Misplaced populism

It was not that long ago that a newly inaugurated President Obama, projecting an image of sure-footed confidence, stood on the steps of the capitol, chiding his critics about the shifting sand beneath them. Now with his poll numbers in free fall and reeling from election defeats where establishment democrats supporting his agenda were rejected despite the political clout he expended on their behalf, the president seems desperate to find solid ground.

Being a community organizer and Senator, Obama has had the luxury of being able to call both sides of the coin. As a community organizer Obama’s job was to marshal the mob against an economic or government institution in an effort to strong-arm an executive or politician into finding a solution to some perceived injustice. In essence create a problem and force someone else to solve it. As a Senator, much like other senators he could support a certain course action with his vote then act as a bystander if the results of that action are unpopular or unsuccessful. For example railing against “fat-cat bankers” and bailouts, but voting for the TARP legislation. Now he is President and the buck stops with him, there is no one left to organize against. Being President has exposed some serious flaws in the Obama image, for one he is visibly angered by the public’s opposition to various elements of his agenda. It is not just Health care. Cap & trade, his approach to national security, foreign policy or immigration, Obama’s Ideas are not inline with the electorate. In a recent interview with George Stephanopoulos the President more or less said that the people just don’t get it.

In an effort to regain his footing and rally the pitchforks to his cause, Obama has renewed his attacks on Wall Street and the financial sector. The president has rolled out a new theme in his recent speeches saying repeatedly “that the people want their money back.” This is curious considering that the majority of the American people were against the TARP legislation and the uncertainty caused by his attacks over the past week has been a major factor in driving the markets into negative territory, that’s real money being lost, not just by “fat cat bankers” but fixed income retires and just about any worker with a 401k. Once again, as on his inauguration day Obama has fatally misread the political landscape with his misplaced populism. The rest of his agenda will offer no salvation from his political free fall and the incessant blaming of his predecessor will only endear him to a minuscule potion of the electorate, lashing out at the Voter will endear him to no one. Obama either fails or refuses to see that the forces behind his recent setbacks are pushing in the opposite direction. The people who determined the outcomes of the VA, NJ and Massachusetts elections, organized the massive march on D.C. and overflowed from tea-parties into townhall meetings are not interested in centralized government solutions, they seek a rollback of the overbearing bureaucracy that has stagnated our economy and set its aim on the individual liberty of the citizen.

Anthony D Dolpies

Forget the Public Option, The Real Lynchpin of Obamacare is the Individual Mandate

The Senate Finance Committee rejected an amendment to Obamacare yesterday that would have prevented taxpayer funded abortions.

The coalition of industry and liberal groups known as the Alliance for Stable Quality Care — that is, PhRMA, the American Medical Association, the Federation of American Hospitals, and FamiliesUSA — have more or less dropped the pretense of being something beyond a checking account for the White House political operation which is spending its money with David Axelrod’s old firm.

An audit of Massachusetts health care system suggests that 40% of employers had violated the state’s health care mandates and owed the state millions of dollars in fines.

If you've been following my blogs for any length of time, then you know how I've been saying that the individual mandate is the really the most important part of the democrat takeover of the health industry, sure they would love to have a public option but in the big picture it's just a lamb they would be willing to sacrifice for now to put a larger frame work in place, In short it's a misdirection play. The revelations that anyone who does not participate could face prison time confirms my suspicions.

Aside from the fact that this provision is blatantly unconstitutional, the mathematics of Obamacare are fuzzy at best, but without the revenue created by the individual mandate they have absolutely no financial leg to stand on. Without the mandate insurance companies will not be able to afford the new regulations imposed on them. Removing the individual mandate will also fracture the behind the scenes alliance Obama has forged with the biggest insurance companies. (If you notice there hasn’t really been much vocal opposition from the insurance providers) Despite the way he demonizes them the individual mandate is a bone thrown to providers, in the next ten years nearly 200 million Americans will turn 65 and put themselves on to the medicare rolls. With an aging population insurance companies will face bankruptcy, due to the fact that many younger citizens forgo insurance for other priorities. This mandate provide th insurers with a new customer base through government coercion.

Call your Senator and Representative and tell them NO on the individual mandate. Tell them that you will not participate in such immoral legislation regardless of the penalty.

Anthony D Dolpies

If you thought the Video With the school kids was disturbing wait till you see this;

One Trick Pony

My Brother made a great observation regarding the Presidents most recent healthcare speech. The president uses a prehistoric sales formula to push his agenda. It’s a technique called problem-agitate-solve. My brother describes it like this; state a problem that the person or group your trying to persuade can identify with. Agitate it a little, pour a little salt on the wound. Solve it, but most importantly, show how what you have will solve the problem and make the pain go away.

My brother is a casual observer to politics, he was just observing the president’s technique, but if you have been following my blog or listening to my talk show, you know I’ve been pointing this out for a while, good sales reps have a variety of tools and techniques in their arsenal, Obama’s problem is that this is his only technique and it's the wrong one for those he really needs to persuade.

The majority of Americans have health insurance, and that same majority is overwhelmingly happy with the coverage they have. Consequently most Americans instinctively know it is impossible to change nothing and change everything at the same time, this is exactly what Obama is selling and why Americans are skeptical.

The president likes to use what I call psycho-semantics, anecdotes designed to get you on board emotionally, like Jimmy Joe Johnson who’s insurance company dropped him in the middle of chemotherapy, but these cases are the exception in this country not the rule, and for every one of these horror stories in the U.S. there are three in countries like the U.K. and Canada, So Although these tactics sound effective but they only really influence the few who have been personally affected by such an event.

Americans are compassionate and generous, The President attempt to exploit this by presenting health insurance as a moral imperative, that it is somehow our righteous duty to provide insurance to those who do not have it. But Americans are not opposed to the uninsured getting insurance, they are opposed to being forced to provide for those who would choose not to provide for themselves and the wealth transfers that would go along with such a policy. They oppose insurance mandates that would force an individual to buy something he feels he does not need. Obama tries to paint anyone who would oppose the absolute immorality of government coercion as somehow being immoral. In this respect he describes the American founding principles as immoral and unjust.

From a policy stand point the President’s speech was much ado about nothing, the setting was more for effect than to convey some new message. The American people have heard this before, this speech is not going to alleviate their doubts because there just where not enough specifics which are what this speech was supposed to be about. So who exactly was the President trying to sell? The answer is that the President used this elaborate forum to try to sure up support in his own party. The president also failed to offer any concrete solutions but that’s just Obama’s nature, he’s not a problem solver he’s a problem seeker. He is not so much concerned with solutions as he is with creating a critical mass against something he sees as an injustice, he then passes it along for someone else to solve, this is why he allows Pelosi and Reid to spearhead all of his legislative initiatives. In the end Obama is just a one trick pony and not a very good salesman.

Anthony D Dolpies

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

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 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