cancer treatments.
Most critically, the bill strengthens the economic and political power of a private insurance-based system based on profit rather than patient need.[snip]
Unlike Social Security and Medicare which expanded a public safety net, this bill requires people – in the midst of the mass unemployment and the worse economic downturn since the Great Depression — to pay thousands of dollars out of pocket to big private companies for a product that may or may not provide health coverage in return.
Too many people will remain uninsured, individual and family healthcare costs will continue to rise largely unabated and private insurers will still be able to deny claims with little recourse for patients.”

Republicans, from the Right of the spectrum, continue the attack. Paul Ryan took to the New York Times for his attack and plans for action, not merely “repeal”:

“Costs will continue their ascent as the debt burden squeezes life out of our economy. We are unapologetic advocates for the repeal of this costly misstep. But Republicans must also make the case for a reform agenda to take its place, and get to work on that effort now. …

Health care experts across the political spectrum acknowledge that a fundamental driver of health inflation is the regressive tax preference for employer-based health insurance. This discriminatory tax treatment lavishes the greatest benefit on the most expensive plans while providing no support for the unemployed, the self-employed or those who don’t get coverage from their employer.

Reform-minded leaders like Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, and Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, pushed legislative proposals that would directly address this issue. I helped write a plan that would replace the bias in the tax code with universal tax credits so that all Americans have the resources to purchase portable, affordable coverage that best suits their needs, with additional support provided for those with lower incomes. All these ideas, though, were dismissed early on, as they didn’t fit with the government-driven plan favored by the majority. But going forward it’s important that we reconsider this regressive tax issue.

Then, when helping Americans with pre-existing conditions obtain coverage, we should focus on innovative state-based solutions, including robust high-risk pools, reinsurance markets and risk-adjustment mechanisms. I intend to continue advancing true patient-centered reforms like attaching tax benefits to the individual rather than the job, breaking down barriers to interstate competition, and promoting transparency and consumer-friendly coverage options.”

Republicans will fight for repeal along with many of the non-hypocrites on the Left. But the energy clearly will be with the Republicans. In July of 2009 we wrote that the advertisements for the 2009 election were easy to discern (“Tomorrow’s Anti-Obama Ads Today“:

“The future anti-Obama advertisements are already written. The ads will begin to air as soon as the 2010 election cycle begins in earnest. The ads will be deadly.

For those wishing to actually see what anti-Obama ads will look and sound like we already have samples. The samples are advertisements already airing in the New Jersey election for governor which will take place this November 2009.

The ads running against Jon Corzine are what we have been saying about Obama since 2007: “Watch what he does, not what he says.

Jay Cost does a follow-up today and by doing so mocks the Obama boast of “Go for it”:

“The Republican Message Writes Itself”

The talk among Republicans is that their November message should focus on repealing the new health care bill – or some version of repeal and replace. Meanwhile, other analysts have suggested that Republicans risk over-reaching and appearing too aggressive.

I think this debate is misframed. The Republican message is going to be put together by campaign strategists looking to maximize the number of votes won by their candidates. While there is something to be said for emphasizing repeal, I expect the Republican argument to focus on more visceral, immediate points. Here are the five big arguments we should expect the GOP to emphasize.

1. The Economy. This is the number one issue in every poll. If the labor market continues to be weak, expect Republican candidates to use that to great effect. [snip]

Remember, it’s not just that the unemployment rate is elevated. It’s that the Obama Administration – and by extension congressional Democrats – over-promised on what the stimulus package would do for it.

2. Medicare. Call it Bob Dole’s revenge. The 104th Congress tried to trim the sails of Medicare to preserve its long-run sustainability, and they were hammered by the Democrats for their efforts. This time, Republicans will return the favor – arguing against the hundreds of billions of cuts in Medicare that ObamaCare imposes to fund a new entitlement. Republican candidates will be sure to mention points like this, from CBO:

“Under the legislation, CBO expects that Medicare spending would increase significantly more slowly during the next two decades than it has increased during the past decades (per beneficiary, after adjusting for inflation). It is unclear whether such a reduction in the growth rate of spending could be achieved, and if so, whether it would be accomplished through greater efficiencies in the delivery of health care or through reductions in access to care or the quality of care.”

What effect will this have? Consider that in the 2008 presidential election in Virginia, senior citizens made up 11% of the electorate and went for John McCain, 53-46. In the 2009 gubernatorial election, they made up 18% of the electorate and gave Bob McDonnell 60% of the vote.

Gallup finds that seniors right now give Barack Obama just 40% job approval. That’s bad news for Democrats.”

Barack Obama does not include seniors in his “situation comedy” coalition. The Republicans in a head-turning, eye-popping, smart bit of judo will market themselves as friends of seniors in 2010. Republicans will prove that we are right about the “Mistake In ’08” and the chance for Republicans to pick up the groups Obama Dimocrats discarded.

Jay Cost continues with his analysis of the Republican message for November which Obama encourages with his “go for it” bravado:

“3. The Deficit. If anybody doubts whether deficits can influence votes, look no further than the case of H. Ross Perot. He made fiscal sustainability a chief plank in his 1992 presidential campaign, and he pulled in a whopping 19% of the vote. That included 30% of the Independent vote.

The deficit is one of those issues that everybody understands. Everybody has to keep some kind of budget, and everybody knows that they can’t get away with spending more than twice what they take in. The White House can call this a “new era of responsibility,” but it’s hard to square the claim with the numbers.

4. Taxes and spending. Combine the billions of new taxes in the health care bill with the $1 trillion from letting the Bush tax cuts expire, the $940 billion price tag of ObamaCare, and the $789 billion stimulus – and you have a simple GOP message: this is the biggest tax and spend government in American history.

Plus, expect Republicans to warn that the unsustainability of the deficit plus Obama’s social welfare ambitions can mean only one thing: massive new taxes on the middle class. We could see ads using this clip:

“Go for it” Republicans – face down the fake bravura of flim-flam Obama and his Dimocrats of Doom:

“5. Congress. This is one of the most unpopular Congresses in recent history, and Republicans will try to anchor incumbent Democrats to Nancy Pelosi, who is quite unpopular (the latest AP poll had her unfavorables at 51%).

We’re going to see a lot of ads like this:

We recall John Kerry’s brave “Bring It On” and then the “Swift Boat Veterans For Truth” and how Kerry fell apart and did not live up to his boasts. Now Obama has his “Go For It” boobery and we will see him fold as he has time and time again (the latest fold is the HCR=HIR rubbish). Cost informs us why this is so:

“These are the tried-and-true issues for Republicans to hit: jobs, Medicare, the deficit, taxes and spending, and Congress. There will be other messages out there, but individually each of these would be very potent. Running on them all in a single election is something else entirely.”

Will the Republicans air the ads that “write themselves” or fear Obama’s “Go For It”? The New York Times gives a clue:

“Polls Show Public Still Skeptical of Health Care Law

While President Obama promotes health care legislation in Iowa today, polls taken since the bill passed find somewhat more support for the measure, but also reveal a nation still skeptical of overhauling the health care system.[snip]

Both polls also find Mr. Obama receiving better marks for his handling of health care since the bill passed, but his rating on the issue is still below 50 percent.[snip]

The CBS News poll further underscores the notion that Mr. Obama has yet to make the case for his health care agenda to most Americans. A majority of those reinterviewed still say they do not have a clear understanding of how the bill will affect them.

Passage of the legislation made no difference in the public’s opinion of whether the changes would improve the health care system over the next few years; just 3 in 10 continue to believe the changes will make it better.”

Scott Brown of Massachusetts will be the face of reasonable Republican opposition to the Obama health scam:

Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., who took office as the 41st vote against health care reform in the Senate, said today it’s time to “collectively fix this bill” and that he’s prepared to lead the charge to do just that.

“We’re all in favor of the catastrophic care coverage and coverage for children,” Brown told “Good Morning America.” “But what about the backroom deals? What about all the bad things?” [snip]

At a rally in Iowa on Thursday, Obama dared Republicans to try to repeal the new health reform law. “If they want to have that fight, I welcome that fight,” Obama said. “My attitude? Go for it.”

Brown told “GMA” the president’s rhetoric is “inappropriate.”



Scott Brown is right, if restrained, about Obama’s words – “inappropriate”. We would add “foolish”.

The Republicans have provided a “Timeline” of provisions in the Obama health scam which detail when exactly the bills and ugly mechanisms of Obama’s scam will churn – which will prove Obama’s forced confidence unwarranted. Joe Biden will continue to blame George W. Bush (now, according to Biden, it is Bush’s fault that Americans are skeptical of Mess-iah) but Americans know Obama is the Problem.

Obama’s false flim-flam confidence palaver as always is flowery and misguided and untruthful.

Obama will continue to say that his health scam will heal America, if not the planet. But the truth is Obama sickens America. We are sick of his flowery palaver and change for the worse.

Death Threat Publicity Stunts And Consequences

Update: The comments have links to (a) youtube of the alleged “spitting” and “racist!” incident (a shouting protester is alleged by sensitive Cleaver of spitting; the “spitter” is detained by congressional police and let go – unasked by Big Media is why there was such a provocation by Dimocrats); (b) a Democratic consultant states the threat talk is overblown by Big Media and Ben Smith immediately proves him correct; (c) youtube of old bricks and Big Media hype; (d) $10,000 reward offered for a video of a “racist!”. – hint: Breitbart’s money is probably safe in his pocket.

Bonus – 54% think Obama will lose in 2012. Extra bonus in the same link – Republicans are learning that Hillary is a strong weapon to be wielded against Obama (as we have advised for a long time now).

The Russ Carnahan fear-mongering is also debunked and Obama is fundraising off the “racist” charges. Good news for the Hopium guzzlers who still keep the incense burning, Obama is now only slightly less popular. Wait until November, Jimmy Carter will begin to look good.

—————————————————————————————-

Learn from Hillary Clinton supporters you Republicans. Today we will discuss the consequences of the Obama scam as passed by the Senate. But we begin with the “death threat” publicity stunts Obama Dimocrats are hyping.

A lesson for Republicans: Hillary Clinton supporters remember when Obama thugs made threats of riots and unrestrained violence in the streets if Obama did not get the nomination. The threats of riots came not from random Hopium addicts but from top Obama Dimocratic officials.

If the superdelegates intervene and get in the way of it, and say, ‘Oh, no, we’re going to determine what’s best,’ there will be chaos at the convention…. And if you think 1968 was bad, you watch: 2008 will be worse.” Those words were spoken by Obama supporter Doug Wilder on nationally televised Face The Nation. The threats were abetted by the Democratic Rules and By-laws Committee when it staged its own soft riot to make sure Obama would get the nomination and duly elected Hillary Clinton delegates were stolen by fiat.

Big Media did not follow up on the threat to Democracy of riots in Denver but rather helped stoke the narrative of ‘it’s Obama or blood on the streets’. John McCain supporters recall the intimidation campaign by Obama supporting elected officials and the threats to suppress free speech.

We’ve discussed in previous articles why Obama supporters themselves are behind the “death threats” scenarios for their blundering Lurch. Indeed it is Obama supporters who stoke “death threat” talk against Obama in order to make Obama and themselves important and somehow significant.

Yesterday Dimocrats were pimping more “death threat” stories. Big Media hyped the “death threat” stories. The timing of the “death threat” stories was ridiculous because yesterday the news emerged that in fact “death threats” against Obama, according to the Secret Service, were down. Also, the only person who had to fear for her life yesterday was right wing Ann Coulter. Coulter is not a favorite in these parts but she earned kudos at Big Pink for declaring she would vote for Hillary Clinton over John McCain. Ann Coulter actually said she should “campaign” for Hillary Clinton over John McCain.

Yesterday, instead of hearing about actual threats against Ann Coulter, we heard from Obama supporter and race-baiter Jim Clyburn (the one who called Bill Clinton a “racist”) about death threats against Dimocrats. Clyburn applauded riot talk from Doug Wilder but now laments how “people get signals” from “people in positions like we hold”. Clyburn spiced up his warning with “aiding and abetting” terrorism talk as well as the race-baiting “I’ve seen this before” – to allude to 1960s “racism!” red meat.



Hillary Clinton supporters (and Bill Clinton) know Jim Clyburn for the pig he is. Republicans need to learn from us and our experience with these race-baiters and hypocrites. Maybe someday Clyburn will address the politically incorrect phenomenon of “Philly Flash Mobs”?

We cannot end a discussion of death threat and violence without mentioning the lack of coverage regarding a black Tea Party member who was called by the “N” word and beaten by SEIU thugs. Race-baiters like Clyburn and Sharpton have not said a word about that violence.



Republicans need to learn from Hillary Clinton supporters and our experience. Republicans must fight back and not be cowed. Hooray for Eric Cantor today, who gets it right by saying that it is Obama Dimocrats “dangerously fanning the flames” on death threats.



* * * * * *

Obama Health Scam Consequences

Republicans scored a big victory in the early morning hours today. The victory is big because every day that Obama’s health scam is the topic is another day “jobsjobsjobs” is not the focus of Obama publicity stunts.

The big victory came about because of Incompetence! by Senate Dimocrats who did not properly vet (like Obama wasn’t properly vetted) the Obama health scam. The Senate Parliamentarian accepted the Republican challenge to the reconciliation bill and therefore after the Senate votes the House will have to vote yet again on the reconciliation package.

We have yet to see if Obama Dimocrats will begin to vote for popular changes to the bill, now that the House must vote again. It had been part of the strategy by Senate Obama Dimocrats to accept no changes whatsoever, no matter how popular or sensible in order to get this mess off the front pages. Will the public option be back on the table as upset Obama fluffers want? We doubt it and Obama fluffers and enablers are slowing learning:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

The remaining Obama enablers still guzzling their Hopium believe a bamboozlement campaign will stave off disaster in November. They cite a poll, which had a different question than has been asked before, as proof of changed fortunes for Obama’s scam.

“The first post-passage health care reform poll is out. And it looks pretty positive [snip]

This diverges pretty sharply from previous polls.

Change the question, change the result. Stage publicity stunts and you temporarily muddly the results. But the truth continues to emerge.

On Monday we noted how things are not going so well for Obama’s health scam and its enablers. Today the Rasmussen poll adds further weight to our analysis. Rassmussen notes:

Just before the House of Representatives passed sweeping health care legislation last Sunday, 41% of voters nationwide favored the legislation while 54% were opposed. Now that President Obama has signed the legislation into law, most voters want to see it repealed.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, conducted on the first two nights after the president signed the bill, shows that 55% favor repealing the legislation. Forty-two percent (42%) oppose repeal. Those figures include 46% who Strongly Favor repeal and 35% who Strongly Oppose it.

In terms of Election 2010, 52% say they’d vote for a candidate who favors repeal over one who does not. Forty-one percent (41%) would cast their vote for someone who opposes repeal.[snip]

Among those not affiliated with either major party, 59% favor repeal, and 35% are against it.

Most senior citizens (59%) also favor repeal. Earlier, voters over 65 had been more opposed to the health care plan than younger adults. Seniors use the health care system more than anyone else. But 58% of those 18 to 29 also support repeal of the plan which requires all Americans to have health insurance. [snip]

The president has enjoyed a bounce in his Job Approval ratings in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll following passage of the legislation. However, the bounce has come from increased enthusiasm among Democrats rather than increased support from Republicans and unaffiliated voters.

In November it is Seniors and Independents who matter most.

The Republican base is fired up and ready to go. The Democratic base, not so much. Who’s left for Democrats to court? Independents. But right now the slippery swing voters are lining up behind the GOP, by double-digit margins as large as 18 points in recent polling.[snip]

It’s the calm folks in the middle that Democrats must persuade.

Senior citizens They care about their Medicare coverage. They’ve been deeply skeptical of the bill. And they vote — particularly in midterm elections when much of the electorate takes a snooze.[snip]

Medicare proved wildly popular with senior citizens because the government provided a benefit without asking for anything in return. But the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988 was repealed a year later because seniors revolted — they were convinced that the immediate tax burden it placed on them outweighed its benefits. [snip]

Democrats convinced themselves that the hot tempers and fierce opposition to health reform would die down as soon as they passed a bill and voters began to see what was in it. The first major test of this theory starts this weekend, when lawmakers return home for the two-week spring recess.

A handful of raucous town halls similar to those that dominated the August recess could put Democrats on notice that the next seven months will be rough for them.

Seniors are not happy. Independents are not happy. The calm will not return to town halls.

Liberal Ruth Marcus at the Washington Post summarized the hope of Obama supporters and Big Media fluffers:

“Gee, I hope this works.”

* * * * * *

Children with pre-existing conditions are screwed by Obama’s health scam.

“Hours after President Barack Obama signed historic health care legislation, a potential problem emerged. Administration officials are now scrambling to fix a gap in highly touted benefits for children.”

Only now, a few hours after passage of the health scam, is this latest boobery uncovered.

That didn’t take long.

“Gee, I hope this works.”

What else (taxes and surcharges?) are Dimocrats going to be hit in the face with when they discover Americans are not so stupid?

What else did Dimocrats fail to tell Americans before they passed the Obama health scam? Obama Dimocrats are busy lying or refusing to answer questions about the IRS and the new role of the IRS on their lives. Anthony Weiner shamed himself last night by pretending he does not know about the IRS enforcement which is on page 345 of the health scam bill:



Weiner is not alone. Steny Hoyer is doing the “ol’ razzle dazzle don’t answer the questions” too about the tax cheats who wrote the health scam.

“Gee, I hope this works.”

Already on this first week we see the future:

“Democrats dragged themselves over the health-care finish line in part by repeating that voters would like the plan once it passed. Let’s see what they think when they learn their insurance costs will jump right away.

Even before President Obama signed the bill on Tuesday, Caterpillar said it would cost the company at least $100 million more in the first year alone. Medical device maker Medtronic warned that new taxes on its products could force it to lay off a thousand workers. Now Verizon joins the roll of businesses staring at adverse consequences.

In an email titled “President Obama Signs Health Care Legislation” sent to all employees Tuesday night, the telecom giant warned that “we expect that Verizon’s costs will increase in the short term.” While executive vice president for human resources Marc Reed wrote that “it is difficult at this point to gauge the precise impact of this legislation,” and that ObamaCare does reflect some of the company’s policy priorities, the message to workers was clear: Expect changes for the worse to your health benefits as the direct result of this bill, and maybe as soon as this year.”

The news should chill the hearts of seniors:

“Mr. Reed specifically cited a change in the tax treatment of retiree health benefits. When Congress created the Medicare prescription drug benefit in 2003, it included a modest tax subsidy to encourage employers to keep drug plans for retirees, rather than dumping them on the government. The Employee Benefit Research Institute says this exclusion—equal to 28% of the cost of a drug plan—will run taxpayers $665 per person next year, while the same Medicare coverage would cost $1,209.

In a $5.4 billion revenue grab, Democrats decided that this $665 fillip should be subject to the ordinary corporate income tax of 35%. Most consulting firms and independent analysts say the higher costs will induce some companies to drop drug coverage, which could affect about five million retirees and 3,500 businesses. Verizon and other large corporations warned about this outcome.”

Businesses will have earnings updates soon to take account of their new health liabilities. No doubt businesses will do what they always do – cut or pass on the costs. If companies act rapidly, and accountants are some of the fastest people on earth when it comes to profits and losses, the many adverse effects of the Obama scam will come before November.

“While the drug tax subsidy is for retirees, companies consider their benefit costs as a total package. The new bill might cause some to drop retiree coverage altogether. Others may be bound by labor contracts to retirees, but then they will find other ways to cut costs. This means raising costs or reducing coverage for other employees. So much for Mr. Obama’s claim that if you like your coverage, you can keep it—even at Fortune 500 companies.

In its employee note, Verizon also warned about the 40% tax on high-end health plans, though that won’t take effect until 2018. “Many of the plans that Verizon offers to employees and retirees are projected to have costs above the threshold in the legislation and will be subject to the 40 percent excise tax.” These costs will start to show up soon, and, as we repeatedly argued, the tax is unlikely to drive down costs. The tax burden will simply be spread to all workers—the result of the White House’s too-clever decision to tax insurers, rather than individuals. [snip]

Businesses around the country are making the same calculations as Verizon and no doubt sending out similar messages. It’s only a small measure of the destruction that will be churned out by the rewrite of health, tax, labor and welfare laws that is ObamaCare, and only the vanguard of much worse to come.

The Obama health scam is about to be seen in all it’s miserable glory.

“Gee, I hope this works.”

CBS News only now explores some of the potential problems:

“It would be much cheaper for Dick Bus to drop the generous coverage he now offers and take the hit at $750 a head for his 120 workers. The penalty would be $90,000 a year. He’s currently spending $480,000.

Bus would save $390,000, but canceling his plan would force his workers to the health plan exchange and could cost more than they’re paying now.”

“Gee, I hope this works.”



Hillary Clinton Hater and former MSNBC boss via GE, Jack Welch, is also beginning to admit the truth about the scam:

“The newly passed overhaul of the nation’s health care system is expected to push expenses “out of sight” and cost the country “a couple trillion dollars,” Jack Welch, former chairman and CEO of General Electric, told CNBC. [snip]

Welch said while he doubts that employees will be laid off due to the expense of health care, the cost of the new policy is going to be “out of sight.

“I think we’re talking about a couple trillion dollars…of overage, not savings,” he said.”




And it is going to get worse. Today the John Deere company, joined Caterpillar in the misery of a $100 million plus hit. It was Obama who talked about Caterpillar and the consequences of a bad Caterpillar “bottom line”:



“Gee, I hope this works.”

* * * * * *

Republicans should continue the fight and indeed should force Big Insurance and Big PhaRma to suffer the consequences of their actions.

The death threat publicity stunts will continue. The health scam publicity stunts will continue. But reality and its consequences will continue too.

And we will continue to fight.

It’s Not A Mandate – It’s A Tax!

It’s not a mandate – it’s a tax! We’re not the ones saying it. It’s the Obama defense. It’s a tax.

Obama promised his version of “Read My Lips – No New Taxes” during the primary and general election campaign. Obama attacked his opponents and said he would never raise taxes for those making less than $250,000. But now “It’s a Tax!” is the Obama defense.



* * * * * *

Yesterday, while Obama and his Dimocrats were celebrating on board the Titanic, a bipartisan group of 13 Attorneys General from across the nation filed legal challenges to the Obama health scam. [Read the legal complaint in a PDF file HERE]

The bipartisan group of 13 Attorneys General filed their opposition on behalf of Americans who reject the Obamination health scam. A brand new poll, published today, states:

“Americans remain skeptical about the health-care overhaul even after the U.S. House passed landmark legislation that promises to provide access to medical coverage for tens of millions of the uninsured.”

The poll is a batch of bad news for Obama Dimocrats who think they will get a “bump” in the polls they can then exploit with hoop -te-do publicity stunts and turn the “bump” into a permanent “bump” that will forestall electoral disaster in November. It was not so long ago that these same Dimocrats promised and swore that the 2010 and 2012 elections would expand Obama Dimocratic dominance for generations to come. Now it is just “avoid disaster” in the iceberg electoral sea.

Americans applaud the lawsuit again the Obama health scam. The bipartisan groups of 13 Attorneys General filed suit in Pensacola, Florida. Yale’s Jack Balkin anticipated some of the arguments the Attorneys General would pursue. Here is Balkin’s defense of the Obama health scam, from a legal perspective:

“Second, it is not actually a mandate. It is a tax, which people would not have to pay if they purchased health insurance. The House bill imposes a tax of 2.5% on adjusted gross income if a taxpayer is not part of a qualified health insurance program. The Senate bill imposes what is called an “excise tax” — a tax on transactions or events — or a “penalty tax” — a tax for failing to do something (e.g., filing your tax return promptly). The tax is levied for each month that an individual fails to pay premiums into a qualified health plan.”

It’s a tax. “Read my lips” Obama style:



The IRS will be the enforcer. It’s a tax.

Barack Obama attacked Hillary Clinton and John McCain and Sarah Palin by declaring one or all of them were too divisive whereas he would be “a uniter not a divider”, he would pass health care with a ton of bipartisan votes, they were for taxes and he would not raise taxes for those making less than $250,000, they were for mandates whereas he was against mandates, they were for taxing health insurance plans whereas he was against raising taxes on health insurance plans, they would penalize those who did not buy health insurance he would not…. Lies all.



This all goes to show:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

* * * * * *

Without getting into the weeds of the legal argument, anyone who says they know what will happen in the Attorneys General lawsuit does not know that they are talking about. Indeed, courts are loathe to interfere into the political sphere. However, as Linda Greenhouse has noted, the Supreme Court during the Rehnquist years targeted congressional overreach. Does this sound familiar?:

But the Americans With Disabilities Act, the most important civil rights law of the last quarter-century, was the highly visible product of a bipartisan legislative process, so much so that some people assumed the law might stand as a firewall against the court’s further expansion of state immunity. [snip]

A revolution once begun is not so easy to stop.

The legal issues are only tangentially related, but the question is will the Roberts Supreme Court, have the gumption of the Rehnquist Court and/or is Federalism at the high court dead or is the “revolution” still on? ADA was a bipartisan product where the health scam is not. Will the courts issue an injunction and provide restraint until the American people resolve the issue in November?

In a 90s era gun possession case, United States v. Lopez, the Supreme Court began its assault on the expansive use of the Commerce Clause:

“The Government’s essential contention, in fine, is that we may determine here that §922(q) is valid because possession of a firearm in a local school zone does indeed substantially affect interstate commerce. Brief for United States 17. The Government argues that possession of a firearm in a school zone may result in violent crime and that violent crime can be expected to affect the functioning of the national economy in two ways. First, the costs of violent crime are substantial, and, through the mechanism of insurance, those costs are spread throughout the population. [snip]

The Government also argues that the presence of guns in schools poses a substantial threat to the educational process by threatening the learning environment. A handicapped educational process, in turn, will result in a less productive citizenry. That, in turn, would have an adverse effect on the Nation’s economic well being. As a result, the Government argues that Congress could rationally have concluded that §922(q) substantially affects interstate commerce.

We pause to consider the implications of the Government’s arguments. The Government admits, under its “costs of crime” reasoning, that Congress could regulate not only all violent crime, but all activities that might lead to violent crime, regardless of how tenuously they relate to interstate commerce. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 8-9. Similarly, under the Government’s “national productivity” reasoning, Congress could regulate any activity that it found was related to the economic productivity of individual citizens: family law (including marriage, divorce, and child custody), for example. Under the theories that the Government presents in support of §922(q), it is difficult to perceive any limitation on federal power, even in areas such as criminal law enforcement or education where States historically have been sovereign. Thus, if we were to accept the Government’s arguments, we are hard pressed to posit any activity by an individual that Congress is without power to regulate.”

The Court struck at the Congressional overreach via the Constitution’s Commerce Clause. The Rehnquist court rejected the argument that “any activity can be looked upon as commercial.” Will the Robert’s Court follow the Rehnquist Court circa 1995?

Others argue that the Attorneys General invoked language in their complaint to tickle the fancy of Justice Scalia in another gun possession case, Printz v. United States. In Printz, Justice Scalia wrote:

“From the description set forth above, it is apparent that the Brady Act purports to direct state law enforcement officers to participate, albeit only temporarily, in the administration of a federally enacted regulatory scheme. [snip]

The petitioners here object to being pressed into federal service, and contend that congressional action compelling state officers to execute federal laws is unconstitutional. [snip]

These early laws establish, at most, that the Constitution was originally understood to permit imposition of an obligation on state judges to enforce federal prescriptions, insofar as those prescriptions related to matters appropriate for the judicial power.

For these reasons, we do not think the early statutes imposing obligations on state courts imply a power of Congress to impress the state executive into its service. Indeed, it can be argued that the numerousness of these statutes, contrasted with the utter lack of statutes imposing obligations on the States’ executive (notwithstanding the attractiveness of that course to Congress), suggests an assumed absence of such power. [snip]

Not only do the enactments of the early Congresses, as far as we are aware, contain no evidence of an assumption that the Federal Government may command the States’ executive power in the absence of a particularized constitutional authorization, they contain some indication of precisely the opposite assumption.”

Scalia lunges for the jugular:

“When a “La[w] . . . for carrying into Execution” the Commerce Clause violates the principle of state sovereignty reflected in the various constitutional provisions we mentioned earlier, supra, at 19-20, it is not a “La[w] . . . proper for carrying into Execution the Commerce Clause,” and is thus, in the words of The Federalist, “merely [an] ac[t] of usurpation” which “deserve[s] to be treated as such.” The Federalist No. 33, at 204 (A. Hamilton). See Lawson & Granger, The “Proper” Scope of Federal Power: A Jurisdictional Interpretation of the Sweeping Clause, 43 Duke L. J. 267, 297-326, 330-333 (1993). We in fact answered the dissent’s Necessary and Proper Clause argument in New York: “[E]ven where Congress has the authority under the Constitution to pass laws requiring or prohibiting certain acts, it lacks the power directly to compel the States to require or prohibit those acts. . . . [T]he Commerce Clause, for example, authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce directly; it does not authorize Congress to regulate state governments’ regulation of interstate commerce.” 505 U. S., at 166. [snip]

Finally, and most conclusively in the present litigation, we turn to the prior jurisprudence of this Court. Federal commandeering of state governments is such a novel phenomenon that this Court’s first experience with it did not occur until the 1970’s, when the Environmental Protection Agency promulgated regulations requiring States to prescribe auto emissions testing, monitoring and retrofit programs, and to designate preferential bus and carpool lanes. The Courts of Appeals for the Fourth and Ninth Circuits invalidated the regulations on statutory grounds in order to avoid what they perceived to be grave constitutional issues, see Maryland v. EPA, 530 F. 2d 215, 226 (CA4 1975); Brown v. EPA, 521 F. 2d 827, 838-842 (CA9 1975); and the District of Columbia Circuit invalidated the regulations on both constitutional and statutory grounds, see District of Columbia v. Train, 521 F. 2d 971, 994 (CADC 1975). After we granted certiorari to review the statutory and constitutional validity of the regulations, the Government declined even to defend them, and instead rescinded some and conceded the invalidity of those that remained, leading us to vacate the opinions below and remand for consideration of mootness. EPA v. Brown, 431 U.S. 99 (1977).[snip]

“Much of the Constitution is concerned with setting forth the form of our government, and the courts have traditionally invalidated measures deviating from that form. The result may appear ‘formalistic’ in a given case to partisans of the measure at issue, because such measures are typically the product of the era’s perceived necessity. But the Constitution protects us from our own best intentions: It divides power among sovereigns and among branches of government precisely so that we may resist the temptation to concentrate power in one location as an expedient solution to the crisis of the day.” Id., at 187.

We adhere to that principle today, and conclude categorically, as we concluded categorically in New York: “The Federal Government may not compel the States to enact or administer a federal regulatory program.” Id., at 188.”

Finally,

“We held in New York that Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. Today we hold that Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the State’s officers directly. The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policymaking is involved, and no case by case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty.”

The Attorneys General in their complaint do their best to almost quote Scalia:

“55. Plaintiffs cannot afford the exorbitant and unfunded costs of participating under the Act, but have no choice other than to participate.

56. The Act exceeds Congress’s powers under Article I of the Constitution of the United States, and cannot be upheld under the Commerce Clause, Const. art. I, §8; the Taxing and Spending Clause, id.; or any other provision of the Constitution.

57. By effectively co-opting the Plaintiffs’ control over their budgetary processes and legislative agendas through compelling them to assume costs they cannot afford, and by requiring them to establish health insurance exchanges, the Act deprives them of their sovereignty and their right to a republican form of government, in violation of Article IV, section 4 of the Constitution of the United States.

58. The Act violates the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and runs afoul of the Constitution’s principle of federalism, by commandeering the Plaintiffs and their employees as agents of the federal government’s regulatory scheme at the states’ own cost.”

Before dismissing the very idea of Supreme Court action, let’s recall that Obama Dimocrats were forced to run away from Demon Pass after a legal assault on the concept in the Op-Ed pages of the Washington Post by former federal Judge Michael McConnell.

Randy E. Barnett who teaches constitutional law at Georgetown University is assisting the Attorneys General in their lawsuit and has also taken to the Washington Post to address some of the issues in the Attorneys General complaint.

“Can Congress really require that every person purchase health insurance from a private company or face a penalty? The answer lies in the commerce clause of the Constitution, which grants Congress the power “to regulate commerce . . . among the several states.” [snip]

But the individual mandate extends the commerce clause’s power beyond economic activity, to economic inactivity. That is unprecedented. While Congress has used its taxing power to fund Social Security and Medicare, never before has it used its commerce power to mandate that an individual person engage in an economic transaction with a private company. Regulating the auto industry or paying “cash for clunkers” is one thing; making everyone buy a Chevy is quite another. Even during World War II, the federal government did not mandate that individual citizens purchase war bonds.

If you choose to drive a car, then maybe you can be made to buy insurance against the possibility of inflicting harm on others. But making you buy insurance merely because you are alive is a claim of power from which many Americans instinctively shrink. [snip]

Several states are considering measures attempting to exempt their residents from an individual health insurance mandate. While such provisions may have a political impact, none is likely to have any effect on the legislation’s constitutionality. Under the 10th Amendment, if Congress enacts a law pursuant to one of the “powers . . . delegated to the United States by the Constitution,” then that law is supreme, and nothing a state can do changes this. Any state power to “nullify” unconstitutional federal laws has long been rejected.[snip]

Of course, there is one additional way for states to win a fight about the constitutionality of health-care legislation: Make it unconstitutional. Article V of the Constitution gives state legislatures the power to require Congress to convene a convention to propose an amendment to the Constitution. If two-thirds of state legislatures demand an amendment barring the federal regulation of health insurance or an individual mandate, Congress would be constitutionally bound to hold a convention. Something like this happened in 1933 when Congress proposed and two-thirds of the states ratified the 21st Amendment, removing from the Constitution the federal power to prohibit the manufacture, sale and transportation of alcohol. But the very threat of an amendment convention would probably induce Congress to repeal the bill.

Here is the Big Question: Will the Supreme Court dare? Barnett:

“But what if five justices think the legislation was carried bleeding across the finish line on a party-line vote over widespread bipartisan opposition? What if control of one or both houses of Congress flips parties while lawsuits are pending? Then there might just be five votes against regulating inactivity by compelling citizens to enter into a contract with a private company. This legislation won’t go into effect tomorrow. In the interim, it is far more vulnerable than if some citizens had already started to rely upon its benefits.”

Will the Supreme Court dare? In Bush v. Gore, absent the very tough Alioto and Roberts, the Court dared.

* * * * * *

Americans have only just begun to resist the Obama health scam. Attempts to slime the resistance as “racist” are in full gear by Big Media but those smears will fail to break the opposition. John Dingell says it will take time to “control the people” but he clearly does not know the answer to that question at the end of the Star Spangled Banner.

Americans don’t want to transfer their wealth to Big Insurance companies and have the IRS enforce payments to Big Insurance companies. Barack Obama will have to break more arms to enforce his scam. Meanwhile, some time today, protected by cameras, acting in shame, Obama will sign what he said he would repeal – and yet another broken promise which Big Media will ignore.

Republicans will fight in the U.S. Senate starting today to block modifications to the hated Obama health scam legislation. Viagra will be one weapon.

Senate Republicans and the Courts have a role to play. But what will stop the Obama scam and madness is Democrats, Republicans, and Independents united against Obama and his Dimocrats – in November 2010.

Titanic Health Care Victory

The Titanic sailed off today. The pompous, celebrity addicted Captain has been warned of the icebergs in the stormy sea. But still the Titanic sails at full speed.

There was a “signing ceremony” publicity stunt this morning of the Senate bill which supposedly is hated by House Dimocrats, unions, PINOs, the “creative class” clueless” and of course Independents and Republicans. You would not know that the Senate bill is hated from all the celebrations and drinking of Hopium filled Champagne bottles by Dimocrats. The same Dimocrats who admit the health bill is really a health insurance bill. A health insurance bill which transfers trillions of taxpayer dollars to Big Insurance and turns Americans into human money batteries similar to those in the Matrix movies.

The mindless of the Big Media Dimocratic commentariat are even celebrating the death of “Clintonism” today. Recall “Clintonism” and Clinton? – the only guy since FDR in the 1940s who won election twice and left office with 64% popularity and who killed the debt and deficit vampires, as well as helped the nation live in a period of wonderful peace and prosperity. The death of that peace and prosperity era is celebrated and the Age of Fake is celebrated by these callow PINO windbags.

On the day after the Big Insurance and Big PhaRma “Save Obama” vote in the House we expected a much more triumphalist reception on the front pages and broadcasts of Obama’s Big Media masters. But instead of cheers, there was caution. Instead of wild carousing, there were iceberg sightings.

Nancy Bets The House On Healthcare” headlined Politico. Typically reasonable Jay Cost at RealClearPolitics flatly stated “ObamaCare is Politically Vulnerable“. Ross Douthat and David Brooks, the piano players at the New York Times scrawled “A New Beginning, Or A Last Hurrah?” and “it feels like the end of something, not the beginning of something” respectively. The Washington Post stated the obvious “Health-care Vote Looms As Big Issue For November Elections” as a follow-up to the earlier “Historic Win Or Not, Democrats Could Pay A Price.”

PoliticsDaily merely asked “Which Party’s Health Care Bet Will Pay Off In November?” Reuters listed the many publicity stunts Dimocratic allies are planning and noted “Republicans Target Democrats On US Healthcare Reform – Democrats Who Backed Healthcare Overhaul Face Attack Ads.” At Obama fluffers and ceaseless Obama apologists NothingLeft, this confession:

The health reform bill is not popular, either in absolute terms or in historic terms. Just because some of the opposition comes from the left does not mean it will be a political winner for Democrats in the 2010 elections. At the same time, killing the bill would not have made Democrats more popular, because then they would look utterly ineffective in addition to trying to foist an unpopular bill on the country.

At this point, for Democrats as a whole, the least painful political solution is to pass the bill and get it out of the headlines as quickly as possible. That is the least painful of a range of painful options.

The New York Times warned “Big Win For Obama, But At What Cost?” (“historic achievement or political suicide?)

For “Save Obama” congressional representatives who choose to be party hacks rather than representatives of the people, the cost is already clear. In a poll published today, Brad Ellsworth who worried more for Obama than about turning his constituents into batteries to power a machine, the voters have a message.

“Two of the three top Republican hopefuls for the U.S. Senate in Indiana continue to hold double-digit leads over Democratic Congressman Brad Ellsworth. Ellsworth supported President Obama’s health care plan in a state where opposition to the legislation is higher than it is nationally.

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely voters in the state finds former Congressman John Hostettler with a 50% to 32% lead over Ellsworth, a current House member who voted with most other Democrats on Sunday to pass the health care plan. The survey was taken last Wednesday and Thursday nights. Fifteen percent (15%) remain undecided in that match-up.

Ex-Senator Dan Coats now posts a 49% to 34% lead over Ellsworth, with 12% undecided.[snip]

Unless there is a major shift if perception of the health care plan, Ellsworth may face a big challenge convincing voters in the state why he voted for the President’s plan. Just 35% of Indiana voters favor the plan proposed by the president and congressional Democrats, while 63% oppose it.”

Indiana voters might hate Obama’s health scam more than the rest of the nation but the anger is equally distributed nationwide.

“Obama’s approval rating has dropped steadily each month since December, when it was 54 percent. [snip]

In fact, health care was the policy area that drew the second highest negative rating, with 58 percent registering disapproval. The highest negative rating was 62 percent for his handling of the federal deficit.”

The American people can be fooled some of the time, but not all Americans and not all of the time. Asked by pollsters on behalf of CBS, before Sunday’s “Save Obama” vote, Americans knew Obama’s health scam is not about health, it’s about Obama:Asked why Democrats worked to pass a health care bill, 57 percent said “mostly political reasons.”

* * * * **

Today Big Insurance, Big PhaRma, and Big Obama Dimocrats are on deck celebrating. Barack Obama has signed his health scam into law and the Obama Dimocratic walking dead rejoice.

But the American people in steerage are angry. Anger will grow as more scams embedded in the already scam laden bill are uncovered. The people in steerage are the most in danger from the drunks above deck and on the bridge.

The only way to save the ship from hurtling smack into icebergs is to toss the captain and his simpering lieutenants into the cold sea. That will come in November.



Barack Obama Celebrates Women’s History Month

Update: A video for the Obama Hopium guzzlers who don’t understand what we wrote today.



Stupak now admits there is nothing to stop Obama from rescinding his Executive Order. The “pro-life” Stupak will learn what the “pro-choice” betrayed know:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

It’s not only 2010, it’s also 2012:

Of the 33 Senate seats up in 2012, 24 are currently held by Democrats or Independents who caucus with them. What’s more, all of the first-term Senators in this class were elected in a mid-term cycle and will likely face a different electorate in a presidential year.

All up in 2012: Tester, Webb, McCaskill, Byrd, Kohl, Akaka, Brown, Cantwell, Casey, Stabenow, Nelso, Nelson, Conrad, Klobuchar, Lieberman, and Menendez.

And these are the Obama broken promises that Republicans will feature in campaign ads in 2010:

—————————————————————————————-

Betrayal. No matter what side of the abortion divide you stand on, you were betrayed. “Pro-choice,” “Pro-Life,” “Anti-abortion,” “Women’s Rights,” those became near-meaningless labels last night. The only divide which mattered was “Betrayed,” and “Betrayers.”

Now the “betrayers”, meaning the Obama Dimocratic Party, have to pay the consequences for their “Night of the Long Knives.” The Arrogance! and paternalism of the treacherous enterprise – “we know best and we’re doing what we want for your own good, and you will have to like it because we had to pass something/anything” – has a close historical analogy to the forced feeding of the Suffragettes. To make us all forget the force feeding of last night, shiny objects will be displayed.

The first line of defense against the American people, will be bamboozlement. Expect many events to “celebrate” the horror of last night and convince the imprisoned they should be grateful for their sparkling, new gilded cage.

“Now, they hope, the discussion will finally shift in their favor. [snip]

But in fact, the political battle is just beginning.

The party now must live or die with its landmark legislation in hundreds of congressional districts across the country, in the most hostile midterm election climate Democrats have faced since the Republican landslide year of 1994.

“Given that Democrats have basically lost the healthcare messaging fight for the last year, I’m not sure why we should think they will begin to win over the next seven months,” said Charlie Cook, one of Washington’s leading election handicappers.”

As we wrote in an early hour update , every Medicare patient that has to wait for treatment or appointment, every medical bill, every stabbing pain, every bureaucratic outrage, every unctuous yet unresponsive bureaucrat, every medical payment, is now blood on Obama Dimocratic hands.



Last night “Republicans were not rejoicing” but they were not unhappy either.

“To their mind, passing a sweeping healthcare overhaul in the face of negative public opinion — and turning legislative somersaults to accomplish the feat — only served to underscore the arrogance and obtuseness of the Democratic majority.

“Their choice was to pass bad legislation or prove they’re incapable of governing,” said David Winston, a Republican pollster who works closely with the party’s House and Senate leadership. Moreover, he said, the effort was off point; by far the greatest concern of most voters is the nation’s stubbornly high unemployment rate. [snip]

For Democrats, the next several months will be spent trying to hold down their losses, which makes passage of the gargantuan healthcare bill all the more audacious — especially when the chief animating force in politics today is a profound mistrust of Washington and anger over the expansive growth of government, embodied by the rise of the “tea party” movement.”

Obama Dimocrats believe that they can impose their will with a paternalistic pat on the head on a free people. Obama Dimocrats believe they can make someone who does not like something like it by describing how bad things would be otherwise. It’s a forced feeding.

“But it’s hard to benefit politically just because things don’t turn out as bad voters feared.

Consider last year’s economic stimulus package, which experts say prevented a steep economic downturn from being a whole lot worse. Obama and Democrats have received little credit for their rescue effort; to the contrary, the stimulus and serial bailouts that began under President George W. Bush have only fueled populist anger.”

Obama Dimocrats in the last hour played the race card. Defiantly marching through angry protesters, Nancy Pelousy and the once respected, once courageous, John Lewis (who due to fear and racial politics betrayed Hillary to endorse “”Johnny-come-lately” Obama) tried vainly to invoke the glory days of the civil rights era as a rationale for Obamination health scam:

“Even so, Democrats must have in the back of their minds the memory of President Lyndon Johnson who, upon signing the 1964 Civil Rights Act, said his party had lost the South for a generation. It’s been longer than that, though few today would question the rightness of outlawing racial segregation in theaters, restaurants, hotels and other public places.

That may prove cold comfort, however, for Democrats who cast an aye vote Sunday and, as a result, may have to await history’s verdict in forced retirement.”

What has been invoked is not the glory days of the civil rights movement but rather the most hated days of the now dead “forced busing” mandates. Whether or not forced busing was done for a “good purpose” Americans don’t like to be forced to do anything that violates their sense of “the consent of the governed”.

Obama Dimocrats would have done themselves well by studying the mandated “forced busing” disaster which did not achieve the aims set out and indeed can be said to have been counterproductive to those aims. The lesson is not Selma, but South Boston.

Before the Sunday night of the long knives the anger was visible. Dimocrats chose to ignore the righteous anger and went ahead with their “we know best” Arrogance! Last night Obama Dimocrats achieved their low aims of passage of a bill, any bill:

“The question is at what cost.[snip]

The lengthy and rancorous debate has inflicted considerable damage on the president and his party. It helped spark the grass-roots “tea party” movement and generated angry town hall meetings last summer that led to some opponents painting Obama as a socialist and a communist for advocating a greater government role in the health-care industry. The issue now is whether final passage of the legislation — Senate leaders say they will take up the reconciliation bill this week — will cause more harm or begin a turnaround in the Democrats’ fortunes heading toward the November midterm elections.

This is not how the struggle over health care was supposed to unfold.”

“Forced feeding” and “forced busing” were not “supposed to unfold” the way they did either. Conservatives and independents are not happy with the Obamination. True liberals are not happy with the Obamination either:

“Liberals say the bill should have created a government alternative to private insurance; conservatives decry an increase in taxes and expensive new government programs.”

Big Media will defend Obama and say that Obama is in the “sweet spot of the middle” because both sides hate the Obamaination. But forced payments of taxpayer dollars to Big Insurance will prove as popular and as viable as forced feedings and forced busing.

“Democrats are afraid of failure and nervous about what success could bring. They fear substantial losses in November, with their majorities in the House and Senate possibly at risk if the country turns even more negative toward the administration and its policies. Republicans vow to continue challenging the program at the state and national levels.”

Social Security and Medicare and Civil Rights legislation passed with bipartisan majorities. Not so with the Obamination betrayal of last night. Republicans and Independents are now fully invested in ceaseless war on a program true Liberals know stinks like the Chicago stockyards of Obama and Rezko.

“The House approved the Medicare bill on a vote of 313 to 115, including 65 Republicans — nearly half the GOP caucus at the time. The Senate approved the measure by 68 to 21, including 13 of the 27 Republicans.

Social Security passed the House in 1935 by 372 to 77. On that vote, 77 Republicans joined the majority and 18 Republicans opposed it. In the Senate, the vote was 77 to 6, with five of 19 Republicans in opposition.”

* * * * * *

March is National Women’s History Month. As the month began we quoted the aims of this year’s National Women’s History Month theme: “The overarching theme for March 2010 is Writing Women Back into History.”

Barack Obama wrote women back into history by finally doing something Hillary could not do: sign an executive order on abortion which betrays every principle of what used to be a “core Democratic value”.

The moribund, trying to wake itself up National Organization for Women, managed to rouse itself sufficiently to type out a tepid statement of “incensed” hollow outrage:

“”President Obama campaigned as a pro-choice president, but his actions today suggest that his commitment to reproductive health care is shaky at best,” NOW pres. Terry O’Neill wrote in a statement. “Contrary to language in the draft of the executive order and repeated assertions in the news, the Hyde Amendment is not settled law … The message we have received today is that it is acceptable to negotiate health care on the backs of women, and we couldn’t disagree more.”

The Suffragettes wretch at these modern day poseurs.

“Pro-life”, “anti-abortion” Americans felt the sting of betrayal too, though they appear to be much more vocal and much more “incensed.” “Pro-life”, “anti-abortion” Americans have not lost their sense of outrage unlike the “leadership” of those of us on the “pro-choice” side.

The president of the once honorable Democratic Party (died in Denver 2008) codified into law what he swore to eliminate during the primary campaign. Women, on both sides of the abortion debate, were nothing more than bargaining chips. The “bros” politically and medically screwed the “hos”.

Barack Obama vowed to Planned Parenthood to eliminate the Hyde Amendment he will now codify in an Executive Order. Jane Hamsher:

“Unfortunately, with this legislation, women’s reproductive rights were sacrificed for corporate profits. There’s no other way to say it. And the party alone is not to blame. It could not have happened without the cooperation of pro-choice groups, who failed to mobilize and did little but issue press releases and fundraise in the wake of the biggest assault on women’s reproductive rights in 35 years. Their complete capitulation is symptomatic of the crisis that the passage of this bill has triggered on the left. Liberal interest groups across the board sacrificed the interests of their members, and, in the end, acted as little more than enforcers for PhRMA and the insurance companies, or sat mute in exchange for personal sinecures and carve-outs.”

Finally the Jane Hamsher’s of the fake left begin to understand just how on target we at Big Pink have been (read “Women, Gays, Jews: WAKE UP!”) when we documented that Women, Gays, and Jews (and African-Americans and the Young and the Elderly) have been “betrayed by their leadership due to cronyism or incompetence or cowardice (often all three)“. Remember NARAL and “Mainline Treachery”?:

The essential fact that must be remembered is that the mainline Women groups, the mainline Gay groups, and to a much lesser extent some mainline Jewish groups (Jewish Americans are betrayed more often by fake “leaders” like Robert Wexler. See HERE and HERE.) have stopped fighting for their constituencies in order to shill for Obama’s Dimocratic Party. [snip]

These mainline groups and their treacheries to their constituencies are easily understood by considering last Thursday’s Gay Fundraiser for Obama Dimocrats which raised more money for Obama Dimocrats that the previous year when Obama Dimocrats were at least serving worthless soon-to-be abandoned promises, not unfulfilled ones. Hillary supporters recall Kate Michelman and NARAL and their various treacheries: they abandoned a long time strong champion of their issues in order to support a “present” voting Obama.

African-Americans too have been abandoned by their mainline groups….”

More from Jane Hamsher:

“But it is a national shame that a Democratic President who pledged the repeal of the Hyde Amendment would proudly issue an executive order affirming it. How far we’ve come since 2007, when Barack Obama swore that his first act in office would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act.”

It’s much more than a shame, it’s a betrayal!



The betrayal is to all sides of the abortion divide. The fight will continue in the courts and in the streets and at the ballot box. As with “forced busing” and “forced feeding” appeal will be made to the courts for years to come. “Repeal” will be the rallying cry in November. The treacherous will be punished no matter how silvery their tongues. The “pro-life” side has a grassroots organization that will punish Bart Stupak for his betrayal in the streets and the ballot box. The “pro-choice” side is left with nothing… but words.

“Pro-choice” or “Pro-life”, “abortion rights” or “anti-abortion” we were all betrayed. It’s not about Stupak and his dead career. We were all betrayed – whatever side of the divide.

March is National Women’s History Month. Barack Obama and his Dimocrats celebrated last night by writing a new chapter, of forced feeling, into history.

Women’s History Month has had a new chapter written too. The new chapter is called “Betrayal”.

By Hook Or By Crook

Update VIII: The Senate bill passed the House (219-212); the Republican Motion to Recommit failed (182-219); the Reconciliation bill passed (220-211). The Reconciliation bill now goes to the Senate.

The few “appealing” aspects of the bill (such as portability of insurance from job to job) that kick in rapidly will help Dimocrats marginally. But from now on every Medicare patient that is unhappy or has to wait for an appointment will, rightly or wrongly, blame Obama and the Dimocrats and will vote in November to punish for the massive Medicare cuts.

All the magic promises will be magnified by unions and Dimocratic allied organizations with publicity stunts featuring “enrollment” drives and assorted distractions. But the magic will never materialize and the “bitter and clingy” mood of Americans will grow even more bitter and sour. Economic misery will have every American answering the question “Are you better off today than you were two years ago?” at the ballot box in November. The Arrogance! Incompetence! Corruption! Cowardice! of Obama and his Corrupt Dimocrats will be punished in November.

By April 15, 2011 the new taxes will have to be paid, just in time for the preliminaries to the 2012 election campaign.

Politico provides a handy guide to the Dims that will “walk plank with ‘yes’ vote.”

“Some members of Congress will end up with primary challenges as a result. Others may have signed their own political death warrant. [snip]

Members in this category include Reps. Harry Mitchell of Arizona, Chris Carney of Pennsylvania and Baron Hill of Indiana, each of whom was elected in the 2006 Democratic wave and represents a seat that George W. Bush carried twice.

And virtually every freshman Democrat who won a marginal district in 2008 will need to mount a vigorous explanation of the benefits of a “yes” vote — especially members like Reps. Mark Schauer of Michigan and Dina Titus of Nevada, who won Republican-held seats.

Some veterans — among them nine-term Rep. Earl Pomeroy, who hails from solidly Republican North Dakota, and West Virginia Reps. Alan Mollohan and Nick Rahall — will also feel the heat.”

Suzanne Kosmas, Betsy Markey, Mary Jo Kilroy, Steve Driehaus, Carol Shea-Porter, Thomas Perriello, John Boccieri, signed their death warrants too.
Those running for higher office (Brad Ellsworth, Paul Hodes, Kendrick Meek) have also signed their death warrants. Bart Stupak and his ilk will face bipartisan loathing and defeat.

—————————————————————————————-

Update VII: The vote on the Senate passed bill will soon start. After that vote, there will be a last ditch Republican attempt to kill the bill by proposing a “motion to recommit”. The motion to recommit will “contain only language on abortion that Stupak originally had wanted to include in the Senate bill.” In November:

Sixty-eight Democrats voted for Stupak’s language in a November vote. They could be portrayed as flipping if they now voted against it.

If the Republicans don’t muck things up, as they did in November, this will be yet another time bomb to explode in November against the Dimocrats. Obama Dimocrats are celebrating today and one is walking around with a clown size gavel. As Pat Caddell describes it, ‘it’s a Kool-aid party’. A Hopium spiked Kool-aid party fit for a cult:



—————————————————————————————-

Update VI: A little history might be in order. Some are saying that “the public is fickle and does not stay focused that long” and therefore Obama’s Dimocrats will be able to get away with by hook or by crook legislation. This is a variation of the “the public does not care about process” argument. We believe both are wrong.

We wrote about “process” and the “fickle public” previously and concluded that ordinarily Americans do not care about the “process” for legislation, but that health care legislation is an exemption to that rule. We believe the “process” answer applies to the “fickle” argument too. It’s not just opinion versus opinion – there’s history.

In 1989 the Democratic controlled Congress was warned by seniors against passing an alleged “expanded Medicare coverage” bill. Democrats were convinced “the people” would love the bill once it was passed and they passed the bill. Seniors revolted. Within months the same Democratic Congress was forced to repeal the law. Here’s a visual:



Seniors in 2010 are expected to account for 54% – 56% of the vote. We suspect that today’s seniors will revolt against the Medicare cuts in Obama’s health scam just like the seniors in 1989 did.

Tonight the Dimocrats will proceed with the Obama health scam. Republicans will continue the opposition unto November 2010 and 2012. Republicans will even pose as the defenders of Social Security and Medicare and the elderly. Amazing.

—————————————————————————————-

Update V: Stupak sells out his principles. Obama will sign an Executive Order. PINOs in congress will keep their mouths shut – so much for “core Democratic values”. Stupak parrots the “American people are the winners” line but Americans don’t feel like “winners” with this massive transfer of taxpayer dollars to Big Insurance and Big PhaRma.

A little note on the atmospherics of the Stupak press conference: Marcy Kaptur’s face and delivery did not match her upbeat words. Bart Stupak looked sullen too. The Republicans must be giddy as they contemplate November. The Dimocrats and allied organizations will hold countless publicity stunts to “sign up” for health care and other such charades, but the independents who vote in November will not be smiling.

The Obama Executive Order may be read HERE. Read it and keep those Pink Grenades handy.

The fight will continue this week in the Senate if and when this Obamination scam passes the House. The lawsuits will commence too.

—————————————————————————————-

Update IV: They Still Don’t Have The Votes but that might change momentarily because Stupak is about to speak and the rumor is he will “Save Obama” and Obama will sign some sort of Executive Order – will any of the so-call progressives react with principle? We doubt it.

Earl Pomerory is a “Save Obama” vote.

DireFog has the vote at 209-209. It does appear though that Kanjorski will be a “NO” vote so maybe the “NOs” are still ahead as we approach 4:00 p.m. ET.

There are not many votes left to mine as the stomach turns. This vote could drag on all night as Pelousy flits about with a comically huge gavel. “One big tell-tale sign” of what is happening is the changed schedule.

Bart Stupak is still making a fool of Barack Obama -who does not need the lessons in boobery – he’s a professor of boobery.

—————————————————————————————-

Update III: Want to call Bart Stupak (a live person is answering the phones at his office? (202) 225 4735, (989) 356 0690, (906) 875 3751.

Musical interlude:



Keep fighting. They still don’t have the votes.

—————————————————————————————-

Update II: They still don’t have the votes. It’s close.

Bill Foster votes to “Save Obama”.

The much courted John Tanner votes “NO!”.

Rumor at DireFog has Lincoln Davis also a “NO!”. DireFog has the vote at 208 “Save Obama” and 209 “NO!” Get the pen Barack! Forget what you told Planned Parenthood during the primaries. Time to wield that back stabbing pen.

It is amazing that with the entire Obama presidency at stake so many are voting “NO!”. It’s the growing NObama Coalition.

—————————————————————————————-

Update I: The latest on the rumors of a Bart Stupak deal HERE. Nothing is confirmed. Stupak has yet to announce an agreement.

More rumors – Stupak is not quite a “Save Obama” vote yet.

Not a rumor – Brian Baird is a “Save Obama” vote.

More rumors – is this the Executive Order? A “non-binding show” which is a stab in the back? Rumors.

Latest non rumor, Major Garrett states on Fox News that he received an email from Stupak’s spokesperson that there is no deal.

Rumors.

Keep fighting. They still don’t have the votes.

—————————————————————————————-

They Still Don’t Have The Votes. With massive Dimocratic majorities in both chambers, and control of the executive branch of government – the most they can HOPE for is a bare majority. The most they can hope for is a bare majority and a Dimocratic president signing a ban on abortion funding. What audacity!

American Big Media is all out to help flim-flam Obama pass his health scam. As usual we turn to the overseas media to provide a sense of some reality. The TimesOnline headline says it:Late swings leave Barack Obama’s healthcare reforms teetering

What appears to propel a great deal of the “they have the votes” conjecture is that no president or no thinking person would stake so much (a presidency, a congress, an entire infrastructure of allied organizations, unions, a political party, Big Media allies) unless it was a sure thing. Hillary supporters know better because we have watched Obama’s flim-flams accepted wholesale even when not based in reality.

We’ll be keeping track of the health scam vote all day and updating this article as appropriate. They still don’t have the votes.

Will they get the votes? Will they work out a deal with Bart Stupak (latest rumors say they have)? Pelousy and Obama will try to scheme as much as necessary, bamboozle as much as possible to get the votes – By Hook Or By Crook. The hook will probably not work, so the crook will have to up his game.

If they do manage to get the votes (They Still Don’t Have The Votes) what can we expect? Well there will be a fight in the Senate all week long, but that conjecture is for another day. The Republicans know what they will do:

“The top House Republican said if his party takes the majority, he would work to repeal the health care bill.

“If this bill passes, we will have an effort to repeal the bill, and we’ll do it the same way that we approached health care on a step by step basis. I’d have a bill on the floor the first thing out, to eliminate the Medicare cuts, eliminate the tax increases, eliminate the mandate that every American has to buy health insurance and the employer mandate that’s going to cover jobs,” Boehner said according to an advanced transcript of NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

The Senate side Republicans are saying much the same thing:

“National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn of Texas said Sunday this fall’s midterm elections will be a “referendum” on the health care bill, saying it will be the “defining issue” even when President Barack Obama runs for reelection in 2012.

“For example, in places like Indiana, where only 37 percent of the public approve of it, you have congressmen who want to be the next senator from Indiana saying they’re going to vote for this bill,” Cornyn said on “Fox News Sunday.” “That will be the defining issue in that state – states like New Hampshire, known for their fiscal responsibility where Paul Hodes, a congressman there, said he’s going to vote for this two-and-a-half trillion dollar bill that’s a job killer that’s going to run up deficits, cut Medicare and raise taxes.”

The whiff of New Hampshire is everywhere these flim-flam days.

Cornyn has other fires to burn in the Senate:

“Texas Sen. John Cornyn said Sunday fellow Republicans will take issue with a tax on high-priced insurance plans, arguing that it violates the rules of budget reconciliation.

Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” Cornyn said that a point of order in the Senate could strip that key provision or even scuttle the bill

“The so-called excise tax on Cadillac insurance plans that doesn’t go into effect until 2018, eight years from now, that effects Social Security. It violates the Byrd rule, and we’re going to raise a point of order. There are 41 senators that signed a letter saying that we will not vote to wave the point of order, it will fall, either that provision or potentially even bring down the whole bill,” Cornyn said.

Cornyn said Republicans have hundreds of amendments to the bill, meant to “highlight” what they consider to be its bad provisions.”

If phase 1, passage in the House of Representative does happen, the fight will continue. It will continue all the way until November 2010 and 2012.

By Hook Or By Crook will not be enough. The Crook will get the Hook soon enough.

The Temple Of Doom

Final Update: New article with information on the rumors of a deal with Bart Stupak has been posted. We’ll update the new article throughout the day.

—————————————————————————————-

Update VI: Video of Steny Hoyer contradicting John Larson’s “we have the votes” comment.



They don’t have the votes but they continue to insist they do. Obama will likely have to sign an Executive Order which bans money for abortions. On this Sunday, the Conference of Bishops says that is not enough and they urge opposition to the scam.

Drudge reports, without proof, this: “OVERHEARD: Walking into Capitol this morning on phone, Speaker Pelosi tells Hoyer: ‘Steny, we have to get to 217. None of these members wants to be the deciding vote'”

Increasingly, the question is not “Do they have the votes?” but rather “Do they know what they are doing?”.

Nancy Kaptur votes to “Save Obama” and abandons the pro-life forces on the basis of “assurances”. Kaptur is a loss but not a surprise as she was not a “Stupak Bloc” diehard. She was “low hanging fruit”.

Solomon Ortiz is also a “Save Obama”.

The vote at this late Sunday morning is 206 “Save Obama” votes, 209 “NO!”. An Obama Executive Order which bans money for abortion (language unknown as of now and of dubious value other than politically), a Dimocratic president signing such an order, is the only way it appears that they can get the votes.



There are many primary challenge threats against “NO” voters. There is a lot of pressure on the “NO” votes. Will they cave? Stay tuned. They Still Don’t Have The Votes. Keep fighting.

—————————————————————————————-

Update V: [update to the mini update update: Politico’s count is 210 “Save Obama” votes – a count which is closer to our count than to the Larson count. Steny Hoyer also says they “will” have the votes, not that they do.]

[update to the mini update HERE which calls into question the claim they have the votes]

[mini update immediately after we posted the update – the House Caucus chairman John Larson insists they do have the votes. By our count as of 9:00 a.m. They don’t have the votes. We’ll wait to see if there were any overnight deals we have yet to hear about. .] Sunday morning – They Still Don’t Have The Votes.

The entire day will be consumed with attempts by Pelousy to get the “Save Obama” votes Obama pretended he already had. But they still don’t have the votes. The official schedule starts at about 2:00 p.m. ET

At 2:00 there will be a one hour debate on the rules of debate for the reconciliation bill and the Senate bill. At 3:00 the vote on the rules. The circus will continue throughout the afternoon and final votes are expected, if they have the votes, around 6:00.

They Still Don’t Have The Votes.

—————————————————————————————-

Update IV: Sanchez! Viva Sanchez!

She was a “yes” in November. The “NOs” still rolling in even after the big publicity stunt this afternoon. The DireFog number is now “Save Obama” 205, “NO!” 209, leaning “NO” 10, unknown 8.

Why is this a shocker? She was an easy “Save Obama” vote but instead…

“The Senate bill is a bad bill,” she told the paper.

Politically, the vote should be a relatively easy lift for Sanchez. The seven-term lawmaker has been re-elected with at least 60 percent of the vote since 2000, winning by a decisive 69 percent in 2008. President Barack Obama carried the district by 60 percent.

Expect Sanchez to be beaten up until she changes her “NO”. The “NO” vote is still ahead. The “Save Obama” Hopium guzzlers are behind. They still don’t have the votes.

—————————————————————————————-

Update III: It’s been a while since our last update, but guess what: They Still Don’t Have The Votes.

A supposed “Save Obama” vote says ‘it ain’t so’. Representative Glenn Nye still undecided or something. The New York Times says he’s a “NO”.

National Review writes that the abortion executive order is the treachery to be discussed tonight “Dem staffer says “this still isn’t nailed down”‘. Pro-choice “leader” DeGette has saluted the plan.

DireFog has the vote at this astonishing result: “Save Obama” 205; “NO” 207, leaning “NO” 10! unknown 9.

Back to the treachery of the night.

Looking at the numbers, I don’t see a really good way to evade the Stupak bloc without pulling the trigger on the executive order from the President clarifying no federal funding for abortion services. While Diana DeGette has agreed to such a maneuver, I’ve heard nobody in the Stupak bloc actually do the same. Apparently members are reading the proposed language.

The “creative clueless” agree:

Looking at the latest vote counts from The New York Times and David Dayen, tomorrow’s vote still hinges on the current size of the Stupak bloc.

Last but not least, here’s Zack Space on why he votes “NO”:

“Getting it done just to get it done is not something we should be doing. We should be doing it right,” Space told the Gannett Washington Bureau in a phone interview late Saturday.

Space said he has been getting calls and letters from his constituents, most of whom do not like the bill.

“I’m doing what I think is right,” Space said. “I have been under enormous amount of pressure this week in Washington. I have spoken to the president twice, once in the Oval Office. My own leadership has been working hard to get me to vote for this. But I don’t represent them. I represent the people in the 18th Congressional District.

Now that is a shocking revolutionary statement!



Keep fighting. They Still Don’t Have The Votes!

—————————————————————————————-

Update II: Zack Space of Ohio chooses to live and flips from a “yes” in November to – a “NO” today. Zack Space is a big get. Jim Matheson is also a “NO”.

The count at DireFog is 207 “NO” and 204 “Save Obama” votes.

Hillbuzz has photos of the Washington protests. The allegedly “pro-choice” clowns are “Save Obama” no matter that he will sign an Executive Order on abortion. No details on what the order will or will not say – or whether Obama will use blood instead of ink.

They still don’t have the votes.

—————————————————————————————-

Update: A victory on Demon Pass extracted from the “Save Obama” Cult. With that victory the fight continues on the Obama scam legislation itself.

Obama held a publicity stunt today but we still do not know if there is indeed a deal for him to sign an executive order on abortion designed to win votes from Bart Stupak and his cohort. If true, the blood will now be on Obama’s misogynistic hands.

The potential executive order on abortion and the death of Demon Pass are signs of weakness. Demon Pass is dead because the scam was hurting more than helping. The American people, who according to the “creative class” don’t care or are incapable of understanding “process”, are revolted and revolted. The prospective lawsuits also scared the Demon away.

The numbers are tightening up. They Still Don’t Have The Votes.

—————————————————————————————-

Hillary Clinton supporters vividly recall the treacheries and illegalities of the Cult Of Obama at the Democratic Rules Committee. We’ve been fighting to expose Obama for a long time, so we know the tricks. It’s happening again. Now it’s the Rules Committee of the House Of Representatives.



The Obama Cult in The Temple Of Doom – the Rules Committee of the House Of Representatives – want to “Save Obama”. To that end, the Cult, with their Hopium ceremonies and incense priests seek to plunge the nation into the abyss of Demon Pass.

They still do not have the votes. Such is the desperation that there is even talk (by Steny Hoyer) that Barack Obama himself might sign an Executive Order to appease the thus far stalwart Bart Stupak. The Republicans are also not making it easy to “Save Obama”.

What about “deem and pass” (hereinafter “Demon Pass”)? We’ll let Byron York explain the devil details of Demon Pass at the Temple of Doom:

“At the House Rules Committee meeting, Democrats desperate to pass their national health care plan are running into the barrier of basic civics. Here is the problem: The Senate has passed its HCR bill. If the House passes the same bill, it goes on to the president; once he signs it, the bill becomes law. But House Democrats, when they vote for the Senate bill using the “Deem & Pass” dodge, also want to simultaneously pass a package of amendments to the law. Except HCR will not, at that point, be law. It will only become law when the president signs it. Congress can amend the law — it does so all the time — but can it amend something that isn’t law?

No, you cannot amend what does not yet exist. Is this an actual problem? Um, yeah.

“Which is where Democrats are tripping up. Passage of their HCR proposal should be very simple: Senate passes it, House passes it, president signs it. But House Democrats are terrified of voting for the unpopular bill, so they hope to pass it by “Deem & Pass,” in which they will vote, not for the bill, but for a rule that both deems the Senate bill to have passed and, in the same vote, passes the package of amendments. So House Democrats will have two fig leaves: 1) they didn’t vote directly for the Senate bill, and 2) they voted to simultaneously amend — to “fix” — the Senate bill.”

It’s not confusion and chaos, it’s skulduggery and chicanery and Arrogance! Incompetence! Corruption! Cowardice!. More from York:

“The problem is the sequence. Can the House vote to amend something that isn’t the law, as the Senate bill will not be law before the president’s signature? The Rules Committee meeting turned into mass confusion when Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman said, “We’re not going to ‘deem’ the bill passed. We’re going to pass the Senate bill…I would be against the idea of ‘deeming’ something — we either pass it or we don’t.”

To Republican ears, that sounded as if Waxman was speaking out in support of a direct vote on the Senate plan. “I hope we’re making news here,” said Republican Rep. Joe Barton. If so, Barton added, “Praise the Lord!” Other Democrats jumped in to say that no, there would not be a direct vote on the Senate bill.

Barton then asked whether there would be some period of time between House passage of the Senate bill and House passage of the HCR amendments. During that period of time, the president would sign the Senate HCR bill into law. For the House to amend the HCR law, Barton said, it has to be law, which means the president has to have signed it. “If he doesn’t, it ain’t a law,” Barton said.

Democratic Rep. Sander Levin jumped in. “We’re going to be amending the law,” he claimed. Waxman added, “We change current law, and the current law will be the Senate bill once it’s voted on in the House.”

But it won’t be law until the president signs it. Obviously, Democrats are performing such strange contortions because many of their members are scared of voting for a bill that will likely mean defeat for them in November. But their attempts to avoid responsibility have created some very basic problems.”

They still do not have the votes for the Obama health scam. We still don’t know what will happen in the Rules Committee, other than skulduggery and chicanery. The situation and legal issues are even more complex than York describes.

Fred Barnes touched on the additional complications and political battles to come if, and it’s still an if, the Obama health scam passes. For now, the scam still does not have enough votes to pass and the protests are in the streets and moving into the congress. They still do not have the votes, but the whorehouse of Obama Rezko style bribery is filled with beds and gifts.

What if the Rules Committee passes the Obamaination health scam by taking the Demon Pass shortcut? Former federal judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, Michael McConnell (a Republican conservative) explains:

“The House will likely adopt a “self-executing” rule that “deems” passage of the amendatory bill as enactment of the Senate bill, without an actual vote on the latter.

This enables the House to enact the Senate bill while appearing only to approve changes to it. The underlying Senate bill would then go to the president for signature, and the amendatory bill would go to the Senate for consideration under reconciliation procedures (meaning no filibuster).

This approach appears unconstitutional. Article I, Section 7 clearly states that bills cannot be presented to the president for signature unless they have been approved by both houses of Congress in the same form. If the House approves the Senate bill in the same legislation by which it approves changes to the Senate bill, it will fail that requirement.

Judge McConnell explains further why Demon Pass is a much bigger problem than the big problem it already appears to be:

“No one doubts that the House can consolidate two bills in a single measure; the question is whether, having done so, it may then hive the resulting bill into two parts, treating one part as an enrolled bill ready for presidential signature and the other part as a House bill ready for senatorial consideration. That seems inconsistent with the principle that the president may sign only bills in the exact form that they have passed both houses. A combination of two bills is not in “the same form” as either bill separately.”

This has not been done before, argues the Judge:

“Defenders of the Democratic strategy say that a self-executing rule has been used many times before by both parties. But never in this way. Most of the time a self-executing rule is used to incorporate amendments into a pending bill without actual votes on the amendments, where the bill is then subject to a final vote by the House and Senate. That usage may be a dodge around House rules, but it does not violate the Constitution. I am not aware of any instance where a self-executing rule has been used to send one bill to the president for signature and another to the Senate for consideration by means of a single vote.

Self-executing rules have also been used to increase the debt ceiling by virtue of adopting a budget resolution. That procedure is questionable, but because budget resolutions are not laws, this usage does not have the feature of using one vote to send a bill to the president and at the same time to send a different bill to the Senate. There may have been other questionable uses of self-executing rules, but not often enough or in prominent enough cases to establish a precedent that would overcome serious constitutional challenge.”

The question is whether the courts will dare rule on such a prominent issue. We suspect the Supreme Court and Chief Justice Roberts do indeed have the fortitude to kill this sick bill. The Judge addresses the doctrine of courts not intruding on congressional actions:

“Whether the courts would entertain such a challenge is a harder question. The “enrolled bill doctrine,” announced by the Supreme Court in Marshall Field v. Clark (1892), holds that the courts will not question whether a bill certified as having passed both houses of Congress was properly enacted. More recently, in United States v. Munoz-Flores (1990), in a footnote, the Supreme Court stated that Field concerned only the “evidence” the courts would consider in such a challenge and that when “a constitutional provision is implicated,” the enrolled bill doctrine would not apply. These holdings are not easy to reconcile. The D.C. Circuit, in a 1995 case, essentially said that it did not understand the Munoz-Flores footnote and thus would not follow it.

The Supreme Court might well hold that Field governs only questions of historical fact, while Munoz-Flores governs questions of constitutional interpretation. In Field, the question was what text passed the two houses of Congress; there was no doubt that only what the two houses passed could be treated as law. Here, by contrast, there will be no dispute about what occurred in the House; the question will be whether using a self-executing rule in this way is consistent with Article I, Section 7. It is one thing for the Supreme Court to defer to Congress on questions of what Congress did, and quite another to defer to Congress on the meaning of the Constitution. Indeed, in United States v. Ballin, decided the same year as Field, the Court ruled, “The Constitution empowers each House to determine its own rules of proceedings. It may not by its rules ignore constitutional restraints . . . .”

One thing is sure: To proceed in this way creates an unnecessary risk that the legislation will be invalidated for violation of Article I, Section 7. Will wavering House members want to use this procedure when there is a nontrivial probability that the courts will render their political sacrifice wasted effort? To hazard that risk, the House leadership must have a powerful motive to avoid a straightforward vote.


Demon Pass might be cut off, but the hazard is reelection.
The hazard is the Cowardice! of those that do not want to go on the record voting for the Obama health scam. The hazard is They Still Do Not Have The Votes.

Enter The Dragon

Update IV: It’s Saturday noon. Um… what we’ve been saying this entire week – They Still Don’t Have The Votes. What’s going on? Obama poll approval still stinking:

“…23% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-four percent (44%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -21. That matches the lowest Approval Index rating yet recorded for this President… Each time the President leads a big push for his health care plan, his job approval ratings suffer… Most voters oppose the proposed Medicare savings and the taxes involved. As a result, most voters continue to oppose the legislation. Just 20% of voters believe that most Members of Congress will understand the proposed health care bill before they vote on it. From a political perspective, 50% are less likely to vote for a Member of Congress who supports the health care reform plan proposed by the President and Congressional Democrats… Overall, 43% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President’s performance. That also matches the lowest level yet recorded for this President. Fifty-six percent (56%) disapprove.”

The Hill still has the “NO” votes at 36. Undecideds are down to 34.

Last night’s crazy-making is still chaos reigning. Reports are that the Stupak deals are all off and his morning press conference will not take place. The quote re Stupak? He is “finished with Pelosi“. Or maybe not. Later reports suggest the press conference has only been canceled and the Stupak people are still talking with Pelousy.

DireFogFakes, the Obama fluffers gone flaccid, have this:

“The path of least resistance remains going around Stupak by peeling off a couple members of his bloc. But this will probably go all day. The Rules Committee has already started their markup, and remember in November, the deal wasn’t made to get a vote on the Stupak amendment until late on the night of the committee hearing.”

They still have the count with the “NO” votes ahead and “Save Obama” votes behind. The kook brigade “Save Obama” nuts who self identify as the “creative class” (we call them “creative clueless”) at Nothing Left are despondent: “Details are murky and confusing, but it now seems that Stupak is the only person in the world who can get a bill through the Senate with neither a fillibuster blocking him, nor recourse to reconciliation. Who knew? This could, of course, blow everything up.

The protests are on. Keep fighting. They still don’t have the votes.

—————————————————————————————-

Update III: They still don’t have the votes. They still don’t have principles. All they have is a scam to sell and Obama to save. The Obama pimp at the Pelousy whorehouse:

“Leadership aides, including those in the Speaker’s office, would not comment, but a senior Democratic aide directly involved in the abortion debate said Pelosi appeared to have agreed to give Stupak a vote on an “enrollment resolution” offered by Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), a key Stupak ally.

Kaptur’s resolution contains the same abortion language that Stupak successfully attached at the 11th hour to the House healthcare bill in November. Were the resolution to pass the House, it would instruct the Senate clerk to change the healthcare bill to reflect Stupak’s more restrictive language to prohibit federal dollars from going toward abortion coverage. [snip]

Stupak has maintained that he has enough votes to kill the healthcare bill, and has threatened to do so unless his demands that his language be included in the eventual healthcare law are met.

Stupak’s threats were real enough in November to force Pelosi to add his language to the House bill at the last minute. That language, which Stupak has said is the only language that upholds the Hyde Amendment, won the votes of 68 Democrats as an amendment to the House bill. [snip]

To that end, one version of the resolution apparently being discussed between Pelosi and Stupak would say that the Senate bill won’t be considered as having passed in the House until the Senate sends a message to the House stating that it has also passed the Stupak resolution, according to a knowledgeable Democratic aide.

But that would seem to be a very heavy lift for the Senate — and possibly even the House — even under the best of circumstances.”

All that skulduggery and – They still don’t have the votes.

“Tense times at the Capitol. Democrats are being called into the Speaker’s office at the eleventh hour for negotiations. Rep. Allyson Schwartz (D., Pa.) just arrived at 10:20 P.M. Regional Medicare reimbursement disparities appears to be the issue. Staffers are on their cell phones, telling their bosses to hustle in.”

Some Republicans/Conservatives are scratching their heads thinking “this makes no sense”. But they are wrong, it makes perfect sense. It all means the pimp Obama and madame Pelousy whorehouse is open and each and every woman is to them just a ho.



—————————————————————————————-

Update II: They still don’t have the votes. Now women of congress are being herded into Pelousy’s office for “let’s make a deal” of your alleged principles. Harry Teague is a “NO”. The definite “NOs” are now 210. The “Save Obama” are at 210 with leaners included. The only way, it appears as of tonight, to pass the Obama scam is to herd women into Pelousy’s office and hit them with a 2×4 – and that is exactly what the PINOs are doing.

“Anti-abortion Democrat Bart Stupak of Michigan is asking for a vote on his language restricting taxpayer funding for abortion, and a group of female abortion rights Democrats came out of an emergency meeting in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office Friday evening visibly angry about the prospect.

Rep. Diana Degette, D-Colorado, told reporters a vote on Stupak’s measure was a “non starter” and said “somewhere between 40 and 55” abortion rights Democrats would bolt from the bill.

“We are holding firm this time,” she insisted.”

Does anyone believe that unprincipled clown or her fellow cave-in clowns?

“Stupak, leaving the Capitol, said that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s willingness to talk to him about his idea shows Democrats “don’t have the votes, or they wouldn’t be talking to me,” he said in an interview with The Hill’s Molly Hooper.

It was not entirely clear how exactly Stupak’s proposal would work. Stupak is reportedly trying to change the abortion language through a procedure called a “concurrent resolution,” but a parliamentarian expert told The Daily Caller that such a move would face huge hurdles.

The House would likely have to pass the Senate bill, and then hold it back from going to the president for his signature while they voted on the concurrent resolution. That resolution would then have to go through the Senate

Nonetheless, Pelosi appeared to be taking the proposal seriously, judging by the reaction from her pro-choice caucus.”

Here is the reaction from the unprincipled clowns who will totally cave-in and prove Stupak is the one with principles and willing to fight for them (even as we disagree with him on the issue he gets our kudos because we like fighters):

“Rep. Diana Degette, Colorado Democrat, emerged clearly agitated from a meeting with Pelosi and other pro-choice members in a room just off the House floor.

She said the Stupak proposal was a “non-starter.”

“Nobody likes this,” she said, claiming that more than 40 pro-choice Democrats would oppose the move.

“If Mr. Stupak and a few members … decide to use this to take health care down, then that loss of health care coverage will be on them,” she said.

Asked if she was willing to vote against the health care bill if Stupak got his way, she said “we are not going to vote for a bill that restricts the woman’s right to choose beyond current law.”

“So you’re willing to take down the health care bill?” the Daily Caller asked.

That’s it! That’s all I’m saying!” she said.

She then added: “I’m not taking any bill down.”

These unprincipled clowns deserve all the contempt and venom we can muster.

—————————————————————————————-

Update: The big news today – Jason Altmire is a “NO”. His reasons:

”I regret that this year-long process of debating health care reform has resulted in a final product that I cannot support. The cost of inaction on health care is great, but it would be an even bigger mistake to pass a bill that could compound the problem of skyrocketing health care costs,” Altmire said in a statement posted on his Web site.

Altmire said the “vast majority” of people in his district oppose the bill.

Particularly hard hit would be western Pennsylvania’s Medicare beneficiaries, which many experts believe would experience dramatic premium increases with enactment of this bill,” Altmire said.

Brad Ellsworth today decided to “Save Obama” and hand the Republicans the Senate seat he announced a run for, after the Evan Bayh resignation. Some speculate this indicates that Pelousy has the votes because there is a secret deal with the pro-life contingent.

The biggest budgetary news however is the late Friday revelation that CBO states:

“…about the total budgetary impact of enacting the reconciliation proposal (the amendment to H.R. 4872), the Senate-passed health bill (H.R. 3590), and the Medicare Physicians Payment Reform Act of 2009 (H.R. 3961). CBO estimates that enacting all three pieces of legislation would add $59 billion to budget deficits over the 2010–2019 period.[snip]

CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3961, by itself, would cost about $208 billion over the 2010–2019 period. (That estimate reflects the enactment of two short-term extension acts, which lowered the cost in 2010 by about $2 billion compared with CBO’s estimate of November 4, 2009.)…

CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3961 together with those two bills would add $59 billion to budget deficits over the 2010–2019 period. That amount is about $10 billion less than the figure that would result from summing the effects of enacting the bills separately. The $10 billion difference occurs primarily because H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation proposal would modify how the government’s payments to Medicare Advantage plans are set.”

—————————————————————————————-

They still don’t have the votes. There is a surplus of publicity stunts and flim flams. But… They still don’t have the votes.

The Barack Obama shoot ’em up, stampede the herd, thus far has not worked.

Enter The Dragon.

“Remember the enemy has only images and illusions, behind which he hides his true motives, destroy the image and you will break the enemy”



They still don’t have the votes. Obama had to postpone his vacation. They still don’t have the votes.

It’s not Big Pink saying “They still don’t have the votes.”

The Hill latest count has “Firm No, Leaning No, Likely No” at 36. The Hill also notes:

“If every member votes and all GOP lawmakers vote no, the maximum number of Democratic defections to pass a bill is 37, which would result in a 216-215 tally.”

The Hill latest count also has 47 Dimocrats as “undecided”. The Obama supporters at DireFogFakes who more and more begin to act as if they had brains also have the “NO” votes (206) leading the “Save Obama” votes (191):

“Lots of information, it’s coming fast and furious now. By the way, of course Democratic leaders say they’re five votes away; that’s been their entire strategy this whole time, to assume inevitability to get people on board. I prefer to count the votes rather than be swayed by anonymous sources.”

Their very latest, count? 195 “Save Obama” votes, 208 “NO” to the scam votes.

And the most pathetic of all, the nuts at NothingLeft? They see the Dragon at Demon Pass too:

“Leaving the he said / she said aside for the moment, Stupak still appears to hold the balance on the bill. He may not have a dozen members anymore, but the vote is so close he doesn’t need that many anymore to sink the bill. [snip]

What this means is that, at least based on public whip counts, there isn’t a clear path to passage at this point without either getting the Stupak group to cave, or caving to the Stupak group. And it isn’t even clear if Democrats could make a deal with Stupak if they wanted to, given both opposition in the Senate, the threat of losing new “no to yes” votes such as Betsy Markey, and the rules on reconciliation generally.”

The “Save Obama” Dimocrats should take a look at the “Obama can’t save himself” polls:

“President Barack Obama’s job approval is the worst of his presidency to date, with 46% of Americans approving and 48% disapproving of the job he is doing as president in the latest Gallup Daily three-day average.

Obama’s approval rating has hovered around 50% since November, but in the last two days has declined to the point that slightly more Americans now disapprove than approve of his performance in office.”

What’s been going on in the last two days that has caused the decline? What could it be?

“The new low ratings come during a week in which the White House and Democratic congressional leaders are working to convince wavering House Democrats to support healthcare reform, which they hope to pass using a series of parliamentary maneuvers in the House of Representatives and Senate.”

Indeed, “Today’s Rasmussen numbers from their daily presidential poll puts Barack Obama into an unusual position. In just 14 months, he has made himself more unpopular than his predecessor, at least by the measure of strong disapproval.”

DireFogFakes, has a “fact sheet” published today which details why “They don’t have the votes” – the bill stinks as much as B.O.:

“We’ve also taken a detailed look at the bill, and have come up with 18 often stated myths about this health care reform bill.

Real health care reform is the thing we’ve fought for from the start. It is desperately needed. But this bill falls short on many levels, and hurts many people more than it helps.

A middle class family of four making $66,370 will be forced to pay $5,243 per year for insurance. After basic necessities, this leaves them with $8,307 in discretionary income — out of which they would have to cover clothing, credit card and other debt, child care and education costs, in addition to $5,882 in annual out-of-pocket medical expenses for which families will be responsible. Many families who are already struggling to get by would be better off saving the $5,243 in insurance costs and paying their medical expenses directly, rather than being forced to by [sic] coverage they can’t afford the co-pays on.”

The “fact sheet” also notes that there will be many legal challenges to the Obama health scam. There are thirty-three states with legislation at various stages to ban the mandate feature of the scam. The “fact sheet” also wisely notes the political implications for November:

“Whether Steny Hoyer believes the legality of the bill will prevail in court or not is moot, it could easily become the “gay marriage” of 2010, with one key difference: there will be no one on the other side passionately opposing it. The GOP is preparing to use it as a massive turn-out vehicle, and it not only threatens representatives in states like Florida, Colorado and Ohio where these challenges will likely be on the ballot — it threatens gubernatorial and down-ticket races as well. Artur Davis, running for governor of Alabama, is already being put on the spot about it.”

And the “fact sheet” focuses on the financial philosophy and financial questions we will address this weekend. The “fact sheet” on the IRS and the official end of the Republic:

“As Marcy Wheeler noted in an important post entitled “Health Care on the Road to NeoFeudalism,we stand on the precipice of doing something truly radical in our government, by demanding that Americans pay almost as much money to private insurance companies as they do in federal taxes:

When this passes, it will become clear that Congress is no longer the sovereign of this nation. Rather, the corporations dictating the laws will be.

I understand the temptation to offer 30 million people health care. What I don’t understand is the nonchalance with which we’re about to fundamentally shift the relationships of governance in doing so.

And it will be the IRS acting as the collector for Big Insurance.

The “fact sheet” counters with a footnoted series of “myths” and mythbusters:

“1. This is a universal health care bill.
The bill is neither universal health care nor universal health insurance.[snip]

2. Insurance companies hate this bill
This bill is almost identical to the plan written by AHIP, the insurance company trade association, in 2009.[snip]

3. The bill will significantly bring down insurance premiums for most Americans.
The bill will not bring down premiums significantly, and certainly not the $2,500/year that the President promised.[snip]

4. The bill will make health care affordable for middle class Americans.
The bill will impose a financial hardship on middle class Americans who will be forced to buy a product that they can’t afford to use.[snip]

5. This plan is similar to the Massachusetts plan, which makes health care affordable.
Many Massachusetts residents forgo health care because they can’t afford it.[snip]

6. This bill provide health care to 31 million people who are currently uninsured.
This bill will mandate that millions of people who are currently uninsured must purchase insurance from private companies, or the IRS will collect up to 2% of their annual income in penalties. [snip]

7. You can keep the insurance you have if you like it.
The excise tax will result in employers switching to plans with higher co-pays and fewer covered services.[snip]

8. The “excise tax” will encourage employers to reduce the scope of health care benefits, and they will pass the savings on to employees in the form of higher wages.
There is insufficient evidence that employers pass savings from reduced benefits on to employees.

9. This bill employs nearly every cost control idea available to bring down costs.
This bill does not bring down costs and leaves out nearly every key cost control measure, including: [snip]

10. The bill will require big companies like WalMart to provide insurance for their employees
The bill was written so that most WalMart employees will qualify for subsidies, and taxpayers will pick up a large portion of the cost of their coverage.

11. The bill “bends the cost curve” on health care.
The bill ignored proven ways to cut health care costs and still leaves 24 million people uninsured, all while slightly raising total annual costs by $234 million in 2019.[snip]

12. The bill will provide immediate access to insurance for Americans who are uninsured because of a pre-existing condition.
Access to the “high risk pool” is limited and the pool is underfunded. It will cover few people, and will run out of money in 2011 or 2012 [snip]

13. The bill prohibits dropping people in individual plans from coverage when they get sick.
The bill does not empower a regulatory body to keep people from being dropped when they’re sick.[snip]

14. The bill ensures consumers have access to an effective internal and external appeals process to challenge new insurance plan decisions.
The “internal appeals process” is in the hands of the insurance companies themselves, and the “external” one is up to each state. [snip]

15. This bill will stop insurance companies from hiking rates 30%-40% per year.
This bill does not limit insurance company rate hikes. Private insurers continue to be exempt from anti-trust laws, and are free to raise rates without fear of competition in many areas of the country.

16. When the bill passes, people will begin receiving benefits under this bill immediately
Most provisions in this bill, such as an end to the ban on pre-existing conditions for adults, do not take effect until 2014.[snip]

17. The bill creates a pathway for single payer.
Bernie Sanders’ provision in the Senate bill does not start until 2017, and does not cover the Department of Labor, so no, it doesn’t create a pathway for single payer.

18 The bill will end medical bankruptcy and provide all Americans with peace of mind.
Most people with medical bankruptcies already have insurance, and out-of-pocket expenses will continue to be a burden on the middle class.”

Republicans are fighting and secretly rejoicing. Some undecided Dimocrats are avoiding calls from Obama.

There will be more publicity stunts and more predictions of victory. On Saturday, Obama will hold yet another “Save Me!” rally publicity/bamboozlement stunt at the White House. But as of now, they don’t have the votes.

Financial numbers will be undercooked, cooked and overcookedbut they are a crock containing poison. The demonstrations against the Obama health scam will continue (another one, this Saturday at noon).

The publicity stunts will continue but it remains to be seen whether the herd can be stampeded. Critical Congressmen such as Altimire have to decide whether they will shatter images and illusions or vote to “Save Obama”. “Save Obama” or “NO” on the Obama health scam.

That is the choice “Save Obama” or “Stop the Obama health scam” which loots the taxpayers.

Enter the Dragon!