Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Nationalized Health Care’

Wonder what you would find if you frisked Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius?

Answer: She believes health insurance is similar to buying televisions.

Huh?

CNS News reports:

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius defended the new health care law’s mandate requiring people to purchase insurance, comparing the buying of health insurance to buying televisions.

People access health care regardless of whether they have insurance, said Sebelius on Friday. “What they’re choosing not to do is actually pay for those services,” she said.

“[I]f I don’t have a 27-inch TV for the Super Bowl, I can’t demand on the day of the Super Bowl that somebody deliver that TV because I have a right to it. On the other hand, if I don’t have insurance, I come through the door of an emergency room and get treated and get cared for, and somebody else picks up the tab,” said Sebelius.

Very interesting… I have heard the Obama administration (including Ms. Sebelius) and other liberals compare health insurance to auto insurance, but that argument has been debunked numerous times.

Buying TV’s? Really? Now they are just getting desperate.

Side-Note: A Florida judge could declare Obamacare unconstitutional today. If so, it will definitely cure my case of the Mondays.

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked the Associated Press after they actually took a look at President Obama’s socialized health-care bill?

Answer: They finally admitted that Obama-Care will increase the nation’s health-care costs.

Talk about showing up late to a party…

The Associated Press FINALLY reports:

President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul law will increase the nation’s health care tab instead of bringing costs down, government economic forecasters concluded Thursday in a sobering assessment of the sweeping legislation.

A report by economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department said the health care remake will achieve Obama’s aim of expanding health insurance — adding 34 million Americans to the coverage rolls.

But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president’s twin goal of controlling runaway costs, raising projected spending by about 1 percent over 10 years. That increase could get bigger, however, since the report also warned that Medicare cuts in the law may be unrealistic and unsustainable, forcing lawmakers to roll them back.

The mixed verdict for Obama’s signature issue is the first comprehensive look by neutral experts.

Objective journalism at its best folks! We are finally starting to get the truth… Of course it’s only after the bill was signed into law.

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked President Obama’s socialized health-care reform bill… for the gazzillionth time?

Answer: It may have accidentally stripped Congress of health coverage!

HAHA! 😆 Oops!

The New York Times reports (I know… I’m surprised too):

[…] the law may “remove members of Congress and Congressional staff” from their current coverage, in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, before any alternatives are available.

[…]

The law apparently bars members of Congress from the federal employees health program, on the assumption that lawmakers should join many of their constituents in getting coverage through new state-based markets known as insurance exchanges.

But the research service found that this provision was written in an imprecise, confusing way, so it is not clear when it takes effect.

The new exchanges do not have to be in operation until 2014. But because of a possible “drafting error,” the report says, Congress did not specify an effective date for the section excluding lawmakers from the existing program.

Under well-established canons of statutory interpretation, the report said, “a law takes effect on the date of its enactment” unless Congress clearly specifies otherwise. And Congress did not specify any other effective date for this part of the health care law. The law was enacted when President Obama signed it three weeks ago.

The unintended consequences of this enormous health-care bill was inevitable. Unfortunately, the corrupt liberal mainstream media decided to report on what’s actually in the bill after the massive government expansion/entitlement passed.

Excellent point by the NYT: “If they did not know exactly what they were doing to themselves, did lawmakers who wrote and passed the bill fully grasp the details of how it would influence the lives of other Americans?” Hmm… That is a good question and like I said above, it would have been nice if they decided to do their jobs as journalists beforehand.

Could this be more reason to repeal this monstrosity called “Obama-Care”? I think I will go ahead and label this another EPIC FAIL created by the Democratic Party. Not looking good… They have been on a roll lately!

Reminder: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said we’d have to pass the bill so that people could find out what’s in it. Apparently, she didn’t read this P.O.S. during the year long health-care debate. Vote her out!

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked the number of states that decided to sue the federal government over Obama-Care’s enforcement of the individual mandate?

Answer: The count has now reached 18 states!

Ut oh liberals… The momentum is building!

Reuters reports:

The joint lawsuit led by Florida and now grouping 18 states was filed on March 23 by mostly Republican attorney generals.

It claims the sweeping reform of the $2.5 trillion U.S. healthcare system, pushed through by Democrats in the Congress after months of bitter partisan fighting, violates state-government rights in the U.S. Constitution and will force massive new spending on hard-pressed state governments.

[…]

South Carolina, Nebraska, Texas, Utah, Louisiana, Alabama, Colorado, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Washington, Idaho, and South Dakota had previously joined Florida’s lawsuit.

[…]

“We welcome the partnership of Indiana, North Dakota, Mississippi, Nevada and Arizona as we continue fighting to protect the constitutional rights of American citizens and the sovereignty of our states,” Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum said.

Of course the Obama Administration is trying to make this seem like a gigantic Republican political stunt, but Ed Morrissey – from Hot Air – thinks quite differently:

At the very least, more than a third of the states see a fundamental interest in stopping Washington from encroaching on their sovereignty, which makes this a bit more than a campaign stunt.

Hmm… What state will be next to join the lawsuit?

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked President Obama’s socialized health-care reform bill… for the 1,000,001th time?

Answer: Young adults will see a 17 percent increase in their premiums under Obama-Care.

Congratulations college students and young adults! Give yourself a big ol’ pat on the back, because you just screwed yourselves…

The Associated Press (of all media outlets – again) reports:

Under the health care overhaul, young adults who buy their own insurance will carry a heavier burden of the medical costs of older Americans — a shift expected to raise insurance premiums for young people when the plan takes full effect.

Beginning in 2014, most Americans will be required to buy insurance or pay a tax penalty. That’s when premiums for young adults seeking coverage on the individual market would likely climb by 17 percent on average, or roughly $42 a month, according to an analysis of the plan conducted for The Associated Press. The analysis did not factor in tax credits to help offset the increase.

The higher costs will pinch many people in their 20s and early 30s who are struggling to start or advance their careers with the highest unemployment rate in 26 years.

Awesome, huh? 🙄

Question for those college kids who got swept up in Obama-Mania and decided to vote for him in the 2008 election: This is one hell of a way to repay you for all your support, huh?

I’ll just let the information above soak in while your subconscious calls you an idiot…

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked President Obama’s socialized health-care reform bill… for the millionth time?

Answer: Under Obama-Care, we’re likely to see retirees’ prescription drug coverage dropped.

Dang! The Democrats are on a roll with their new health-care bill! All of the hidden positives are flying out of its 2,000+ pages, aren’t they? Wait a minute… No they’re not.

The Associated Press (of all media outlets) reports:

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.

Politicians… They never seem to understand that unintended consequences will definitely occur when you overhaul 1/6th of the U.S. economy with a health-care bill the size of Mt. Everest! At least private companies warned the Democrats about the possibilities of this dilemma:

Industry groups say they lobbied hard against the change in the tax rules before it was added to the health care law over the winter.

“It was in all of our letters and communications that went up to the Hill, and the companies were heavily involved in that,” said Dena Battle, a tax specialist with the National Association of Manufacturers.

[…]

The companies that signed the December letter warned that changing the way retiree drug benefits are subsidized would have a broad impact on the economy, and there are already indications that the effects will trickle down to individuals.

Bravo! Good job Democrats! 🙄 Yeah… That whole “collecting $5.4 billion in revenue by eliminating the tax break enacted in the 2003 Medicare Part D program as an incentive for businesses to keep their retirees out of the Medicare system” thing… Unfortunately, I don’t think it is going to workout the way you hoped. Great, more burden on the taxpayer!

Hope-and-change right? Pff…

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Rep. John Dingell (D-MI)

Wonder what you would find if you frisked the interview between Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) and WJR’s Paul W. Smith?

Answer: According to Rep. Dingell, it will take awhile for Obama-Care to “control people.”

If you don’t want to listen to the sound clip posted above, here’s the transcript:

Let me remind you this [Americans allegedly dying because of lack of universal health care] has been going on for years. We are bringing it to a halt. The harsh fact of the matter is when you’re going to pass legislation that will cover 300 [million] American people in different ways it takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people.

❓ Hmm…

Personally, I know exactly how I interpret this socialist-talk that spewed from the mouth of Rep. Dingell, but Ed Morrissey – from Hot Air – provides both sides of the argument better than I do/would:

It may be the mother of all Freudian slips (which is itself a Freudian joke, if you didn’t catch it).  “Control the people” could have one of two contexts here, of course; it could mean patient management, or it could be taken literally.  It would take quite a while to “control” 300 million people in either sense of the phrase.  Of course, in either sense, it’s one of the good reasons why the government shouldn’t be in the health-care business.  The private sector is better designed to manage patients.

But of course, the private sector isn’t designed to “control the people” in the literal sense.  You have to have government to do that, and people in charge who believe they should be in charge of “control[ling] the people” instead of supporting and defending the Constitution.

Either way… It doesn’t escape the fact that I am embarrassed that this Congressman is from my home state of Michigan. 😳 I know… I know… What can you expect? Unfortunately, his congressional district is around the Detroit area and we all know how they love their Democrats around there.

Please take the time to support Frisk A Liberal:

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »