Obama will try to ram through ObamaCare; in his mind it's meant to be the CENTER PIECE OF HIS LEGACY in the overall transforming America. It's what he promised when not enough people were listening.
But now we all know THE REAL OBAMA AS REVEALED IN THE HEALTHCARE SUMMIT with no teleprompters.
Even with lots of preparation, Obama, in the role of "MODERATOR" and seeking "BIPARTISANSHIP" acted CONDESCENDING, ELITIST, DEFENSIVE, ARGUMENTATIVE AND EVASIVE.
Not the kind of leader that anyone would want to work for in business or public service.
At times, OBAMA tried to appear "ACADEMIC" and PHILOSOPHICAL but he HAD FACTS WRONG and LIED by omission and commission.
In the end, we saw the real Obama, a CHICAGO-STYLE politico COERCING, BRIBING, THREATENING, APPEASING SPECIAL INTERESTS, and IGNORANT of, OR simply IGNORING, FACTS.
Just WHAT YOU MIGHT EXPECT from a spoiled brat who was always told he was the smartest one in the room (but wasn't really), who had his way paid and paved for him, and who was always surrounded and protected by those using him and by sycophants.
Now we know that OBAMA DOESN'T JUST USE TELEPROMPTERS, he hides behind teleprompters; HE NEEDS TELEPROMPTERS to perpetuate that phony "Hope-Change" image
Friday, March 5, 2010
Thursday, March 4, 2010
The Mind of a Socialist
OBAMA'S PRIMARY MOTIVATION for health care reform is for the government to take control of this segment of the economy, along with education and energy. This is the game plan for all SOCIALIST governments. This will create more government jobs and increase the power of government through controlling the money. This will enable the socialist Obama to reward (bribe) those who give campaign contributions and vote for him while punishing those that oppose him.
Because Obama is a socialist, it is more important to redistribute the cost along lines of ability to pay rather than equal cost for equal health services. Higher taxes ("fees") are to be used for redistribution and for coercion of opponents.
Because Obama is a socialist, it is more important to have everyone get a comparable level of health care no matter how bad that care is, even if this means degrading the overall level of health care.
OBAMA IS SIMPLY FOLLOWING THE SCRIPT OF EVERY SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT.
Because Obama is a socialist, it is more important to redistribute the cost along lines of ability to pay rather than equal cost for equal health services. Higher taxes ("fees") are to be used for redistribution and for coercion of opponents.
Because Obama is a socialist, it is more important to have everyone get a comparable level of health care no matter how bad that care is, even if this means degrading the overall level of health care.
OBAMA IS SIMPLY FOLLOWING THE SCRIPT OF EVERY SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT.
Truth About Bush's Deficit in Last Year in Office
The often quoted Bush $1.3 trillion deficit is a huge distortion and a quirk of the government budget process; Obama and the Democrats know this but they continue to lie about it anyhow. Many others quote the $1.3 trillion figure out of ignorance.
The truth is that Bush had a real deficit of about $600 billion. THEN THE TARP FUNDS OF $700 BILLION, WHICH WERE SUPPOSED TO BE A LOAN NOT SPENDING, WERE ADDED TO THE BUSH BUDGET AS IS THE STANDARD GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING PRACTICE. EVEN THOUGH $500 BILLION HAS BEEN REPAID, THE "BUSH DEFICIT" DOES NOT GET CREDIT FOR THIS. THE $200 BILLION THAT IS NOT BEING REPAID IS PRIMARILY FROM AIG, GM AND CHRYSLER, all of whom who Obama continued to bailout and excuse repayments.
Of course, Obama wants to continue to recycle the TARP funds since he views this as "free money" that was assigned to the Bush deficit. Obama can even absorb other losses with this TARP money and it still will not be assigned to his budget as it rightfully should be.
The truth is that Bush had a real deficit of about $600 billion. THEN THE TARP FUNDS OF $700 BILLION, WHICH WERE SUPPOSED TO BE A LOAN NOT SPENDING, WERE ADDED TO THE BUSH BUDGET AS IS THE STANDARD GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING PRACTICE. EVEN THOUGH $500 BILLION HAS BEEN REPAID, THE "BUSH DEFICIT" DOES NOT GET CREDIT FOR THIS. THE $200 BILLION THAT IS NOT BEING REPAID IS PRIMARILY FROM AIG, GM AND CHRYSLER, all of whom who Obama continued to bailout and excuse repayments.
Of course, Obama wants to continue to recycle the TARP funds since he views this as "free money" that was assigned to the Bush deficit. Obama can even absorb other losses with this TARP money and it still will not be assigned to his budget as it rightfully should be.
Charlie "Tax Cheat" Rangel and Nancy "Drain The Swamp" Pelosi
Pelosi pledged to run the most ethical congress in history. She was going to "DRAIN THE SWAMP" as in almost everything, PELOSI IS ONE OF THE MOST UNETHICAL MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, lying and distorting the truth so often, bringing pork to her district to benefit her husbands real estate investments,handing our pork to supporters in her district and elsewhere and using her position to milk the taxpayers of tens of millions on her travel and parties.
Why is it a surprise that Pelosi will NOT RISK ANTAGONIZING THE BLACK CONGRESSIONAL CAUCUS (Rangel was a founder) by insisting on rapid hearings and severe sanctions for Charlie The Tax Cheat Rangel who has clearly committed a number of unethical, if not criminal, acts?
Rangel makes a meaningless gesture, NOT RESIGNING HIS CHAIRMANSHIP of the House Ways and Means Committee, BUT MERELY TAKING A "LEAVE OF ABSENCE".
Meanwhile, Rangel and Pelosi both come from districts with "safe" demographics, so they can do just about anything and get reelected time and again.
Once the 2010 elections are over and his chairmanship can no longer be used for criticizing the ethics of the Democrats, Charlie Tax Cheat will be back in the Chairmanship if the Democrats retain the majority, ending his "leave of absence".
Meanwhile, WHAT IS GOING THROUGH THE MINDS OF THE VOTERS IN THE DISTRICTS OF PELOSI (CA), RANGEL (NY) and BARNEY FRANK (MA), that these three keep getting elected. These politicians are corrupt way above the common congressman and have acted for self-interest above all and have done enormous harm to the country pushing or blocking legislation to favor their special interests and personal friends or relatives. How can these three have "safe seats"? What is wrong with the people in those districts?
Why is it a surprise that Pelosi will NOT RISK ANTAGONIZING THE BLACK CONGRESSIONAL CAUCUS (Rangel was a founder) by insisting on rapid hearings and severe sanctions for Charlie The Tax Cheat Rangel who has clearly committed a number of unethical, if not criminal, acts?
Rangel makes a meaningless gesture, NOT RESIGNING HIS CHAIRMANSHIP of the House Ways and Means Committee, BUT MERELY TAKING A "LEAVE OF ABSENCE".
Meanwhile, Rangel and Pelosi both come from districts with "safe" demographics, so they can do just about anything and get reelected time and again.
Once the 2010 elections are over and his chairmanship can no longer be used for criticizing the ethics of the Democrats, Charlie Tax Cheat will be back in the Chairmanship if the Democrats retain the majority, ending his "leave of absence".
Meanwhile, WHAT IS GOING THROUGH THE MINDS OF THE VOTERS IN THE DISTRICTS OF PELOSI (CA), RANGEL (NY) and BARNEY FRANK (MA), that these three keep getting elected. These politicians are corrupt way above the common congressman and have acted for self-interest above all and have done enormous harm to the country pushing or blocking legislation to favor their special interests and personal friends or relatives. How can these three have "safe seats"? What is wrong with the people in those districts?
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Rep Paul Ryan (R-WI) Exposes The Fraud of Obams's Health Care Bill
Rep. Paul Ryan, at the Health Care Reform Summit, commented on Obama's health care reform proposal. During the 7 hours of discussion neither OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRATS NEVER ADDRESSED OR REBUTTED ANY OF RYAN'S POINTS. OBAMA COULD ONLY IGNORE RYAN BECASUSE RYAN WAS RIGHT ON THE MARK AND OBAMA KNEW IT. Ryan said: "This bill does not control costs (or) reduce deficits. Instead, (it) adds a new health care entitlement when we have no idea how to pay for the entitlements we already have."
• "The bill has 10 years of tax increases, about half a trillion dollars, with 10 years of Medicare cuts, about half a trillion dollars, to pay for six years of spending. The true 10-year cost (is) $2.3 trillion."
• "The bill takes $52 billion in higher Social Security tax revenues and counts them as offsets. But that's really reserved for Social Security. So either we're double-counting them or we don't intend on paying those Social Security benefits."
• "The bill takes $72 billion from the CLASS Act (long-term care insurance) benefit premiums and claims them as offsets."• "The bill treats Medicare like a piggy bank, (raiding) half a trillion dollars not to shore up Medicare solvency, but to spend on this new government program."
• "The chief actuary of Medicare (says) as much as 20% of Medicare providers will either go out of business or have to stop seeing Medicare beneficiaries."
• "Millions of seniors who have chosen Medicare Advantage (Medicare through a private insurer) will lose the coverage that they now enjoy."
• "When you strip out the double-counting and ... gimmicks, the full 10-year cost of the bill has a $460 billion deficit. The second 10-year cost of this bill has a $1.4 trillion deficit."
• "The 'doc fix' (restoring cuts in Medicare reimbursements) costs $371 billion ... a price tag (that) made the score look bad. (So) that provision was taken out, and (put) in stand-alone legislation. But ignoring these costs does not remove them from the backs of taxpayers. Hiding spending does not reduce spending."
• "Are we bending the cost curve down or are we bending the cost curve up? If you look at your own chief actuary at Medicare, we're bending it up. He's claiming that we're going up $222 billion, adding more to the unsustainable fiscal situation we have."
• "The bill has 10 years of tax increases, about half a trillion dollars, with 10 years of Medicare cuts, about half a trillion dollars, to pay for six years of spending. The true 10-year cost (is) $2.3 trillion."
• "The bill takes $52 billion in higher Social Security tax revenues and counts them as offsets. But that's really reserved for Social Security. So either we're double-counting them or we don't intend on paying those Social Security benefits."
• "The bill takes $72 billion from the CLASS Act (long-term care insurance) benefit premiums and claims them as offsets."• "The bill treats Medicare like a piggy bank, (raiding) half a trillion dollars not to shore up Medicare solvency, but to spend on this new government program."
• "The chief actuary of Medicare (says) as much as 20% of Medicare providers will either go out of business or have to stop seeing Medicare beneficiaries."
• "Millions of seniors who have chosen Medicare Advantage (Medicare through a private insurer) will lose the coverage that they now enjoy."
• "When you strip out the double-counting and ... gimmicks, the full 10-year cost of the bill has a $460 billion deficit. The second 10-year cost of this bill has a $1.4 trillion deficit."
• "The 'doc fix' (restoring cuts in Medicare reimbursements) costs $371 billion ... a price tag (that) made the score look bad. (So) that provision was taken out, and (put) in stand-alone legislation. But ignoring these costs does not remove them from the backs of taxpayers. Hiding spending does not reduce spending."
• "Are we bending the cost curve down or are we bending the cost curve up? If you look at your own chief actuary at Medicare, we're bending it up. He's claiming that we're going up $222 billion, adding more to the unsustainable fiscal situation we have."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)