Posts tagged ‘Healthcare Reform’

Bad Obama, Bad GOP Congress

TARP bailout of financial firms (who caused the problem in the first place). 

Stimulus rescue for automakers (who failed to keep pace with fuel efficiency increases) and the auto execs and unions (who are both making too much money). 

War in Iraq (for absolutely no reason). 

Tax cuts for the most successful businesses (makes little sense, supply-side economics is proven to be a failed theory). 

Tax cuts for the richest Americans (makes no sense)   

And now Congress and the President wants to screw everyone (everyone who plans on getting older) buy cutting Social Security and Medicare benefits?  Now – after all these other programs were funded…now you are trying to offset it by screwing me?   Now all of a sudden the deb ceiling is important?  Two trillion in Iraq wasn’t a big deal.  700 billion for TARP wasn’t a big deal.  770 billion for stimulus wasn’t a big deal. 

But now Congress wants to cut Social Security – because they already spent the money on Wall Street execs and Iraqis and now they need my retirement funds that MY taxes funded??  How could that even get out of Congress? 

Hats off to the Democrats in Congress, as they are holding the line on protecting Social Security. 

Beyond that, to hell with all those Republicans in Congress and Barack Obama who apparently want to raid the retirement savings to fund their overspending.  I’m not yet sure who I’m supporting for President in 2012.  If Social Security or Medicare/Medicaid is cut because Washington overspent, it won’t be anyone who voted ‘Yes’ in Congress nor will it be the person who signed the bill into law. 

You can tell alot by how a society treats its elderly population. 

I sure didn’t donate my money in support of healhcare reform only to have Obama sign in a Republican law that removes/restricts/reduces my Medicare/Medicaid benefits.

July 14, 2011 at 3:50 pm Leave a comment

So long, Stupak!

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich) has announced his retirement from Congress. Good riddance! Obviously, the Republican voters weren’t going to vote for him. What made it a losing battle for him is his power-play threatening to derail the health-care reform. Being independent is good, is admirable. But there’s a time and a place. Being the man standing in the way of monumental improvements to improve the lives of millions of people who have been born and are suffering now was undesirable. And in a state like Michigan, hard-hit by the economy, watching their Rep. threaten to block their healthcare…there was no WAY they were going to vote for him.

He got his 15 minutes of fame, but now he’s done. Had he left well-enough alone, he might still be electable, and able to continue his efforts. But he shot his load too early, and now he’s having to abort his re-election campaign.

April 9, 2010 at 1:55 pm Leave a comment

Good ole days

Teddy Roosevelt on a national healthcare plan for America:

“The supreme duty of the Nation is the conservation of human resources through an enlightened measure of social and industrial justice. We pledge ourselves to work unceasingly in State and Nation for … the protection of home life against the hazards of sickness, irregular employment and old age through the adoption of a system of social insurance adapted to American use.”

— Theodore Roosevelt (Republican), 1912.

March 31, 2010 at 6:31 pm Leave a comment

Capturing the racist vote

Not everyone who votes Republican is racist.  But everyone who is racist does vote Republican. 

Three Democratic African-American lawmakers – including civil rights leader Rep. John Lewis of Georgia – said demonstrators against the health care bill yelled racist epithets at them as they walked past. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri said a protester spit at him. Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts, an openly gay Democrat, said protesters yelled anti-gay comments at him.

Cleaver released a statement late Saturday saying he…was called the “n” word as he walked to the Capitol for a vote and that he was spat on by one protester who was arrested by U.S. Capitol Police. Cleaver declined to press charges against the man. 
March 21:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/21/house-republicans-denounce-racial-slurs-hurled-at-democrats/?hpt=T1&fbid=6ETWyMxuiRx 

While these Congressmen were walking to work, conservatives were screaming racial slurs at them that would get you thrown out of churches, schools, and just about any place of business.  This from the same group, of course, who said disrespecting Washington leadership is un-American.  Kinda puts the whole Natalie Manes thing in perspective.

https://goearth.wordpress.com/2009/09/24/tyt-racism-gop

March 21, 2010 at 6:38 pm 1 comment

Deficit Reduction – Healthcare

“The Congressional Budget office put the 10-year savings at $138 billion, but Democratic leaders said that would be dwarfed by a projected $1.2 trillion in the following decade.”

http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=508 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35928063/ns/politics-health_care_reform

March 19, 2010 at 1:26 pm Leave a comment

Televised Healthcare Debate – I

The GOP is saying that Americans object to the mandate that you must purchase health care and that since they object, they shouldn’t be forced to buy that insurance.  

What a bunch of bullsh.  Americans don’t want to buy car insurance, either.  So why don’t the GOP senators remove that?  People who do NOT buy insurance will STILL get sick/old.  And you cannot predict illness or injury (like a car wreck that just happens in an instant) for yourself or your family.  So when they do get sick and hurt and they “chose” not to buy insurance…the cost for all of us who have insurance goes UP.  So they need to just say “Look, my campaign was funded pretty heavily by the insurance execs and being in Washington is really great and I want to stay here.”  

They don’t want to pay taxes, either.  But you need to – and why?  Because we all have to share.  We all have to share the roads, we share the water systems, we share the protection buy the army, and we share the rising costs and decreasing coverage of insurance.

February 25, 2010 at 7:49 pm Leave a comment

Backpedaling on Health Care Reform

  Look, this kind of tax reduction causes businesses to cut benefits and/or force employees to choose less functional plans.  It’s a back-track on at least 3 campaign promises on a topic that is a ‘top 3’ issue to many voters.  For most, health care and taxes are at the top of the concerns – even above the war in Iraq, homeland security, and evironment.  By my count: (1) There were promises not to raise income taxes.  Now, with other cuts this proposed increase might be offset – but then what’s the point anyway?  (2) There were promises not to tax health insurance costs.  (3) There were promises to improve health care coverage and affordability.   

I know I’m jumping the gun.  I know this is only a proposal.  But to even say that taxing an extremely over-priced & still-sky-rocketing product like health insurance is extremely disappointing.  I don’t really care if this was Reagan’s idea and in fact it may be further evidence that’s is a bad idea. 

Health insurance ‘haves’ to pay for ‘have-nots’?

The idea of limiting the tax break for employer-provided insurance gained momentum last week, when Obama told senators that he’d consider it as one ingredient of the health insurance reform bill he wants Congress to pass by early August, when the Senate starts a one-month recess. While details of such an approach are still sketchy, it would likely involve employees paying tax on a percentage of their employer-provided health benefits. 

Scolding McCain in their debate on Oct. 15, Obama said, “This is your plan, John. For the first time in history, you will be taxing people’s health-care benefits.”

The tax exemption on employer-provided health insurance, which dates to 1943, has already survived one attempt to limit it. An echo of Ronald Reagan In 1984, President Ronald Reagan floated the idea of requiring workers to pay taxes on employer contributions to their health insurance exceeding $2,100 a year. A Washington Post editorial the following year called the proposal “surprisingly lucrative yet eminently fair,” and speculated that “(it) might have helped hold down health care costs in the bargain.” But opposition, especially from labor unions, scuttled the proposal.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31106408

June 8, 2009 at 3:47 pm Leave a comment


Recent Posts