I must not view debates like others do

I am all about substance, and not style where politics and campaigns are concerned. Not that I necessarily mind style, it has its place, but that place matters far less to me than do ideology and substance.

In the GOP debates this year, the “consensus” has been that Romney has looked, presidential, and well-informed. To me he has looked robotic, and rehearsed, and less than sincere many times.

Herman Cain, to me, has done well enough, but, frankly, if I hear him say “bold plan” or “9-9-9” once more I will throw something at my TV, frankly, that makes him sound like  used car salesman, not the sincere Conservative he is.

Now, consider Rick Perry, who has had some less than perfect moments in the debates. Yes, but, I have to say, on things that matter, I mean really matter, and sorry, but a brain fart, which all of us have had, likely more than once, does not amount to anything of any import. Frankly, if you are saying Perry is not qualified to be president because of that gaffe, or that his campaign is now doomed, then I would say that you are the one having the mental meltdown, not Perry. And by the way, I would say the very same about any of the candidates who had  a brain fart.

Consider something else about “gaffes” if anyone has gaffed their way out of the race, it is Herman Cain. Don’t think so? How about the Medicare question in his debate with Newt? His going back and forth about abortion? How about the right of return debacle? His contradicting himself on whether States could restrict gun rights? His seeming not to be aware that China has nukes? And of course, the question of whether or not he would negotiate with terrorists? Good grief! Yet, for the most part, Cain seems to be made of Teflon on these. Perry? He gets the big time scrutiny. This makes no sense to me.

So, here it is folks. If you do not support Perry, fine, but at least do it because of differences on issues. Not how he performs in a debate format that is designed, in my view to, select not the best candidate but the best “debater”.

Go listen to some of Perry’s speeches, look at his ideals, his record, his tax and energy plans, and his position on core Conservative values, and then decide. But for goodness sake, do not judge him, or ANY of our candidates on debates, or style points, this election is way to important for that!

Regulation? Big Government? Two things that can KILL YOU!

Resized image of Ritalin-SR-20mg-full.png; squ...
Image via Wikipedia

Stossel lays out the absurdity, and danger of over-regulation

Recently, there have been shortages of some medicines. Cancer patients can’t get drugs they need. Why not?

One reason is that a big drugmaker shut down for a year in part to meet Food and Drug Administration rules. The FDA makes it so expensive and difficult to sell drugs that there isn’t an eager pack of companies rushing to the fill the gap. The free market would provide that, but government intervention, such as low Medicare reimbursement, strangles it. So people suffer.

Does the FDA say it’s sorry for its part and back off? Of course not. Regulators almost never do that. In fact, the FDA wants more power.

It wants to regulate how your doctor uses his smartphone. I’m not kidding! The FDA wants the power to approve mobile medical apps that let doctors monitor patients’ vital signs over their phones. As one doctor put it, “Even though I’m away from the hospital, I can still look at … real-time wave form data just as if I were at the patient’s bedside.”

Sounds great. It makes doctors more efficient. But the FDA basically says, “No, you just can’t put something on your phone if it’s a medical device. What if it doesn’t work right? We have to approve it first.”

Go read it all. This is the inherent failure that any big government program or agency runs into. And then there is waste, fraud, corruption, power hungry bureaucrats, and on and on the list goes. The fact is this the farther removed from the people the power is, the worse things get!

Shocker! Debbie Wasserman Schultz endorses Perry’s tax reform plan

Well, not really. But, by bashing the plan, Schultz makes me think it must be a winner. I mean if a moonbat like her hates it, it has to be good.

Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wassserman Schultz slammed Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry’s tax plan, saying his flat tax proposal would benefit the wealthiest Americans at the expense of the middle class and increase the deficit.

NO! I just cannot believe that she played the benefit the rich card. I think that card is maxed out Debs.

“My reaction to Rick Perry’s new/old plan is that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result,” said Wasserman Schultz on MSNBC Tuesday.

Perry, the Texas governor, laid out a sweeping overhaul to the nation’s tax code, entitlements and way of budgeting Tuesday. He called for an optional 20 percent flat tax, a privatized option for Social Security and a hike in the eligibility age for Social Security and Medicare.

Mark Levin, on the other hand, really likes the Perry plan  The Club for Growth likes it a lot too!

 

Of course, Schultz would call any plan that lessens government controls, and Democratic greed crazy. And face it, Debs is kind of an expert on crazy!

Not just crazy, BATSHIT carzy!

Call Obama’s bluff? YES!

Via Randy. A tremendous piece by Charles Krauthammer exposing Obama’s sudden infatuation with cutting spending as nothing but  BS

President Obama is demanding a big long-term budget deal. He won’t sign anything less, he warns, asking, If not now, when?”
How about last December, when he ignored his own debt commission’s recommendations? How about February, when he presented a budget that increases debt by $10 trillion over the next decade? How about April, when he sought a debt-ceiling increase with zero debt reduction attached?
All of a sudden he’s a born-again budget balancer prepared to bravely take on his own party by making deep cuts in entitlements. Really? Name one. He’s been saying forever that he’s prepared to discuss, engage, converse about entitlement cuts. But never once has he publicly proposed a single structural change to any entitlement.

Obama is hoping, of course, that the American people will forget his past spending orgies. He is hoping that we will be stupid enough to buy his current talk of a “balanced” approach to cutting the debt. Balanced, of course meaning more tax hikes, which Obama and the Dems now call revenues, and meaningless spending cuts.

Hasn’t the White House leaked that he’s prepared to raise the Medicare age or change the cost-of-living calculation?

Anonymous talk is cheap. Leaks are designed to manipulate. Offers are floated and disappear.

Say it, Mr. President. Give us one single structural change in entitlements. In public
Fat chance that will ever happen. Our president is playing politics rather than leading. He is trying to put the Republicans in a box. If they stand up and say Hell No to new taxes, the President can blame them when the debt ceiling expires. If they go along with tax hikes, and the “balanced” approach, they will anger the people who voted them into office, and when those tax hikes hurt the economy, Obama can say the GOP is to blame because they did not vote to “tax the wealthiest” Americans enough.
Krauthammer lays out the plan to call the President on his bluff, and I think it is solid. He calls for the House to pass a short-term debt-ceiling hike $500 billion containing $500 billion in budget cuts. That avoids the “Armageddon” the president insists will happen if a deal is not reached by August 2.He also calls for an urgent negotiations on the tax loopholes he is whining about every five seconds. As I have said before, end those loopholes, and also lower the top tax rate.
Krauthammer suggests a rate of 23%. In other words make Obama put his money where his mouth is. Let America see him for what he is, and at the same time, let America see who is leading and trying to solve our debt problem.

You know how I call Liberalism the Ideology of Convenience?

Well, Matt at Conservative Hideout has a great example of the truth behind that description. Social security was, a few weeks back, in great shape according to the Left. Now, however, when it is politically expedient for Liberals, Social Security is S.O.L.!

The latest case in point came yesterday, when the POTUS announced that Social Security checks might not go out in August unless the GOP sabotages the economy to Obama’s liking

Wait a freaking minute here! I seem to recall that over the last few months, we were consistently told that Social Security and Medicare were so well funded as to be bullet proof.  As Rep. Ryan’s buget plan was rolled out, we were told that Social Security was in great shape, and that Ryan and his GOP cohorts were just trying to kill off all the grannies (like there would be any left after ObamaCare anyway).

Here is what MSNBC had to say about it back in March of this year. 

But skeptics wonder: why pick on Social Security? Since Social Security will be solvent until 2037, why must it be part of any fiscal overhaul now?

Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif., a member of the Bowles-Simpson commission who voted against its recommendations, has accused Republicans of wanting “to raid Social Security to pay for their past failures to balance the books.”

He said Social Security has “$2.6 trillion in reserves dedicated to paying the retirement, disability and survivor benefits that American taxpayers have earned” and that $2.6 trillion “doesn’t add to our deficit.”

How very convenient.

Your Blog of the day is

Adrienne’s Corner

Take a peek at her post on health care costs and tell me it does not smack of common sense and reason.

Somehow, in the past 50 or so years, the entire concept of health insurance has been turned inside out and upside down.  No longer do we insure against a catastrophic event, what was once called a “major medical” policy, but now expect our insurance to pay for hangnails and head colds. 

As a nation, we run to the doctor for the most trivial of reasons because “it’s free.”  This phenomenon is not relegated to the people who are insured through their employer, but includes Medicare recipients also.

A number of years ago, I had a lady friend who was on Medicare.  She had problems with the maintenance of her toenails and so her doctor referred her to a podiatrist.  Every six weeks, she visited the podiatrist to have her nails clipped, not by the doctor, but by an assistant in the office.  Medicare was billed for an office visit and for the clipping of her nails, a procedure that could have been performed by any competent manicurist.  Of course, if she went to manicurist, she would have to pay $5.00 or $10.00 to have her nails clipped.  Why do that when you can get it done for “free.”

Both my husband and I are recent receivers of this abomination called Medicare.  Unlike most recipients, I carefully review the statements for our services.  Just a few weeks ago, my husband had a electrocardiogram performed.  When I saw the amount billed to Medicare, I almost had a stroke.  A relatively simple procedure, the technology of which has long since paid for, cost close to $4,000.00.  A doctor isn’t even required to do the procedure, a technician being sufficient for the job.  Admittedly, a doctor “reads” the results, which were already known to us by the nurse.   What Medicare actually paid the clinic for the procedure is an unknown, but not for long, since I plan on spending some quality time with the billing office to find out this information. 

Take the time to read the whole thing, it is excellent

The worst kind of damned fools indeed!

President Lyndon Johnson foresaw the end of th...
Image via Wikipedia

Milton Wolfe has a great piece up at The Washington Times that deals with Medicare, and the looming disaster that Obamacare will be. Read the whole thing, but I found this snippet the most telling

America somehow managed to survive for 189 years without Medicare or Medicaid and, in fact, became the greatest nation in the history of humankind. Established in 1965 – a mere 46 years ago – too many politicians today lack the perspective to understand this health care altar at which they worship. Instead of reforming the system to align it with American values, they abuse it as an eternal source of giveaways to buy votes. As for the politicians of the 1960s, except for the mop tops and go-go boots, they were very much like the politicians of today: They made a lot of empty promises.

President Lyndon B. Johnson promised that Medicare would cost about $500 million a year – yes, million. He even said that if costs went higher, then he was going to look like the “worst kind of damn fool.” Just a year later, in 1966, the House Ways and Means Committee estimated that Medicare would cost about $12 billion a year by 1990. The actual 1990 cost was $107 billion – off by an order of magnitude but close enough for government work. And that’s when costs really took off. By 2008, annual costs hit $599 billion and the program for the first time went into deficit-spending mode.

For all the Democrats’ dishonesty and reckless spending, Republicans weren’t exactly blameless either. In 2003, President George W. Bush and a Republican Congress doubled down and ushered in the largest expansion in Medicare history with their senior citizen prescription drug entitlement program. They claimed the price tag would be $400 billion for the first decade but quietly adjusted that estimate upward to $534 billion just one month after passage.

Simply unbelievable isn’t it? The depth of incompetence is staggering o the mind. And again, this is Medicare that is such a disaster, how bad will the much larger Obamacare be? God help us

POH Diaries earns coveted Blog of the Month honor

Paul Ryan (politician)
Image via Wikipedia

Great work being done at POH Diaries, work like this

The House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly not to increase the debt limit. 318-97 was the final tally with 82 Democrats breaking ranks and helping the GOP vote it down.

From CNN:

The question of how to control the explosive growth in popular entitlements may be the most critical question in the current debate over Washington’s fiscal health. Leaders from both parties agree that some kind of change is necessary in Medicare in particular, but differ sharply on scope and shape.

Exactly. Democrats want more of the same. Spending the country into oblivion while avoiding the hard choices that could, could threaten their power. Republicans, for the most part, are listening to the people who put them in power and are taking serious steps to contain out of control spending. They still need a little nudging into Paul Ryan’s direction on Medicare, but, baby steps, I guess.

Wait did that post say HAMMER TIME? I wonder if this dance is going on over at POH?

Wow! Yet another Democrat singing the praises of “Death panels”

Charles Schumer, United States Senator from Ne...
Image via Wikipedia

This time it is Chucky Schummer!

Republicans need to come up with their own “throw granny off the cliff” ad. They could use an Obama lookalike, for cutting $500 billion from medicare to pay for ObamaCARE. Or they can use Schmuck Charles Schumer who advocated on NBC today (and as usual got a free pass) rationing health care for sick senior citizens. According to CNSNEWS, Schumer proposed a reform that would ration health care for sick seniors by telling doctors the Medicare system would pay them a single flat fee for treating a particular illness as opposed to paying for the specific services needed to treat a particular patient. Aka, a one size fits all system. The system proposed by Schumer would give health-care providers a financial incentive to withhold care from sick seniors because each and every service or treatment they provided would cut into their profit margin–or cause them to lose money. Where’s the media outrage? Oh that’s right. schmucky Schumer is of course a far left Marxist Democrat, so the media has no problem with this.

Left Wing compassion! A video preview, obviously Schummer approved~!

Next stop for Newt? Late night infommercials hawking the Newt-O-Matic vacuum cleaner

Hey, buy a Newt-O-Matic for the ex wives you scrwewed over

It would be a great fit, given that Newt’s campaign strategy has such major league suckage. Picture this, You are up late, and there on your TV is Newt himself, pushing his latest creation the Newt-O-Matic! It will suck the dirt out of your carpet as fast as he sucked the life out of his campaign he tells you. And, as an added bonus, if you call in the next 30 minutes, he will throw in the Dede Scozzafavaapproved RINO-knife, stainless steel, it never needs sharpening, and it is perfect for stabbing your political party in the back.

Some folks insist that those of us piling on Newt are going too far, and should stop. I would say that is a bunch of hooey, Clifton, it seems agrees

If you ever wanted to know how to lose a presidential campaign before it has even begun, look no further than Newt Gingrich. The GOP primaries have not even begun and Newt Gingrich has basically imploded before he has even started to seriously campaign.

Before even announcing his candidacy Gingrich inflicted several wounds upon himself.  First, there was that nonsense about shrugging off conservative purists. Then there was his pig-headed support of uber RINO Dede Scozzafava.  Finally, the was his asinine excuse for his infidelity.

If that was not enough to sink his ship, Newt has decided that more damage was in order and has now inflicted his most fatal wound with his brain-dead comment about Paul Ryan’s plan for Medicare being social engineering.

See what happens when a grown man allows people to call him Newt?

Social Security And Medicare In Even Worse Shape Than Previously Thought

Social Security And Medicare In Even Worse Shape Than Previously Thought –

Social Security and Medicare Trustees Friday issued their annual report on the financial future of the two entitlement programs. The prognosis isn’t good, and, in fact, is even worse than was reported just one year ago.

According to the report, Social Security is now permanently cash negative and can no longer be funded solely from the payroll tax. It is projected to exhaust funds in 2036 — one year earlier than the report predicted last year.

Medicare isn’t faring any better. The trustees expect the fund to run out of money in 2024, and not 2029 as was previously expected. For the sixth year in a row, the trustees also, made an “excess general revenue Medicare funding” determination.

It only requires two consecutive determinations before the president is required to submit a legislative proposal to deal with the funding crisis within 15 day of his next budget.

“Today’s news that Social Security and Medicare will become insolvent even sooner than expected is a sobering wake up call and makes clear we must take action now to avoid catastrophe. Washington has no excuse. We have known for years this was coming.”

Social Security and Medicare have been front-and-center in recent months as lawmakers battle over the budget and which areas to cut spending. Those discussions were put into overdrive this week as debate about raising the debt ceiling heated up and lawmakers met at the White House for budget talks.

In a speech in New York Monday night, Speaker of the House John Boehner said that a vote to raise the debt ceiling would require “trillions” of dollars worth in spending cuts, suggesting that entitlement programs would be on the table.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell came out Thursday night saying that he would not vote to raise the debt limit without significant cuts and revisions to programs like Medicare.

McConnell did say, however, that changes to Social Security are likely to be off the table when it comes to the debt ceiling, despite its dire finances.

“I would love for Social Security to be a part of it,” he said. “The president can speak for himself, but I think he’s not interested in doing Social Security without raising taxes. We don’t think that’s necessary.”

In his statement, Sessions continued to hound the Democrats for budget proposal. “It has been 744 days since the Democrat-led Senate has passed a budget,” he said. “If the Senate goes another year without passing a budget it would be a national scandal.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

Susan Collins is still a gutless RINO

One of the keys to getting our country back on a sane fiscal course is to get RINOs out of office! Susan Collins is a prime example of a RINO that we have to replace with a real Republican.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine.) said Friday that she will not support the 2012 budget passed by the House last week.

“I don’t happen to support Congressman Ryan’s plan but at least he had the courage to put forth a plan to significantly reduce the debt,” Collins said on “In the Arena” a program on WCSH 6, a local NBC affiliate in Portland, Maine.

In fairness Collins did give credit to Ryan for doing what President Bambi does not have the fortitude to do, that is to TRY!

“The president has yet to come up with a detailed plan,” Collins said. “At least Ryan had the courage to come out with a detailed plan

It is just too bad Collins does not support a real plan to help reign in government spending!

H/T Weasel Zippers

Now the Left begins their defense of those non-existent “death panels”

Cue Cynthia Tucker of the Atlanta Journal Constitution

I don’t mean to sound cavalier about the needs of the elderly, who tend to be sicker and have higher medical expenses. Obama was right to pledge to protect Medicare against the predations of U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-), who wants to end it.

But an adult conversation — a truly adult conversation — would engage seniors and help them to understand the consequences of our current spending curve. In nations that suffer famine, we hear wrenching stories of starving parents who give the last scraps of food to their children. We’ve taken a starve-the-kids, feed-the-old approach, instead.

While too many children are stuck in bad schools and poor housing, while community clinics that deliver vaccinations and asthma medicine beg for money, while young adults skip college because they can’t afford it, the elderly were given a budget-busting prescription drug plan during the Bush administration. That makes little sense.

If resources are limited (and they are), the nation needs to make choices – some more painful than others. My brother, Kevin, a Boston physician who treats kidney disease, talks about the Medicare program that pays for dialysis for anyone with failing kidneys — including the terminally ill. Started in the 1970s to help adults still in the workforce, its fastest-growing population is now over 65, he said.  And it costs tens of billions a year.

“It may not be the best use of resources for the frail and infirm elderly, and it also forces many elderly patients to spend their last days in the hospital, rather than at home,” a more comfortable setting, Kevin told me.

Check out how Tucker closes her column

But we simply don’t have the money to spend to prolong the life of a terminally ill 87-year-old for a few weeks.

Wow, just wow. And remember this is EXACTLY what people like tucker insisted could NEVER HAPPEN under ObamaCare!

(AJC) — At long last, a few responsible Republicans are chastising their conservative colleagues for the distortions, exaggerations and outright lies they have used to denounce healthcare reform. (It’s too bad that Georgia Sen. Johnny Isakson, usually a thoughtful and fairminded man, cannot be counted in that number. But, according to my colleague Jay Bookman, he can’t.)

The Anchorage Daily News reported that Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski spoke at a public policy forum in Anchorage yesterday, where she rebuked the “deathers,” such as former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who have insisted that “death panels” would be created to decide whether to euthanize the elderly and the handicapped.

The newspaper quoted Murkowski this way: “It does us no good to incite fear in people by saying that there’s these end-of-life provisions, these death panels. Quite honestly, I’m so offended at that terminology because it absolutely isn’t (in the bill). There is no reason to gin up fear in the American public by saying things that are not included in the bill.”

It’s reassuring to know there are a few Republicans who are still willing to act as the loyal and honest opposition. None of the bills working there way through Congress are perfect; there is certainly legitimate criticism. Why not stick with that?

Again, the Left shows its true colors!

Now THAT is cutting the budget!

I have to say, this Paul Ryan chap is looking like a winner! I mean when he talks about budget cuts, he means business!

The Republicans have recently come under fire by conservative voters–myself included–for what is perceived as their mishandling of the current budget negotiations after having failed to live up to their proposal to cut $100 billion in spending from the current budget, but are the Republicans finally beginning to get serious about this issue? While the current budget negotiations are underway Paul Ryan is working on a budget for the next fiscal year which he is set to unveil on Tuesday. This budget would include a cut in federal spending of $4 trillion over the next decade. The details are still not available, but here is what we know so far:

A “premium support system” for Medicare. In the future, older people would choose plans in the marketplace and the government would subsidize those plans. Ryan said that would differ from the voucher system he has proposed in the past. Those 55 and older would remain under the present Medicare system. Ryan acknowledged that the “premium support system” would shift more costs to Medicare recipients, especially what he called “wealthy seniors.” He did not define at what level someone would be considered wealthy.

-Block grants to states for Medicaid, the health program for the poor. Ryan disputed reports that the plan would seek savings of $1 trillion over 10 years from Medicaid, but would say only that the details would be in the plan.”Medicare and Medicaid spending will go up every single year under our budget. They don’t just go up as much as they’re going right now,” he said. Ryan said governors have told members of Congress they want “the freedom to customize our Medicaid programs. … We want to get governors freedom to do that.”

-A statutory cap on actual discretionary spending as a percentage of the economy. While Ryan did not specify the amount during the interview, he said it would be at a lower level than proposed by Obama and would return the government to its “historic size.”

-Pro-growth tax changes, including lower tax rates and broadening the tax base. Ryan said overhauling taxes would boost the economy. The plan will not propose tax increases.

Well, I will need to see the proposal, but, I like the sound of that number! Sounds like someone IS dead serious about getting a handle on America’s fiscal insanity. The Mind Numbed Robot is liking this too

Fortitude.

…as in testicular fortitude.

As used by R.S. McCain to accurately describe Rep. Paul Ryan, who announced the first real plan to cut government’s wasteful spending.

Stacy McCain likes Ryan’s, er, he admires Ryan’s, ummm guts, yeah, that’s it!

The gentleman from Wisconsin steps up:

The Republican chairman of the House Budget Committee said his party’s budget proposal for 2012 would cut deficits by more than $4 trillion over the next decade, vowing to tackle costly entitlements like Medicare and Medicaid.
The proposal, set to be unveiled Tuesday, would serve as the Republicans’ official response to President Obama’s proposed $3.7 trillion budget for 2012. The White House claims its plan would cut deficits by $1.1 trillion over a decade.
But Ryan, R-Wis., in an interview with “Fox News Sunday,” accused Obama of “punting” and said Republicans’ plan would exceed the fiscal goals set by the president’s fiscal commission — which issued a report calling for $4 trillion in cuts. That report never made it out of committee.
“We can’t keep kicking this can down the road,” Ryan said. “The president has punted. We’re not going to follow suit.”

The Beltway spin on this: By proposing large cuts for the fiscal 2012 budget, Ryan’s plan gives House Republicans political “cover” if negotiations over the remainder of the fiscal 2011 budget require them to accept smaller levels of cuts for the current year.

I could care less about buying the GOP “cover” that is fine, but the meat here is that finally, a Republican leader is ACTING like a leader in a major way! No BS, no nibbling at the debt, no dancing, no prancing, or playing games. Paul Ryan has come out swinging for the fences, he has come out, let me say it again, LEADING! You want to get the GOP base fired up? Propose budget cuts that actually cut something.

Representative Paul Ryan, a mastermind on economics and budgetary issues, was on Fox News Sunday declaring that Republicans will lead when it comes to the 2012 budget.

Unlike President Obama and the Democrats who are missing in action, Ryan will release a 2012 budget proposal that will greatly reduce federal spending by tackling Medicare and Medicaid.

Ryan said it’s ironic that President Obama will relaunch his reelection campaign on the week that Republicans are trying to get Democrats to debate budgetary issues and get us out of the debt crisis looming in the horizon.

This Tuesday, Ryan will lay out his budget which will include more than $4 trillion in spending cuts over the next decade. Leading where Obama and the Democrats won’t.

Transcript via The Hill:

“Where the president has failed to lead, we’re going to lead and we’re going to put out ideas to fix this problem,” Ryan said.

“Democrats could use the plan as a “political weapon,” Ryan said.

“We are giving them a political weapon to go out against us, but they will have to lie and demagogue to make that a political weapon. They are going to demagogue us, and it’s that demagoguery that has always prevented political leaders in the past from actually trying to fix the problem. We can’t keep kicking this can down the road.”

He added, “Shame on them if they do that.”

They will demagogue, he knows it, I know it, you know it. But, consider that they have been doing the Democratic Dance of Demagogue and Doom like the Devil over the paltry cuts proposed so far. Harry Reid and his cohorts would bitch if Ryan suggested we cut five bucks of spending. Let them take that bag of BS to the American people if they choose to

The ultimate danger of government entitlements?

The battleground of Wisconsin has been, and continues to be an amazing example of where so-called entitlement programs lead. Some government programs, like Social Security and Medicare were designed to help people. Yet, they have become a model of the failure of Socialism. Both programs are deeply in the red, and are unsustainable, yet millions of Americans are dependent on them, and any effort to seriously address fixing them is fraught with such political dangers that no politician dares to even contemplate such actions.

These “entitlement programs”, started in the name of helping people in need, have actually enslaved many of us. On one hand we can see these programs will collapse, likely sooner rather than later, yet we are too afraid to attempt a fix for them, so we are stuck in a vicious cycle, clinging to failing programs. Liberal Democrats love such programs because they are convinced that all solutions for all problems must come from Washington DC. They love that millions and million of us are hooked on the crack of entitlements. The more Americans dependent on entitlements, the more power the Democrats wield. And let us face facts, if you think Social Security or Medicare are powerful drugs, just wait until ObamaCare becomes rooted in American’s lives. It will be the mother of all entitlements!

Of course, the battles in Wisconsin, as well as other sates between public employee unions and governors trying to right the fiscal ships of their state governments involves a different type of entitlement. The benefit packages that many government employees enjoy have become, like Social Security and Medicare, unsustainable in many states. Governors, like Scott Walker of Wisconsin, have, in an effort to rein in the fiscal insanity of their state budgets, asked public employees to pay for a bit more of their benefits. the reaction from the public employees unions has been, well, a bit like a vampire’s reaction to sunlight.

You see, these public employees are looking at their benefits as if they are, “entitled” to them. As if they are OWED them. Never mind that they pay far less than private sector employees for health care and other benefits. Forget that they are being asked to pay very small amounts of their salaries to help offset the costs of these benefits. Forget too that they will likely lose their jobs if they do not help address the desperate need to cut government costs in their states. Forget it all because they are, say it with me, ENTITLED! And when a governor, or a state legislature reminds them of the limits of entitlements? What happens then? Apparently some are willing to kill to keep what they feel they are entitled to.

The union backers are getting uglier. Now, they are straight out threatening to put bullets in the heads of Wisconsin Republicans:

From: XXXX
Sent: Wed 3/9/2011 9:18 PM
To: Sen.Kapanke; Sen.Darling; Sen.Cowles; Sen.Ellis; Sen.Fitzgerald; Sen.Galloway; Sen.Grothman; Sen.Harsdorf; Sen.Hopper; Sen.Kedzie; Sen.Lasee; Sen.Lazich; Sen.Leibham; Sen.Moulton; Sen.Olsen
Subject: Atten: Death threat!!!! Bomb!!!!

Please put your things in order because you will be killed and your familes
will also be killed due to your actions in the last 8 weeks. Please explain
to them that this is because if we get rid of you and your families then it
will save the rights of 300,000 people and also be able to close the deficit
that you have created. I hope you have a good time in hell. Read below for
more information on possible scenarios in which you will die.

WE want to make this perfectly clear. Because of your actions today and in
the past couple of weeks I and the group of people that are working with me
have decided that we’ve had enough. We feel that you and the people that
support the dictator have to die. We have tried many other ways of dealing
with your corruption but you have taken things too far and we will not stand
for it any longer. So, this is how it’s going to happen: I as well as many
others know where you and your family live, it’s a matter of public records.
We have all planned to assult you by arriving at your house and putting a
nice little bullet in your head. However, we decided that we wouldn’t leave
it there. We also have decided that this may not be enough to send the
message to you since you are so “high” on Koch and have decided that you are
now going to single handedly make this a dictatorship instead of a
demorcratic process. So we have also built several bombs that we have placed
in various locations around the areas in which we know that you frequent.
This includes, your house, your car, the state capitol, and well I won’t
tell you all of them because that’s just no fun. Since we know that you are
not smart enough to figure out why this is happening to you we have decided
to make it perfectly clear to you. If you and your goonies feel that it’s
necessary to strip the rights of 300,000 people and ruin their lives, making
them unable to feed, clothe, and provide the necessities to their families
and themselves then We Will “get rid of” (in which I mean kill) you. Please
understand that this does not include the heroic Rep. Senator that risked
everything to go aganist what you and your goonies wanted him to do. We feel
that it’s worth our lives to do this, because we would be saving the lives
of 300,000 people. Please make your peace with God as soon as possible and
say goodbye to your loved ones we will not wait any longer. YOU WILL DIE!!!!

Again, recall that these people are not being asked to take a pay cut, they are not being laid off, no. They are merely being asked to have their benefits reduced a bit so they will NOT BE FIRED or laid off! But, I suppose that some folks take the entitlement mentality to extremes don’t they? And that, my friends is the ultimate danger when government starts “entitling” Americans isn’t it? What happens when those entitlements are cut, or limited? Wisconsin offers us a glimpse!

SHOCKER! Even more suckage found in ObamaCare!

The more we know, the more we are sickened!

WEEKLY STANDARD: Obamacare Ends Construction of Doctor-Owned Hospitals.

Under the headline, “Construction Stops at Physician Hospitals,” Politico reports today that “Physician Hospitals of America says that construction had to stop at 45 hospitals nationwide or they would not be able to bill Medicare for treatments.” Stopping construction at doctor-owned hospitals might not seem like the best way to boost the economy or to promote greater access and choice in health care, but that exactly what Obamacare is doing.

Kenneth Artz of the Heartland Institute explains, “Section 6001 of the health care law effectively bans new physician-owned hospitals (POHs) from starting up, and it keeps existing ones from expanding.” Politico adds, “Friday [New Year’s Eve] marked the last day physician-owned hospitals could get Medicare certification covering their new or expanded hospitals, one of the latest provisions of the reform law to go into effect.”

H’T to Wolf Files. No wonder more and more Americans want this abomination repealed! And thankfully, one political party is LISTENING!

House Republicans are wasting no time making good on their campaign pledge to repeal President Barack Obama’s health care reform law: Floor debate on repeal will begin Friday, with a final vote scheduled for Jan. 12.

Speaker-designate John Boehner (Ohio) and other House GOP leaders made repeal of the health care law a key component of their successful 2010 campaign to capture control of the House. The Members of the 112th Congress will be sworn in Wednesday.

Republicans were expected to post the repeal bill, dubbed the Repeal of the Job Killing Health Care Law Act, on the Rules Committee’s website Monday night, and the committee will consider the measure Thursday. The legislation will be a simple repeal of the entire health care law, which Obama signed in March 2010.

Once more, it was democrats that said “screw the people” and it is Republicans that are trying to serve the people.

Rep. Steve King (R.-Iowa) says that House Republicans should include language that prohibits any funding for implementation of Obamacare in literally every appropriations bill that passes the House of Representatives this year, thus forcing a showdown on the issue with the Democratic majority Senate and President Barack Obama. “Somebody’s going to blink,” King told CNSNews.com. “It’ll be President Obama or it’ll be House Republicans.

“If House Republicans refuse to blink, we will succeed,” said King in videotaped interview. “ObamaCare will never become the effective law of the land and we’ll be able to leave a legacy of liberty for the future generations.”

So consider this my Liberal readers. It is Liberals that are fond of saying things like “power to the people”. So why do you continue to support a political party that IGNORED the PEOPLE, and passed ObamaCare DESPITE the will of the people? The Republicans are trying to DO the will of the people by repealing ObamaCare, isn’t that the party that is far more supportive of “power to the people”?

Dumber than a box of hammers?

Hey, I did not say the American people, at least 61% of them would lose a game of Trivial Pursuit with a box of hammers did I? No, Chris at Wyblog did, although, I must say he has a great point!

61% of Americans are dumber than a box of hammers.

That’s the only conclusion I can draw from a 60 Minutes/Vanity Fair poll released on Monday.

Sixty-one percent of Americans polled would rather see taxes for the wealthy increased as a first step to tackling the deficit, the poll showed.

Alternative conclusion — the people at 60 Minutes and Vanity Fair have a congenital case of cranial-rectal syndrome.

Take your pick.

But wait, I hear you cry. The rich need to pay their fair share!

Let’s see now. The top 1% of all income earners in the U.S. pay 40.4% of the total taxes collected.

In contrast, 36% of all Americans filing tax returns pay absolutely nothing into the system. Even worse, a typical married couple filing a joint return can now make over $50,000 with two children and pay zero in federal income tax.

How? Refundable tax credits, that’s how. The 2010 earned income credit is as high as $5,666 for taxpayers with three or more qualifying children. This is in addition to the $1,000 per child tax credit. That’s $8,666 which comes out of some rich guy’s pocket only to be redistributed to someone else.

There’s a word for a person who does that sort of thing without the imprimateur of a government program — thief.

Unfortunately there are all too many thieves out there, chomping at the bit to tell 60 Minutes and Vanity Fair how much they love that Robin Hood fellow.

This is an excellent post, and please go read it all, Chris even  quotes a man, who, although long passed, is still smarter than every Liberal living today, put together!

“When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”
— Benjamin Franklin

The latest thing about ObamaCare that will make you say OH SHIT!

Soon to be EX Speaker Face Lift told us we had to pass the bill to see what was in it didn’t she? YUP, and since it passed there have been lots of OH SHIT moments!

It’s very easy for Obamacare supporters to scoff at the whole idea that there are “death panels” ensconced in Obama’s health care power grab. But the fact of the matter is that they exist in a defacto form. One of those defacto death panels is the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), an agency invented under Obamacare that has no congressional oversight and will be able to summarily cancel your drug prescriptions as paid for by Medicare.

The IPAB is not well known by Americans, but it is a 15-member board appointed by the president and while members are confirmed by the Senate, the board is not otherwise answerable to anyone but the president. As to its duties, this board was given the responsibility to put a spending cap on Medicare. One way that the IPAB intends to do that is to decide what drugs are cost effective enough for government to pay for.

In other words, the IPAB will decide whether or not Medicare patients will be allowed to have a drug and its decision to eliminate the drug will be based solely on cost, not effectiveness or medical necessity. These decisions will also not be made with your doctor. It will be a top down, bureaucratic decision, not a decision based on medical science.

If the government decides that your lifesaving drug is too expensive, then you simply won’t be allowed to have it. How is that not a “death panel”? Can anyone see a meaningful difference between a “death panel” and the IPAB’s powers?

Read the whole thing folks, this is scary, and this is the very thing we all knew this bill would do! That is why most Americans were, and are vehemently opposed to this bill, or any other “comprehensive” health care bill. We fear granting the government such power. Sarah Palin, and anyone else who raised fears of death panels was ripped by the media as a fear monger or a nut. Yet, many aspects of this bill scream death panels!

You do not have to be a complete idiot to think like Thomas Friedman, but, it helps

Good freaking grief, if you wanted a perfect example of someone educated beyond their hat size, it would be Friedman as Noel Sheppard points out

Consider that after the impact the Tea Party has had on our nation’s politics the past 20 months, and the historic elections that just took place on November 2, Times columnist Tom Friedman actually thinks Americans aren’t interested in reducing the federal deficit but are instead yearning for higher taxes and greater government spending:

I believe most Americans don’t want a plan for deficit reduction. The Tea Party’s vision is narrow and uninspired. Americans want a plan to make America great again, and at some level they know that such a plan will require a hybrid politics — one that blends elements of both party’s instincts. And they will follow a president — they would even pay more taxes and give up more services — if they think he really has a plan to make America great again, not just bring him victory in 2012 by 50.1 percent.

The Tea Party’s vision is uninspired? Friedman ought to get out of 620 Eighth Avenue and talk to some Democrats that’ll be leaving Washington, D.C., when the new Congress gets sworn in next year.

What Americans on November 2 clearly said was uninspired are the tired and worn out policies of Obama, Pelosi, and Reid that are mortgaging the future of this nation on the backs of generations not yet having a say in how their money is being spent.

But missing this was just the beginning of Friedman’s myopia for he then rattled off what he considers solutions: 

We need to raise gasoline and carbon taxes to discourage their use and drive the creation of a new clean energy industry, while we cut payroll and corporate taxes to encourage employment and domestic investment. We need to cut Medicare and Social Security entitlements at the same time as we make new investments in infrastructure, schools and government-financed research programs that will spawn the next Google and Intel. 

How desperate is Harry Reid?

Well, he has now accused Sharron Angle of being against the freeing of the slaves

HARRY REID: “She wants to abolish social security, get rid of Medicare, she believes it’s unconstitutional, do away with the Department of Education, Department of Energy. She thinks that all Presidential proclamations — executive orders are unconstitutional – like the Emancipation Proclamation.”

I think we can now agree that Reid’s political future is”shovel ready”!