Sunday, August 30, 2009
Friday, August 28, 2009
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Health Care Bill Will Cover Illegal Aliens (congressional research service)
WASHINGTON, Aug. 26 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Tuesday, the Congressional Research Service (CRS), the "research arm" for the United States Congress, issued a report validating an analysis by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), that illegal aliens would be able to receive benefits under the House health care reform bill, America's Affordable Health Care Act of 2009 (H.R. 3200).
The report, Treatment of Noncitizens in H.R. 3200, states definitively, "H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitizens - whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently - participating in the Exchange." H.R. 3200 establishes a Health Insurance Exchange which would provide individuals and small businesses with access to health care plans, including the "public option" to be managed by the government.
CRS also confirms FAIR's assessment that the House bill does not include a mechanism to prevent illegal aliens from receiving "affordability credits" that would subsidize the purchase of private health insurance. CRS specifically noted the absence "of a provision in the bill specifying the verification procedure." Because the language is ambiguous, all CRS could reasonably conclude is that any eligibility determination would be the responsibility of the Health Choices Commissioner.
The CRS analysis comes after weeks of denials by Members of Congress that illegal aliens could receive benefits under the House bill. These denials were echoed by countless media and health care "experts" who dismissed public concerns as myths, or as politically orchestrated attacks.
"Case closed. Illegal aliens will be eligible to participate in the health care program offered by the House bill unless Congress acts to amend the bill," stated Dan Stein, president of FAIR. "The loopholes and omissions in the House bill are not there by accident," continued Stein. "These loopholes were intended to extend benefits to illegal aliens while allowing Members of Congress to deny those facts to the American people."
The House Ways & Means Committee had the opportunity to include language that would have barred illegal aliens from enrolling in the proposed public option or receiving the affordability credits, but chose not to. An amendment offered by Rep. Dean Heller (R-Nev.) would have applied the same eligibility verification procedures for coverage under H.R. 3200 that have been used for years to prove eligibility for Medicaid. That amendment was rejected by a party-line vote.
Based on its own findings and those of CRS, FAIR is calling on Congress to:
- Adopt clear language that makes illegal aliens (and nonimmigrants) ineligible for enrollment in publicly funded or subsidized health insurance programs.
- Require electronic eligibility verification for any health care reform proposal through the existing Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system.
- Maintain a five-year eligibility waiting period for legal immigrants to ensure that individuals don't come to the U.S. and immediately tap the system.
"For the past month, irate citizens, concerned that their tax dollars will be used to fund health care for illegal aliens, have been unfairly portrayed as uninformed rabble by their elected representatives and a host of media organizations," said Stein. "It is time for the politicians to close the loopholes, and for the media establishment to acknowledge that they got it wrong."
About FAIR
Founded in 1979, FAIR is the country's largest immigration reform group. With over 250,000 members nationwide, FAIR fights for immigration policies that serve national interests, not special interests. FAIR believes that immigration reform must enhance national security, improve the economy, protect jobs, preserve our environment, and establish a rule of law that is recognized and enforced.
SOURCE FAIR
The President and congress have repeatedly lied about this, So let me ask you, what else are they lying about?
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Blowback, Obama's Big Mistake
On any given day the Obama administrations propensity for rapid fire incompetency could make any former Jimmy Carter era official blush. In Fact they provide me with so much fuel for commentary fire, that it sometimes causes writers block, it's not so much writers block, but more like a six o'clock traffic jam on the Schuylkill expressway and if you are at all familiar with Philadelphia then you know what I'm talking about. Sometimes I just don't know were to begin or were to end.
So Let's Start with the CIA issue, everyone by now is aware of the advanced interrogation memos released back in April, as well as the recent appointment of a federal prosecutor by Attorney General Eric Holder, charged with investing the CIA. I have no doubt this comes at the behest of the White house, despite the denials by President Obama. President Obama will undoubtedly claim these actions are being taken in the interest of transparency . Unfortunately the Presidents fondness for transparency, so far, only seems to apply to previous administrations. But while President Obama wraps himself in a cozy false cloak of high morality, he has voluntarily backed himself into a corner.
The Presidents executive order to close Gitmo in reality has no teeth, Attorney General Holder is on the record in saying that the Presidents Gitmo doctrine is "always subject to further revision," it is merely an order to examine closing the prison. The President has also continued the cowardly practice of rendition, which is when a prisoner, captured on the battlefield is remanded to custody of another country, usually in the middle east where interrogation methods are far more severe. It's hard to imagine anything more hypocritical.
The truth is Obama has done this for three reasons; the first and most obvious was to satisfy his left wing base, who have been clamoring for Obama to throw the Bush administration to the lions in regards to this matter. In the minds of partisan Democrats and the hardcore left a prosecution of any kind would be an ultimate reckoning for the 2000 election.
The Second reason is to set up a class A political pump fake. Why else would Obama drag this issue out in such a piece-meal fassion if not to keep the mainstream media stenographers busy while trying to distract the citizenry from his damaging agenda, most notably Health care, cap & trade and immigration.
Third he seeks to establish a dangerous and insidious precedent, criminalizing previous administrations or individuals that hold dissenting political views, an act that is UN-American in the extreme.
In his usual way Obama seeks to play both sides, releasing the memos but claiming he would not seek any prosecutions, he then did a 180 and said he would allow Eric Holder to pursue the matter and then the announcement of appointing a prosecutor while Obama frolics under a media blackout in Martha's vineyard. This was a critical error, Holder is nothing more than a political hack. This is the same man who argued in front of the supreme court that the American people do not have the right to bare arms. He is also the same person who sought a second opinion when his own justice department told him that the D.C. representation bill is unconstitutional.
Why is this a huge mistake? Because when push comes to shove the American people are not going to side with terrorists who helped to mastermind the killing of more than 3000 Americans, many of whom were burned alive or jumped to their deaths. They will not have empathy for cowardly terrorist who strap bombs to the handicapped instead of engaging our soldiers straight-up on the battlefield. The American people will not sympathise with terrorists who hold live beheadings of American civilians over the Internet. The fact of the matter is the suffering of the victims of these barbarians far outweighs any discomfort caused by the so called torture of described in these memos, not to mention the fact that valuable lifesaving information was extracted as a result of these methods.
Barack Obama has overplayed this hand, and if he pursues this to the end, putting the CIA on trial, the American people will see him as the man who gave aid and comfort to the enemy by trying to imprison those who were trying to protect us, no amount of rhetoric or media spin will be able to change that.
Anthony D Dolpies
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Why I Speak Out
I was recently having an online debate with a typical progressive lib, after dissecting his health care talking points like the myth of the 47 million uninsured, or that insurance companies have the final say about the care you receive. He finally just replied with this;
“Dolpies, why does some poor schmo from Philly speak out in favor of HMO's and the medical lobby? Whatever you can afford now, a government medical system would be an improvement. So why vote against your self interest? It makes no sense.”
I was so glad he asked me that question and this was my reply; Why do I speak out? I'm not speaking out defending HMO's or any lobby, in fact if you really think about it there would be no medical lobby or any lobby for that matter, if government was not increasingly stepping into areas that are none of it’s concern. The only way you can make any improvements to health Insurance is by reducing the governments role not expanding it. There is nothing government can offer me that I want or will accept. I know it might surprise you that there are still people who will not trade liberty for security, but I got news for you, there are more than you think. As for my interests, my interest is a limited constitutional government by consent, my interest is that no man needs to work to provide the government with a majority of his income, my interest is using my God given talents to do anything I can to help preserve the liberty you are so willing to give away. So at least if I fail and tyranny wins, I will be able to look my children in the eyes & say I did everything I could, but now you must carry on the fight. My interest is that my 1 year old can grow in a society where the freedoms his ancestors once enjoyed in The United states are not just part of the stories or folklore passed down by the generations. I would ask you a black man from Ohio, Why are you so willing to sell your children and grandchildren into slavery & serfdom. By accepting the Idea that health care is a fundamental right you have chosen to allow government to ration how you will exercise that right, how can it be right if the government can administer it? What other rights will you so willingly cede for a small handout? You see, you have already volunteered yourself for slavery under this soft form of tyranny. No sir my liberty and that of my progeny has a much higher price. It makes me wonder who exactly is the poor schmo?
Anthony D Dolpies
“Dolpies, why does some poor schmo from Philly speak out in favor of HMO's and the medical lobby? Whatever you can afford now, a government medical system would be an improvement. So why vote against your self interest? It makes no sense.”
I was so glad he asked me that question and this was my reply; Why do I speak out? I'm not speaking out defending HMO's or any lobby, in fact if you really think about it there would be no medical lobby or any lobby for that matter, if government was not increasingly stepping into areas that are none of it’s concern. The only way you can make any improvements to health Insurance is by reducing the governments role not expanding it. There is nothing government can offer me that I want or will accept. I know it might surprise you that there are still people who will not trade liberty for security, but I got news for you, there are more than you think. As for my interests, my interest is a limited constitutional government by consent, my interest is that no man needs to work to provide the government with a majority of his income, my interest is using my God given talents to do anything I can to help preserve the liberty you are so willing to give away. So at least if I fail and tyranny wins, I will be able to look my children in the eyes & say I did everything I could, but now you must carry on the fight. My interest is that my 1 year old can grow in a society where the freedoms his ancestors once enjoyed in The United states are not just part of the stories or folklore passed down by the generations. I would ask you a black man from Ohio, Why are you so willing to sell your children and grandchildren into slavery & serfdom. By accepting the Idea that health care is a fundamental right you have chosen to allow government to ration how you will exercise that right, how can it be right if the government can administer it? What other rights will you so willingly cede for a small handout? You see, you have already volunteered yourself for slavery under this soft form of tyranny. No sir my liberty and that of my progeny has a much higher price. It makes me wonder who exactly is the poor schmo?
Anthony D Dolpies
Word On The Street
Growing up in the neighborhoods of South Philadelphia, I learned very quickly that there are three common sources in which you could get information. There is of course broadcast media, TV network news and such, you could also scan one of the various newspapers. However neither of these is as effective as the third, word on the street. Word on the street is a powerful & swift moving vehicle, it can expose a secret, stop a crime, or sink a new business venture.
Word on the street is sinking President Obama, In the past few months I have noticed an interesting & refreshing surge in the political dialogue of the casual observer. I originally noticed what seemed like a sense of unease in the people regarding the direction of government, but over the course of the last month this bubbling overall discontent has crystalized into unfavorable and sometimes hostile criticism of President Obama. One of the more glaring examples of this came while doing some grocery shopping at the local supermarket, while perusing the fresh vegetable Isle. (You know the one Michelle Obama says is not available in inner-city neighborhoods like mine.) I couldn’t help but overhear a group of three supermarket workers rabidly criticizing the administrations spending and climate change policy, I say overheard but understand, The tone and volume of their discussion is significant, these men were visibly agitated. The gist of the conversation was to the effect that the administration’s actions in these matters where only going to lead to higher taxes for them and high inflation overall. This is quite telling, these were not rich men but inventory clerks in a grocery store and their age ranged from early twenties to mid sixties. I was tempted to chime in, instead I just picked up some strawberries and went about my business, with a little extra jump in my step.
Another example was outside a local bank just yesterday, Where a group of five fifty-something women was vociferously expressing their outrage at Obama’s “condescending attitude” and “disrespect” toward “the police,” I thought it was interesting that they said the police and not the Massachusetts police officer who arrested professor Gates, but this is understandable being that police in Philadelphia have an extremely dangerous job as it is, without the President inciting racial tension.
This might seem like a few random encounters but it is important to understand that for every one citizen with a particular point of view there are thousands who share it, that’s why congressmen put a lot of weight behind phone calls from constituents and other citizens. Consequently traffic to my own personal blog has increased exponentially, now that might not mean a whole lot, but if The President’s chief economic advisor Larry Summers can say that the economy is getting better because google searches for the phrase “economic depressions” are back to normal levels, well then it might not be such a stretch to draw a correlation between that and the rising disaffection for our President.
The President’s problem is three fold. First, his policies have been unpopular from day one, polls have shown over and over again that the American people do not like this massive expansion of government into what seems like every area of life, regardless of the issue. Up until recently however he has been shielded by his celebrity status and a hapless press which refuse to connect Obama to his policy. Unfortunately for the President he is learning that the campaign is over and voters are now looking for details and not focus grouped talking points or general platitudes.
Secondly, The Deficit is now the top priority among voters along with the economy, far above health care and completely eclipsing climate change. Yet Obama seems arrogantly unaware of these concerns and continues to push energy rationing taxation at the same time horribly underestimating the American people by trying to sell them his mythological health care plan, which according to him will not add to the deficit, regardless of its trillion-dollar price tag.
Third, the president is completely handcuffed by his ideology, and he is noticeably indifferent to the adversarial relationship he is fostering between the American people and himself, who do not view themselves as global citizens. This is why his sliding poll numbers are significant, Obama’s ideas for governing are just more of the same socialist policies that are detrimental to the economic growth that would be his salvation, this leaves him little hope for redemption with a citizenry that is quickly growing weary.
Anthony D Dolpies
Word on the street is sinking President Obama, In the past few months I have noticed an interesting & refreshing surge in the political dialogue of the casual observer. I originally noticed what seemed like a sense of unease in the people regarding the direction of government, but over the course of the last month this bubbling overall discontent has crystalized into unfavorable and sometimes hostile criticism of President Obama. One of the more glaring examples of this came while doing some grocery shopping at the local supermarket, while perusing the fresh vegetable Isle. (You know the one Michelle Obama says is not available in inner-city neighborhoods like mine.) I couldn’t help but overhear a group of three supermarket workers rabidly criticizing the administrations spending and climate change policy, I say overheard but understand, The tone and volume of their discussion is significant, these men were visibly agitated. The gist of the conversation was to the effect that the administration’s actions in these matters where only going to lead to higher taxes for them and high inflation overall. This is quite telling, these were not rich men but inventory clerks in a grocery store and their age ranged from early twenties to mid sixties. I was tempted to chime in, instead I just picked up some strawberries and went about my business, with a little extra jump in my step.
Another example was outside a local bank just yesterday, Where a group of five fifty-something women was vociferously expressing their outrage at Obama’s “condescending attitude” and “disrespect” toward “the police,” I thought it was interesting that they said the police and not the Massachusetts police officer who arrested professor Gates, but this is understandable being that police in Philadelphia have an extremely dangerous job as it is, without the President inciting racial tension.
This might seem like a few random encounters but it is important to understand that for every one citizen with a particular point of view there are thousands who share it, that’s why congressmen put a lot of weight behind phone calls from constituents and other citizens. Consequently traffic to my own personal blog has increased exponentially, now that might not mean a whole lot, but if The President’s chief economic advisor Larry Summers can say that the economy is getting better because google searches for the phrase “economic depressions” are back to normal levels, well then it might not be such a stretch to draw a correlation between that and the rising disaffection for our President.
The President’s problem is three fold. First, his policies have been unpopular from day one, polls have shown over and over again that the American people do not like this massive expansion of government into what seems like every area of life, regardless of the issue. Up until recently however he has been shielded by his celebrity status and a hapless press which refuse to connect Obama to his policy. Unfortunately for the President he is learning that the campaign is over and voters are now looking for details and not focus grouped talking points or general platitudes.
Secondly, The Deficit is now the top priority among voters along with the economy, far above health care and completely eclipsing climate change. Yet Obama seems arrogantly unaware of these concerns and continues to push energy rationing taxation at the same time horribly underestimating the American people by trying to sell them his mythological health care plan, which according to him will not add to the deficit, regardless of its trillion-dollar price tag.
Third, the president is completely handcuffed by his ideology, and he is noticeably indifferent to the adversarial relationship he is fostering between the American people and himself, who do not view themselves as global citizens. This is why his sliding poll numbers are significant, Obama’s ideas for governing are just more of the same socialist policies that are detrimental to the economic growth that would be his salvation, this leaves him little hope for redemption with a citizenry that is quickly growing weary.
Anthony D Dolpies
Nancy's Dream
Nancy Pelosi had a dream, America as it should be, An America were elected officials are immune from criticism. An America where the only murmurs heard from the people would be the obligatory applause from needy surfs, clamoring behind barricades, baring name tags, hoisting preprinted supportive banners supplied by acorn, hoping to catch a glimpse of their noble leaders as they board glimmering G-5's. This is an America where the subjects would be grateful for all that Pelosi provides them. They would be satisfied in their wanting, for everyone would be wanting equally, for what better way for the citizen to understand and support Pelosi's vision and concern for the poor than for you to be poor as well. In Nancy Pelosi's dream anything else would be Un-American. Unfortunately Madam Speaker it is time to wake up. After years of apathy resulting from prosperity, the American People have awakened around you.
This is truly a significant time in U.S. history, we see town hall meetings erupting, we see large groups of people of little or no acquaintance gathering in angry protest of elected officials and the overall direction of government, the once casual observer is now engaged. They are angry because they feel betrayed, they have trusted these elected officials and now they see that trust has been abused. They are agitated by representatives who over promise and overspend, They are enraged by representative who cannot clearly respond to citizens criticism or understand their concerns, and even more these representatives feel they are above reproach. The people have grown inpatient with pompous politicians who spout platitudinal, focused grouped phrases to justify their actions, instead they seek serious answers and accountability.
The Senators and representatives attend these town halls and in their arrogance expect to be given free range to dictate to their constituents, telling them that D.C. knows best and their concerns are unwarranted. But their contradictory nebulas talking points have been rejected, their arithmetic does not add up. And how have the president and congress chosen to respond to this great political awakening? How have they addressed the common sense dissection of their talking points? Certainly not by honest clarification, but instead attempting to marginalize dissenters as political operatives, ridicule them as extremist, or intimidate them with the power of government. This will backfire horribly because the truth is they are neither. Now of course there are some who will seek to jump on this bandwagon for political benefit, but for the most part these are just average folks, law biding citizens who seek nothing more than to provide for their families. They are reliable voters from different parties, who in the past have been somewhat detached from politics and many occasional spectators at best. Even more politicians are coming face to face with the realizations that there are still people who will not trade liberty for security. Madam Speaker there is nothing that is more American.
Anthony D Dolpies
Keep it Simple, Stupid
The Obama administration seems to be changing its rhetoric about the necessity of a public option, but let’s not get too excited, socialized medicine is not gonna go away until it dies on either the house or senate floor. It will however be fun watching the democrats fight this one out amongst themselves. The hard left will not want to budge on the public plan.
The important thing is that we don’t get fooled by a change in nomenclature. If the public option does go by the wayside, we will start to hear politicians talking about co-ops’. The simplest example of a co-op is a credit union, financial co-ops’ are relatively successful, being nonprofit entities extra capital is returned to the members so they tend to offer benefits to their members that regular banks might not, like lower interest rates. This could work in a similar fashion when it comes to health insurance, but it’s definitely not a magic bullet. Let’s remember that most insurance companies have profit margins in the low single digits, around 3%, credit unions also take less risk with investment capital so they can insure members against big losses, it’s not clear how that would translate in a health insurance market. Insurers also have to keep vast reserves on hand to cover claims, and the same would have to hold true for the co-op. So how much it could reduce the cost of a policy is uncertain. Most important, a co-op is not a co-op, well unless it’s a co-op. Which means a nonprofit free market enterprise owned, operated & funded by its members. A government-funded & operated co-op is the same wolf in different sheep skin. It would also be corrupted by political appointees, sort of like Fannie & Freddie, so forgive me if I’m skeptical.
But while we seem to have the ear of congress I figure this is the perfect time to pull firmly on the lobe. We need to start petitioning our newly attentive legislators to embrace simple free market reforms.
1st Cut the tie between employers and health insurance by giving individuals the tax advantages that employer have. This will energize the individual insurance market, giving people a reason to buy, making insurance portable. At the moment most people only change plans when they change jobs. Think about it, would you expect your new auto insurer to pay for an accident that happened before you were a policy holder. Making insurance portable will significantly reduce denials based on pre-existing conditions.
This will drive down cost, government advocates like to tell you how individuals don’t have the buying power, but that’s the idea, if insurance companies have to compete in a market with the pool of money is less they will adjust their prices to be competitive and being that most employers will cease to offer policies they will be forced to adapt.
2nd Bolster competition by allowing insurers to sell policies across state lines. This is really ridiculous regulation, you can buy bread in Pennsylvania, tomatoes in New Jersey, open an online bank account, but you can’t buy health insurance from a provider in New Jersey if you live in Pennsylvania. Allowing insurers to compete in an individual market across the country will also create better quality service. A real co-op can add to competition but it can’t do it alone and there would have to be more than one to choose from, just like credit unions.
3rd Abolish the community rating system and relax regulation this will allow individuals to be rewarded for good health and determine their own level of coverage.
A note on preventive care, Obama bills this as his cure all, preventive care with no out of pocket expenses and 100% coverage. This will not bring down costs, offering something for nothing only creates a bums rush on that service. Regardless of what Obama would like us to believe these services cost money and not everyone gets cancer or some other serious illness, in fact most people don’t. So the money saved on the few cases’ you catch early would be heavily negated by the amount of people who get these check ups & never get seriously ill. It also brings up the question of how you would enforce such preventive measures. Would government force citizens into doctor visits? Also, how would you know what to look for in a person who seems healthy unless you perform a multitude of tests on every visit? Again this cost money, and isn’t Obama always telling us about the bane of unnecessary tests.
Barack Obama is learning a vital lesson, one I learned in the private sector 14 years ago; a dishonest salesman is a horrible salesman, but even worse is a dishonest salesman who doesn’t know his product. In reality Obama has no product, he thought he could sell this to the American people with promises and platitudes. The only product offered by congress so far is a complex disaster for liberty which has the administration & congress stepping allover each other trying to sell it. Remember Barack if you confuse em you lose em.
Advocates of socialized medicine will say these suggestions are too simplistic, but I’ve learned over time that simple solutions usually work best to solve complex problems. Or as we say in the car business K.I.S.S, Keep it simple, stupid.
Anthony D Dolpies
The important thing is that we don’t get fooled by a change in nomenclature. If the public option does go by the wayside, we will start to hear politicians talking about co-ops’. The simplest example of a co-op is a credit union, financial co-ops’ are relatively successful, being nonprofit entities extra capital is returned to the members so they tend to offer benefits to their members that regular banks might not, like lower interest rates. This could work in a similar fashion when it comes to health insurance, but it’s definitely not a magic bullet. Let’s remember that most insurance companies have profit margins in the low single digits, around 3%, credit unions also take less risk with investment capital so they can insure members against big losses, it’s not clear how that would translate in a health insurance market. Insurers also have to keep vast reserves on hand to cover claims, and the same would have to hold true for the co-op. So how much it could reduce the cost of a policy is uncertain. Most important, a co-op is not a co-op, well unless it’s a co-op. Which means a nonprofit free market enterprise owned, operated & funded by its members. A government-funded & operated co-op is the same wolf in different sheep skin. It would also be corrupted by political appointees, sort of like Fannie & Freddie, so forgive me if I’m skeptical.
But while we seem to have the ear of congress I figure this is the perfect time to pull firmly on the lobe. We need to start petitioning our newly attentive legislators to embrace simple free market reforms.
1st Cut the tie between employers and health insurance by giving individuals the tax advantages that employer have. This will energize the individual insurance market, giving people a reason to buy, making insurance portable. At the moment most people only change plans when they change jobs. Think about it, would you expect your new auto insurer to pay for an accident that happened before you were a policy holder. Making insurance portable will significantly reduce denials based on pre-existing conditions.
This will drive down cost, government advocates like to tell you how individuals don’t have the buying power, but that’s the idea, if insurance companies have to compete in a market with the pool of money is less they will adjust their prices to be competitive and being that most employers will cease to offer policies they will be forced to adapt.
2nd Bolster competition by allowing insurers to sell policies across state lines. This is really ridiculous regulation, you can buy bread in Pennsylvania, tomatoes in New Jersey, open an online bank account, but you can’t buy health insurance from a provider in New Jersey if you live in Pennsylvania. Allowing insurers to compete in an individual market across the country will also create better quality service. A real co-op can add to competition but it can’t do it alone and there would have to be more than one to choose from, just like credit unions.
3rd Abolish the community rating system and relax regulation this will allow individuals to be rewarded for good health and determine their own level of coverage.
A note on preventive care, Obama bills this as his cure all, preventive care with no out of pocket expenses and 100% coverage. This will not bring down costs, offering something for nothing only creates a bums rush on that service. Regardless of what Obama would like us to believe these services cost money and not everyone gets cancer or some other serious illness, in fact most people don’t. So the money saved on the few cases’ you catch early would be heavily negated by the amount of people who get these check ups & never get seriously ill. It also brings up the question of how you would enforce such preventive measures. Would government force citizens into doctor visits? Also, how would you know what to look for in a person who seems healthy unless you perform a multitude of tests on every visit? Again this cost money, and isn’t Obama always telling us about the bane of unnecessary tests.
Barack Obama is learning a vital lesson, one I learned in the private sector 14 years ago; a dishonest salesman is a horrible salesman, but even worse is a dishonest salesman who doesn’t know his product. In reality Obama has no product, he thought he could sell this to the American people with promises and platitudes. The only product offered by congress so far is a complex disaster for liberty which has the administration & congress stepping allover each other trying to sell it. Remember Barack if you confuse em you lose em.
Advocates of socialized medicine will say these suggestions are too simplistic, but I’ve learned over time that simple solutions usually work best to solve complex problems. Or as we say in the car business K.I.S.S, Keep it simple, stupid.
Anthony D Dolpies
The Rights Of Others
Listen to Congressman Green very carefully, at 1:30 he says "under current law you have the right to not buy ins." It's funny because I didn't realize that buying insurance was a right, I thought that was an option. There is no such thing as a right to a product or service. Under this philosophy government or some other authority can ration individual rights as they please. We are approaching a very dangerous territory, a line that if crossed, it will be almost impossible to come back, A territory where we will allow a group of people to vote away the natural rights of the individual for their own benefit. This is not civil society it is mob rule.
As far as this mandating insurance business; when Obama demonizes these companies it's really just an act, this insurance mandate is a bailout for those companies. We have an aging population in the next ten years close to 200 million people, will leave the private ins market and go on Medicare. With not nearly enough people to replace them, The big insurance companies are in trouble, mandating those who would not normally buy ins to buy it, is a hand out to those companies.
The left likes to argue that the public option will not put insurers out of business, if you look at the facts medicare will accomplish this on it's own.
My Video Response;
Anthony D Dolpies
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)