The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for the ‘Health Law’ Category

Dr. Walter Williams: Government Lies

Posted by iusbvision on June 12, 2011

Dr. Walter Williams

President Obama and congressional supporters estimate that his health care plan will cost between $50 and $65 billion a year. Such cost estimates are lies whether they come from a Democratic president and Congress, or a Republican president and Congress. You say, “Williams, you don’t show much trust in the White House and Congress.” Let’s check out their past dishonesty.

At its start, in 1966, Medicare cost $3 billion. The House Ways and Means Committee, along with President Johnson, estimated that Medicare would cost an inflation-adjusted $12 billion by 1990. In 1990, Medicare topped $107 billion. That’s nine times Congress’ prediction. Today’s Medicare tab comes to $420 billion with no signs of leveling off. How much confidence can we have in any cost estimates by the White House or Congress?

Another part of the Medicare lie is found in Section 1801 of the 1965 Medicare Act that reads: “Nothing in this title shall be construed to authorize any federal officer or employee to exercise any supervision or control over the practice of medicine, or the manner in which medical services are provided, or over the selection, tenure, or compensation of any officer, or employee, or any institution, agency or person providing health care services.” Ask your doctor or hospital whether this is true.

Lies and deception are by no means restricted to modern times. During the legislative debate prior to ratification of the 16th Amendment, President Howard Taft and congressional supporters said that only the rich would ever pay federal income taxes. In 1916, only one-half of 1 percent of income earners paid income taxes. Those earning $250,000 a year in today’s dollars paid 1 percent, and those earning $6 million in today’s dollars paid 7 percent. The lie that only the rich would ever pay income taxes was simply a lie to exploit the politics of envy and dupe Americans into ratifying the 16th Amendment.

The proposed tax increases that the White House and Congress are proposing will probably pass. According to the Washington, D.C.-based Tax Foundation, during 2006, roughly 43.4 million tax returns, representing 91 million individuals, had no federal tax liability. That’s out of a total of 136 million federal tax returns. Adding to this figure are 15 million households and individuals who file no tax return at all. Roughly 121 million Americans — or 41 percent of the U.S. population — are completely outside the federal income tax system. These people represent a natural constituency for big-spending politicians. Since they have no federal income tax obligation, what do they care about higher taxes or tax cuts?

Another big congressional lie is Social Security. Here’s what a 1936 government pamphlet on Social Security said: “After the first 3 years — that is to say, beginning in 1940 — you will pay, and your employer will pay, 1.5 cents for each dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year … beginning in 1943, you will pay 2 cents, and so will your employer, for every dollar you earn for the next 3 years. … And finally, beginning in 1949, twelve years from now, you and your employer will each pay 3 cents on each dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year.” Here’s Congress’s lying promise: “That is the most you will ever pay.” Let’s repeat that last sentence: “That is the most you will ever pay.” Compare that to today’s reality, including Medicare, which is 7.65 cents on each dollar that you earn up to nearly $107,000, which comes to $8,185.

The Social Security pamphlet closes with another lie: “Beginning November 24, 1936, the United States government will set up a Social Security account for you … The checks will come to you as a right.” First, there’s no Social Security account containing your money, but more importantly, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on two occasions that Americans have no legal right to Social Security payments.

We can thank public education for American gullibility.

 

More Lies

Advertisements

Posted in Chuck Norton, Click & Learn, Government Gone Wild, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

Bill O’Reilly Now Convinced: The Far Left is Trying to Blow Up the System

Posted by iusbvision on June 5, 2011

Via The Blaze:

Bill O‘Reilly and Glenn Beck don’t always see eye-to-eye — they don’t always agree on everything. But one thing that O’Reilly is agreeing with Beck on now is that there are those on the left who would love to see an economic collapse so that they can remake the system. Chief among those cheerleaders, O’Reilly says, is Beck’s “spooky guy” — George Soros.

Click the link below to watch the video.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4639217/who-won-the-budget-battle/

Bill O’Reilly resisted accepting this premise for a long time;  years even. But as the evidence mounted up it became hard to ignore.

The Democrats are the party of the status quo when it comes to Social Security and Medicare while the governments own numbers admit that these programs will go bankrupt and crash very soon. The reductions in spending discussed in the video were not real cuts at all, they were only reductions in Obama’s proposed budget, and even so it was not even a 1% cut in that budget proposal. The truth is that spending was higher this year than last year, so in reality there were no real cuts, yet the left was still upset.

One of the big problems with Medicare is that the bureaucracy is expensive and truly gargantuan. Billions of dollars go to fund those government jobs that should go to seniors care. The Democrats benefit in the short run and the long run by letting Medicare collapse. In the short run, Medicare not being reformed will mean countless thousands of government employees, will be paying Democrats and the government union dues which is used to finance Democrat political campaigns. Government employees make between 30% and 300% more than their private sector counterparts depending on the job field. That is right folks, Medicare funds are essentially being used to fund Democrat political campaigns.

In the long run, when Medicare explodes seniors will be forced into ObamaCare, which can ration care and push doctors into just “giving gramps the pain pill” kind of care. This is why the Democrats raided half a TRILLION DOLLARS of Medicare funds to pay for the ObamaCare implementation. The administration had moved to implement “death panels” like language but outrage forced them to delay implementation. The bottom line is that ObamaCare gives the President, or the HHS bureaucrat the regulatory authority to implement “death panel” like rationing with the stroke of a pen.

Obama Advisor and former Labor Sec. Robert Reich: We are going to let the old die because its to expensive and we are going to make the drug companies poor so they cant innovate new drugs so you young people likely will not live much longer than your parents.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Government Gone Wild, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Obama Administration Lawyer to Federal Court: If a citizen does not want to buy the forced ObamaCare mandate, all they have to do is eliminate their income and go into poverty to not qualify…

Posted by iusbvision on June 2, 2011

Have we had enough of this kind of nonsense yet?

 

This is kind of technical and legalistic, but this is the argument the government is making to the court. They are also arguing that there are no limits to government power under the “Commerce Clause” and the “Necessary & Proper Clause”. This takes the entire idea of limited government and tosses it out the window, just as this web site said was one of the goals of the legislation back in 2009.

Washington Examiner

President Obama’s solicitor general, defending the national health care law on Wednesday, told a federal appeals court that Americans who didn’t like the individual mandate could always avoid it by choosing to earn less money.

Neal Kumar Katyal, the acting solicitor general, made the argument under questioning before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Cincinnati, which was considering an appeal by the Thomas More Law Center. (Listen to oral arguments here.)  The three-judge panel, which was comprised of two Republican-appointed judges and a Democratic-appointed judge, expressed more skepticism about the government’s defense of the health care law than the Fourth Circuit panel that heard the Virginia-based Obamacare challenge last month in Richmond. The Fourth Circuit panel was made up entirely of Democrats, and two of the judges were appointed by Obama himself.

During the Sixth Circuit arguments, Judge Jeffrey Sutton, who was nominated by President George W. Bush, asked Kaytal if he could name one Supreme Court case which considered the same question as the one posed by the mandate, in which Congress used the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution as a tool to compel action.

Kaytal conceded that the Supreme Court had “never been confronted directly” with the question, but cited the Heart of Atlanta Motel case as a relevant example. In that landmark 1964 civil rights case, the Court ruled that Congress could use its Commerce Clause power to bar discrimination by private businesses such as hotels and restaurants.

“They’re in the business,” Sutton pushed back. “They’re told if you’re going to be in the business, this is what you have to do. In response to that law, they could have said, ‘We now exit the business.’ Individuals don’t have that option.”

Kaytal responded by noting that the there’s a provision in the health care law that allows people to avoid the mandate.

“If we’re going to play that game, I think that game can be played here as well, because after all, the minimum coverage provision only kicks in after people have earned a minimum amount of income,” Kaytal said. “So it’s a penalty on earning a certain amount of income and self insuring. It’s not just on self insuring on its own. So I guess one could say, just as the restaurant owner could depart the market in Heart of Atlanta Hotel, someone doesn’t need to earn that much income. I think both are kind of fanciful and I think get at…”

Sutton interjected, “That wasn’t in a single speech given in Congress about this…the idea that the solution if you don’t like it is make a little less money.”

The so-called “hardship exemption” in the health care law is limited, and only applies to people who cannot obtain insurance for less than 8 percent of their income. So earning less isn’t necessarily a solution, because it could then qualify the person for government-subsidized insurance.

Throughout the oral arguments, Kaytal struggled to respond to the panel’s concerns about what the limits of Congressional power would be if the courts ruled that they have the ability under the Commerce Clause to force individuals to purchase something.

Sutton said it would it be “hard to see this limit” in Congressional power if the mandate is upheld, and he honed in on the word “regulate” in the Commerce clause, explaining that the word implies you’re in a market. “You don’t put them in the market to regulate them,” he said.

In arguments before the Fourth Circuit last month, Kaytal also struggled with a judge’s question about what to do with the word “regulate,” to the point where the judge asked him to sit down to come up with an answer. (More on that exchange here). Kaytal has fallen back on the Necessary and Proper clause, insisting that it gives broader leeway to Congress.

Judge James Graham, a Reagan district court appointee who is temporarily hearing cases on the appeals court, said, “I hear your arguments about the power of Congress under the Commerce Clause, and I’m having difficulty seeing how there is any limit to the power as you’re defining it.”

Posted in Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

Over Half of All Obamacare Waivers Given to Union Members

Posted by iusbvision on May 16, 2011

Mark Hemingway at The Weekly Standard:

In what is fast becoming a weekly event, the Obama administration granted 200 more companies aivers from the Democrats’ sweeping health care law in the Friday night news dump. That brings the number of companies receiving waivers to 1,372. (You can get a full list of the companies exempted here.)

Not surprisingly, it helps to be a Democratic ally when seeking a waiver. The Republican Policy Committee reports that over half of the workers that have been exempted so far belong to unions:

The plans newly approved for waivers cover more than 160,000 people, bringing to nearly 3.1 million the number of individuals in plans exempted from the health law’s requirements.  Of the participants receiving waivers, more than half – over 1.55 million – are in union plans, raising questions of why such a disproportionate share of union members are receiving waivers from the law’s requirements.  The percentage of participants receiving waivers that come from unions also continues to rise – the number was 48% in April, and 45% in March.

Unions already received a generous concession in the health care bill. Their generous “cadilac” insurance plans were exempted from being taxed until 2018, adding about $120 billion to the bill’s cost over ten years. For more on how the administration has helped unions, see my story in THE WEEKLY STANDARD from a few weeks ago.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Dirty Tricks, Government Gone Wild, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Democrats try to get copies of Senator Scott Brown’s medical records AND those of his family

Posted by iusbvision on April 1, 2011

Boston Herald:

U.S. Sen. Scott Brown — an upstart Blue State Republican in the cross hairs of national Democrats — is lashing out at the party’s opposition researchers, accusing them of prying into his family’s private health insurance records, and demanding that they stop fighting dirty.

“It seems in bad form. Obviously, when it comes to information about my wife and daughters, it crosses the line. I find it offensive and so do they,” Brown told the Herald yesterday.

“They (Democrats) don’t have any business muddling in the private health records of my family,” said Brown, adding that his family is “disturbed” by the intrusion.

Officials from the Group Insurance Commission, the state’s health insurance provider, notified Brown on Tuesday that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee asked them “to provide insurance information,” according to a copy of the GIC letter obtained by the Herald.

The GIC, a quasi-independent state agency, administers health insurance for state employees and their families. Brown’s wife, Gail Huff, and two daughters, Ayla and Arianna, were also on his state insurance plan when he was a Wrentham state senator.

A copy of the DSCC request provided to the Herald asks for “all direct correspondence” between Brown and the GIC under the Massachusetts public records law.

Now this is rich….

A DSCC spokesman insisted the request was only for public information and never sought private medical information about the Brown family.

To provide insurance information, like what was paid out, claims made etc. It is pretty easy to reverse engineer a medical record from that information, but oh no, you don’t want medical information, WHICH IS WHY YOU SENT THE LETTER TO THE STATE MEDICAL INSURANCE COMMISSION….

Come on guys, if you are going to issue a denial, can you at least come up with one that is better than that? Remember this is the state with RomneyCare folks, they state will have those records and the Democrats want them.

The Democratic Party illegally obtained Michael Steele’s credit report and released it, Obama illegally obtained a copy of Jack Ryan’s sealed divorce papers to put the details of his sex life and such on the front page and the Democrats also put Congressman Allen West’s Social Security number and other person info in a mailer to 60,000 people.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Dirty Tricks, Government Gone Wild, Health Law, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

Video and News Roundup April 1st

Posted by iusbvision on April 1, 2011

AWESOME: US and Japanese Forces Rescue Dog Swept to Sea Three Weeks Ago in Japan

Kristi Noem: Democrats are Rooting for a Government Shutdown

“The federal government accumulates more deficit every single day than my home state did in a year.”

Democrats are on retreat after the leadership was caught on tape plotting a government shutdown to increase deficit spending. Rasmussen: 57% prefer government shutdown to current levels of spending – LINK. Former DNC Chair Howard Dean: Democrats should root for a government shutdown – LINK.

Obama Administration Official: GOP Budget Cuts Will Kill 70, 000 Children…

This time both the Democrat and Republic strategist agree; not only is the statement preposterous, but you can say that about anything.

Why do we pay the people in Congress or the federal government or the military? Don’t you know how many lives we could “save” around the world with that money? Do it for the children!

Trump weighs in on the policy debate: If I am President Iran WILL NOT have a nuclear weapon. Iraq needs to pay us back, Saudi needs to pay us for protecting them and keeping them in power. The Arab League asked us to deal with Ghadaffi, they are super rich countries so pay for it! Trump talks China, trade, OPEC, taxes, jobs and more

This is a no miss interview, even if you do not take Trump seriously you should still watch it.

On trade, Trump is right but there will be consequences, a big tariff on China will mean an instant price increase in everything that is made there, which lately seems like most things. So the poor and middle class will take a hit, for a while. But it must be done. Trump is right that we are being sucked dry and we have had leaders who have not looked out for our economic interests (which is obvious).

The problem is that currency manipulation and labor costs are only a part of the problem. The Obama Deficit Commission which the media doesn’t want to talk about much lately is right in that our tax rates are too high, our tax code is too complicated and too hard to comply with, and we have so many regulations (many of which are corrupt to help political cronies) that it is impossible to comply with them all. We have so many regulations no one could even read them all in a lifetime so it is no mystery why investors and job creators do not want to invest here. Trump does hit on these problems, but does not tie it in with his narrative about the Chinese and others that are fleecing us. He should as it really is one problem.

Former CIA “bin-Laden Unit” Head To CNN Anchor: “You’re Just Carrying The Water For Mr. Obama”

Dr. Scheur wrote a “Bush bashing” book. He has also blasted Obama and Clinton for bad “war on terror” tactics/strategy. He was the head of the CIA’s bin-Laden unit. He was one of the sources for the film, “The path to 9/11”. Dr. Scheur almost always has facts that are not disputable, but of course his conclusions are open to debate. Scheur’s opinions are highly informed ones though and have merit even if I do not totally agree with them.

Like Dr. Niall Ferguson, Dr. Scheur has little tolerance for biased, no nothing reporters who are often less informed than his students.

Mexican Cartels Get Heavy Weapons from Central America, U.S. Cables Say

Dick Morris Reports: Wisconsin Reforms In Peril Due To Possible Election Of Radical Judge

Congressman Issa subpoena’s documents after Obama Administration stonewall in project gunrunner case. The administration was actively facilitating American guns going to the Mexican Drug Cartels and got caught. – LINK.

Police Caught On Tape Beating Black Man.

The man is a member of the Nation of Islam and allegedly as he was working at a night club he was taking keys from customers and going to their cars and stealing items such as GPS, computers and he was caught with a stolen firearm. You can see on the tape that he surrendered to police and they beat him for some time and there are multiple police obviously breaking the law so what you see here is an automatic conspiracy by police to break the law and cover it up. After all if there was no tape what would the police report have said? I have an idea, something like “the police were fighting this athletic perp and the police feared for their collective lives and very regrettably the suspect was injured but the police used all possible restraint”. So here is the rub, if the police in this video were capable of this, how can anything they say about the charges against this man be believed? This is why police need to have restraint especially if this man is guilty, because of this tape not only will he walk, but the city will be writing him a big fat check.  – LINK for the video and story.

More Obama Administration Nuttery: American servicewomen “encouraged” to wear “hijab” headscarves in Afghanistan – LINK.

‘Unprecedented’ Political Review of FOIA Requests by Homeland Security Department

So much for transparency – LINK.

Government Pays Failed Fannie Mae Execs Millions (again) – LINK.

Related:

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac paying $210 million in bonuses with your money and no outrage why…..

Fannie and Freddie Amnesia: Taxpayers are on the hook for about $400 billion, partly because Sen. Obama helped to block reform.

Transparency, Congress & Corruption: AIG and Fannie Mae Bonuses

Rules For The and Not For Me:  Presidential limousine, security vehicles exempt from fed ‘green’ vehicle policy – LINK

Six of top 15 declining cities in California – LINK

Hello, I am from the Communist Party. Would you like to join?…

Evil with a smiley face. Notice how many in the second video are academics?

 

Posted in 2012, 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Post 2010 | Leave a Comment »

AARP Making Mega-Millions on Corrupt ObamaCare “Easter Egg”

Posted by iusbvision on March 31, 2011

This is how some corrupt corporations make millions and scam the taxpayers. The AARP is supposed to be non profit. That means that they are not supposed to make hundreds of millions of dollars in profits, they are not supposed to be engaged in partisan politics and they are not supposed to be engaged in a huge conflict of interest. AARP has done all of this at the expense of their members and employees.

Related:

AARP and Many Others Hiking Premiums or Dumping Coverage Because of ObamaCare

Corrupt AARP Health Care Deal Puts Seniors at Risk

CBO: Obama is wrong, cuts in Medicare will result in benefit cuts. The corrupt AARP angle. UPDATED!

Ethics You Can’t Believe In: Special Interests Dominate Fiscal Responsibility Summit

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Click & Learn, Economics 101, Health Law, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Obama refuses Congressional request on Obama meetings with lobbyists, mega corporations, interest groups and drug companies

Posted by iusbvision on March 26, 2011

Dick Cheney met with those oil guys in the Energy Task Force before they proposed legislation to drill that would have moved us closer to independence and lower gas prices. Democrats filibustered that legislation in the Senate to stop it. Don’t you wish they hadn’t today?

The left created all of these conspiracy theories about the meeting, demanded transcripts etc etc.

Well now the shoe is on the other foot and the left and the elite media are like this:

AP/Yahoo:

Obama tells GOP: Nice try on health care records

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama once promised that negotiations over his health care overhaul would be carried out openly, in front of TV cameras and microphones. Tell that to the White House now.

Republican congressional investigators got the brush-off this past week after pressing for details of meetings between White House officials and interest groups, including drug companies and hospitals that provided critical backing for Obama’s health insurance expansion.

Complying with the records request from the House Energy and Commerce Committee “would constitute a vast and expensive undertaking” and could “implicate longstanding executive branch confidentiality interests,” White House lawyer Robert Bauer wrote the committee. Translation: Nice try.

It’s one more roadblock for Republicans who tapped into widespread anxiety about the scope and costs of the new health care law to regain control of the House in last fall’s elections.

So far, they’ve been unable to repeal the landmark legislation they dismiss as “Obamacare.” GOP efforts to deny administration agencies the money to carry out the law are running into unintended consequences, not to mention the sheer difficulty of tracking those dollars. Now it looks like oversight isn’t going to be easy either.

“We are both concerned and disappointed by your response,” the committee chairman, Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., wrote back to Bauer. “The American public deserves the information we have requested. The secret meetings conducted by (White House officials) are a perfect example of why transparency in government is so important.”

 

So much for the most transparent White House in history as Obama promised so many times.

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Nurse tells her story: How I went from an Obama voter to Tea Party activist.

Posted by iusbvision on March 25, 2011

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Click & Learn, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

Indiana Small Business Owner On Obamacare’s Impact on Jobs and Economy

Posted by iusbvision on March 22, 2011

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

Senator Marco Rubio with Mark Levin

Posted by iusbvision on March 16, 2011

A great interview. I like Marco because he sees the big picture. He attacks the nations problems as if he wakes up in the morning and reads a list of the reasons why he ran for the job in the first place.

So you hear it in his voice? The anger? The frustration? The worry? Marco has had enough. He is fighting to be nice, but you can tell that he is ready to launch on some bad guys.

More Marco Rubio:

Posted in 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Government Gone Wild, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Republicans Find Multi-Billion Dollar Slush Funds Hidden in ObamaCare Bill – UPDATE: PolitiFact, FactCheck, WashPo Fact Checker, Heritage say Bachmann is Right

Posted by iusbvision on March 9, 2011

So what about those CBO numbers again far left?

$105 billion hidden in the bill so that the GOP could never cut off funds for it, a $16 Billion slush fund, and unlimited budgetary authority to bail out state insurance pools. None of it known, none of it counted by the CBO and much of it unconstitutional.

Now you know why Nancy Pelosi had to say this:

UPDATE I – Michele Bachmann speaks.

The liberal media has been attacking my work to expose the truth about Obamacare. But all the major political fact-checking outlets–PolitiFact, FactCheck and the Washington Post Fact Checker–agree: the $105 billion hidden in Obamacare does exist! Get the facts: http://bit.ly/ggdOtv .

Heritage Foundation:

Today former Congressman Ernest Istook testified before the House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee about the $105 billion slush fund in advance appropriations liberals tucked inside Obamacare. The $105 billion bypasses the traditional yearly budgeting process and is spread throughout the 2,700 page legislation. It took the Congressional Research Service (CRS) seven months to identify all the disparate funds and it was not until February (11 months after the bill passed) that all of the funds could be totaled up.

Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) has been beating the drum to raise awareness of this unprecedented level of advance spending. But the liberal media has been attacking her for calling it “hidden” funding. In reality, Rep. Bachmann said that “practically no Member of Congress even knew that $105 billion of funding was” in the bill.FactCheck says that this funding was known to “those who read the bill … including members of Congress.” But does FactCheck really believe that any member of Congress read all 2,700 pages of the bill? Do they have any evidence at all that any member of Congress knew about the $105 billion figure before CRS published their report this February?

But more importantly, in their attempted take down of Rep. Bachmann, PolitiFactFactCheck, and The Washington Post Fact Checker all confirm her underlying charge: the $105 billion exists. Poltifact writes: “We added up the spending Bachmann was referring to and got $104 billion — very close to her number.”

And a note to The Washington Post Fact Checker: Former Congressman Ernest Istook served in the House of Representatives, not the Senate.

UPDATE II

 

UPDATE IIISpeaker Boehner Blasts Democrats for Hidden Slush Funds in ObamaCare

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Dirty Tricks, Government Gone Wild, Health Law, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

British Student Calls Out Michelle Obama. Defends Sarah Palin.

Posted by iusbvision on March 5, 2011

Meet the lovely and quite brilliant YouTube personality Laurbubble.

I sent Laurbubble the following message:

You have just figured out the American left. They make a “policy” and cry “WERE SAVED!” without any regard for the unintended consequences of their policy. The policy usually makes matters worse as you have so eloquently described. Usually the policies they make for the “public good” increase the stock of one of their contributors, or stick it to those who donate to the other party.

The more the planner’s plans fail the more the planners plan.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Culture War, Government Gone Wild, Health Law, Palin Truth Squad, True Talking Points | 1 Comment »

Sebelius Cracks! Admits the Obamacare Books Were Cooked! Admits to Double Counting Half Trillion Dollars!

Posted by iusbvision on March 4, 2011

 

Via Fox Nation:

The House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee invited Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to swing by and have a little chin wag about the budgetary implications of ObamaCare. Representative John Shimkus (R-IL) noticed that the rather large sum of $500 billion was dedicated to both sustaining Medicare and funding ObamaCare. When he asked Sebelius which destiny awaited those five hundred billion clams, she replied, “Both.”

That’s right, folks: another part of the ObamaCare fraud involved double-counting half a trillion dollars. Shimkus said he was “shocked” to learn this. “We knew the health care law’s actual cost was much greater than originally told to the public,” he declared. “And now, the truth is slowly coming out in administration reports and testimony.”

 

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Health Law | 4 Comments »

February News Roundup Part I

Posted by iusbvision on February 18, 2011

We have been a bit behind on blogging this month. Catching up by using a couple of mega-posts to catch up on the important stuff. There are lots of great updates here so be sure to scan through this carefully and be sure to catch our February News Roundup Part II.

>> Obama’s Cousin Dr. Milton Wolf says that Palin is right about ObamaCare.  – LINK.

>> Watts – New Evidence that mother nature deals with CO2 just fine. Also if all industrial activity stopped climate would still change – LINK:

>>Steve McIntyre presentation at the Heartland Climate Change and Economics Institute. This is a no miss video. – LINK.

>> Daily Caller – The new budget from the White House gives the GOP new opportunities.

The budget from the President contains levels of spending, debt and new taxes that are just reckless. The numbers are also fraudulent because the proposed budget assumes levels of economic growth that are not even close to realistic. You can see the official proposed and rather rosy rigged White House deficit numbers here – http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf

Do these numbers look like the government living within its mean as President Obama said to you?

>> Daily Caller – First Drilling Company Files Bankruptcy as  Result of Obama Illegal Offshore Drilling Ban.

Keep in mind that we reported that the Obama Administration has been found in contempt of course for continuing to enforce the illegal offshore drilling ban. By the way the Daily Caller has been on a roll of great coverage lately and has become a must see daily along with the Washington Examiner.

>>Dale Petersen is running for President. I had a nice chat with one of his fund raisers at CPAC. I will discuss more of that later. This guy is a long shot to be sure, but there is certainly more depth to him than a few great TV ads.

>>Gallup: More Americans Now Pro-Life than Pro-Abortion for the First Time.

>>Daily Caller – Obama signs into law new Food Regulation Bill passed during the lame duck session at Christmas while you weren’t looking.

This bill is a gargantuan power grab that drives up food prices and sticks it to smaller companies and farms. This bill is Norton’s First Law in action: Big business loves big government because big government taxes and regulates the small and medium sized competition out of the competition.

You “liberals” who claim to oppose corporatism, I am waiting for you to speak up because this is yet another in a long list of examples of Democrats being in big corporations back pocket.

>> Tea Party Express Takes on Senator Lugar:

>> America’s worst speed traps LINK.

>> Prof. William Jacobson at Cornell dissects the Shirley Sherrod nuisance lawsuit against Andrew Breitbart. Mark Levin Comments:

>> Accuracy in Media interviews Donald Rumsfeld on his book and media bias.

Rumsfeld talks about the WMD issue. The weapons inspectors found active and static WMD programs some of which could be producing mass weapons in six months and some programs would be producing within five years. Saddam was suppose dto give all of this up. We invaded in 2003 well five years later was 2008. So what would terrorists now be armed with if Saddam was not removed?: 

>> Bill O’Reilly Budget Plan for America – “It is embarrassing that the President’s own debt commission says he is not doing nearly enough to solve the financial crisis…” : 

>> WOW – Laurie Dhue was a functioning alcoholic for 10 years! Tells all to Geraldo! Sober for 4 years! May come back to Fox News!!

>> GOOD NEWS – The House passed 61 Billion in real spending cuts today and repealed excessive and poorly designed regulations from several industries including coal. The regulatory power is granted by Congress for the purpose of making the laws Congress passes easy to understand and follow, it was never designed for social engineering nor was it intended to be used to allow the executive to legislate on its own and buck the will of Congress.

>> File this under awesome: The House has voted 244-179 to kill $13 million in U.S. funding for the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The House no longer wishes to have the IPCC prepare its climate assessment. GOP lawmakers said IPCC scientists were guilty of manipulating data and destroying evidence to promote their global warming views. (H/T Gregory Hilton)

>> By a 235 to 189 margin, the House of Representatives has just voted to defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, National Public Radio and PBS. They have been receiving $420 million from the government. They are all responsible for blatant bias against conservatives. (H/T Gregory Hilton).

>> Liz Trotta Rips Anderson Cooper’s Egypt Coverage!

>> State Rep. Robert Hagen (D-OH) has just called a black tea party member “Buckwheat,” but says it is not a racial slur. Tom Spaulding wants to test his claim: “Let’s have Hagan take a midnight stroll in poor urban areas and call the black people he meets ‘Buckwheat’. Let him explain that he’s been using the phrase ‘since he was a kid’ and it ‘has no racial connotation’”. State Sen. Jake Knotts (R-SC) referred to Gov. Nikki Haley as a “towelhead” on a comedy show.  (Via Gregory Hilton)

>> Tucker Carlson:  Politically Correct (read not accurate) pro-Islamic bias being introduced to public school text books.

I have high school aged relatives and it amazes me how much leftist secular/anti-western culture attitude change propaganda gets into these text books, much of it can be debunked with common academic and public records resources. In many of these texts Ronald Reagan’s name is not even mentioned in the sections covering the end of the Cold War; I just graduated with a new degree in 2010 and that particular bias was in my class material. Fortunately the young PhD. candidate teaching the class allowed me to give a lecture on the Cold War as I was the only one in the room old enough to remember it.

>> Geert Wilders on the expatriating of Jihadists from Europe.

Most people here in the USA havce no idea how the situation in Europe has evolved. Many European countries including Sweden, England, Germany, France, and Holland have “state within a state” jihadist enclaves where militant Islamists have such control that not even the police are not safe to enter. The violence has reached incredible levels. Such violence includes Islamic rape gangs that act with near impunity, honor killings, and female genital mutilation. The militants have masterfully used their lawyers to manipulate the Euro left and the hate speech laws to make it virtually illegal to even criticize what is going on.  Polls in England show that 28% of Muslims were willing to tell a pollster that they supported and/or were sympathetic to the cause of the 9/11 hijackers and the subway bombers. Many also are willing to tell a pollster that they want to do away with democracy, and force sharia law and the caliphate upon Europe.  

>> Congress in bipartisan push to reverse Obama’s ban on re-importation of M-1 Garand antique rifles.

Ahh yes I remember the campaign. I remember when Obama said that he supported the Second Amendment and how he promised not to get in the way of hunters, collectors and those who wanted to have a gun for legitimate self defense. I remember how he hired that actor to get in target shooting garb to praise him. I remember how he lectured us all on how he supported gun rights and firearm enthusiasts. I also remember how he opposed a law in Illinois that would allow you to defend yourself in your own home. I also remember how he answered several firearms policy questionnaires and I remember how he was against Heller before he was for it. I also remember how right after he was elected he started hiring hard core anti-gun (BATF Chief) and anti-hunting (OIRA Director) activists.  But what can I say, but WE TOLD YOU SO.

The excuse was that these rifles are too dangerous…. but no one in the Administration would go on the record stating so. “Asked why the M1’s pose a threat, the State Department spokesman referred questions to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. ATF representatives said they would look into the question Monday afternoon, but on Wednesday they referred questions to the Justice Department. DOJ spokesman Dean Boyd referred questions back to the State Department” – LINK.

These rifles are NOT the choice of criminals by a long shot. The M1 Garand rifle is very long, heavy, fires ammo that is very expensive, it has an antique loading mechanism that only holds eight bullets, it is not a rapid fire weapon and if the proper training is not obeyed EVERY time the weapon is loaded/unloaded its feeding mechanism can  easily leave you with a broken thumb or finger.

Let me show you what I mean: 

Here is the good news from the NRA: 

>> Video release of the loon that tried to firebomb Governor Rick Perry’s (R-TX) home.

>> Todd Palin at Iron Dog Race in Alaska. He is a four time champion.

>> Attention Journalism Majors – See why veteran unemployment is higher than the national average

>> Daily Caller – China moves to stamp out “Jasmine Revolution” LINK.

>> Food Prices going up at 150% inflation rate. And some elite media reporters said that Sarah Palin was nuts when she predicted this. LINK.

>> Six Reasons why USA is Only the Ninth Most Free Economy in the World LINK.

>> Obama Was Against Health Care Mandate in Campaign

>> Democrats having a fit over House investigations into Obama Administration lack of transparency. This is a subject we have covered many times. He promised the most transparent administration and has the least transparent since Nixon.  – LINK.

>> Gallup: GOP Image Highest Since 2005LINK.

>> Book Glamorizing Suicide Bombers Found in Arizona Desert Near BorderLINK.

>> Radicalized Muslim Cleric Arrested Sneaking into USALINK.

>> Disaster: Obama to raise ethanol in gas to 15%. Ethanol gives you lower gas mileage, eats automotive seals, breaks down into water and varnish in a few weeks if your car sits, is environmentally backwards, this will drive up food prices, it is expensive, the taxpayers subsidize it and most cars made before 2006 aren’t designed to handle it. HotAir.com has more details.

>> Newt all over the place on ethanol and global warming. His positions change depending on who he is in front of and I witnessed that at CPAC. Newt is brilliant, but like Mit Romney it seems he just wants it too badly. LINK. Gov. Daniels is pro-ethanol and has been consistent in that view. Of course he is from Indiana so what do you expect? Of course Mitch is wrong about the issue on the merits and he almost certainly knows it. Economically and logistically ethanol is a nightmare, but opposing it politically in this state may be as well and the same goes for Iowa. Mitch is truly an economic genius so I cannot believe he does not understand this.

>> Judge Vinson – ObamaCare is unconstitutional. Judge uses Obama’s own words in the ruling LINK.

>> Media Bias – Washington Post has no coverage for March for Life but gives 48 paragraphs to leftist Ingrate Ron Reagan Jr. who attack his dead father Presidnet Reagan. LINK. ABC gives 24 minutes of network news coverage of his nook in five days. What nooks gets that much network face time? – LINK. You have heard us use the term “attitude change propaganda” before well I have just given you two examples of it. Loyal son Michael Reagan responds with a simple statement, “My brother was an embarrassment to my father when he was alive, now he is an embarrassment to my mother”.

>> Jeff Sessions: Economic policy that is stuck in reverse LINK.

>> Mark Levin: Obama is NOT moderating. Has Obama called off his lawyers when it comes to ObamaCare, Texas EPA regs, illegal offshore drilling ban, suing Arizona etc. NOPE. Must see video – LINK.

>> OK this was sort of obvious but it is always good to have the evidence – Obama Justice Department Colluded with ACLU to Attack Arizona’s SB 1070 According to Documents Uncovered by Judicial WatchLINK.

>> New York Democrats indicted on voter fraud charges. Elite media yawns. LINK.

>> Reagan on the dictator of Libya:

>> Dramatic Video: Mom Lashes Out At “Scumbag” Judge That Was Found Guilty Of Sending Kids To Jail For Payola

>> O’Reilly and Bernard Goldberg on CNN’s softball interview with George Soros:

>> Texas will soon pass a new law allowing concealed carry on campus:

Many students are too young to remember, but I remember very well when only a few states in the union allowed concealed carry. Every time a new state changed the law to get more constitutionally correct the left warned that there would be shootouts right and left and that average people would be snapping at the drop of a hat. Well it hasn’t happened. In fact states who have passed such laws saw almost all crime including gun crime drop. While England and Australia passed gun bans their crime and gun crime rates when up sharply. A gun is a great equalizer and if citizens do not have them the law of the land starts to look more like the law of the jungle.

Here in Indiana as many as 1 in 12 carries a concealed handgun. How often do you hear of issues involving people with legal guns? Most citizens who are unaware of the gun culture such as the young lady who made those rather uninformed comments in the video have no idea that they are surrounded by armed people much of the time. Of course now some courts are enforcing the bill of rights on public property more and more. With Heller and the other recent rulings involving the Second Amendment expect courts to be more sympathetic to the issue of self defense. Utah has already passed a similar law for schools and it has been a success.

As I have stated before, I believe that some far left professors lack the judgment and temperament to have access to a firearm. Fortunately most of the left will not take advantage of such laws anyways.

>> Rumsfeld: “I think [Obama] has made a practice of trying to apologize for America” LINK

>> UK – Four Islamist men slashed teacher’s face and left him with fractured skull ‘for teaching other religions to Muslim girls’LINK

>> Hillary: “Israel’s settlements illegitimate“. We pointed out that Obama hired some hard core antisemites to serve on his campaign and as advisors. This is exactly the type of thing that Joe Biden promised would not happen.

>> Ann Coulter says that Sarah Palin should not run for President because it would be a step down for her. It would be like Rush Limbaugh running for President.

This may seem silly to the politically unsavvy, but think about it.  Palin has a bully pulpit that is bigger than Obama’s. She can get legislation changed with a Tweet or a Facebook note. She is the fund raiser and king maker in chief. And she can mobilize the base after an election to keep members of Congress and even a President honest.

>> Barry Rubin: NPR is not journalism it is a political warfare operation – LINK.

>> Pamela Geller: “honor killings” on the increase in the West – 

>> MSNBC: Oil Companies Make Sure Our Air is Polluted

Where do they find these whack jobs. Oh wait I know, radicalized college campus’

Stay Tuned for February News Roundup Part II

Posted in 2012, 2012 Primary, Alarmism, Big Bizz Loves Big Govt, Chuck Norton, Energy & Taxes, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, True Talking Points | 1 Comment »

South Dakota to challenge ObamaCare individual mandate by requiring all citizens to buy a gun.

Posted by iusbvision on February 1, 2011

UPDATE: Ann Coulter –

If the government can mandate that a citizen by a product to promote a public purpose why not require that they have a gun for the defense of themselves, their fellow citizens and the state?

Notice how they admit that the courts will nuke it, but that is the point.

Argus Leader:

Five South Dakota lawmakers have introduced legislation that would require any adult 21 or older to buy a firearm “sufficient to provide for their ordinary self-defense.”

The bill, which would take effect Jan. 1, 2012, would give people six months to acquire a firearm after turning 21. The provision does not apply to people who are barred from owning a firearm.

Nor does the measure specify what type of firearm. Instead, residents would pick one “suitable to their temperament, physical capacity, and preference.”

The measure is known as an act “to provide for an individual mandate to adult citizens to provide for the self defense of themselves and others.”

Rep. Hal Wick, R-Sioux Falls, is sponsoring the bill and knows it will be killed. But he said he is introducing it to prove a point that the federal health care reform mandate passed last year is unconstitutional.

“Do I or the other cosponsors believe that the State of South Dakota can require citizens to buy firearms? Of course not. But at the same time, we do not believe the federal government can order every citizen to buy health insurance,” he said.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Firearms, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

Obama’s own Medicare Actuary more confident in Paul Ryan’s ‘Road Map’ cost controls than Obama’s health law

Posted by iusbvision on January 26, 2011

Daily Caller:

The government’s chief actuary for Medicare spending on Wednesday said he had more confidence that Republican Paul Ryan’s plan to reform entitlements would drive down health-care costs than President Obama’s recently passed overhaul.

Richard S. Foster, the chief actuary of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, made the comment in response to questions from lawmakers during House Budget Committee hearing.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen, the ranking Democrat from Maryland, went on the attack against committee chairman Paul Ryan’s “Road Map” plan, which is a long-term proposal to make entitlement spending solvent.

Van Hollen pressed Foster on whether Ryan’s plan would work, prompting Foster to point out that one of the biggest problems in health care now is that most new technology that is developed increases costs rather than decreasing it.

“If there’s a way to turn around the mindset for the people who do the research and development … to get them to focus more on cost-reducing tech and less on cost increasing technology, if you can do that then one of biggest components of [increasing costs] turns to your side,” Foster said. “If you can put that pressure on the research and development community, you might have fighting chance of changing the nature of new medical technology in a way that makes lower cost levels possible.”

Foster said: “The Road Map has that potential. There is some potential for the Affordable Care Act price reductions, though I’m a little less confident about that.”

The thinking behind Foster’s comment is that a voucher system would reduce the amount of government money available for health care over time, causing consumers to shop around and creating an incentive in the health-care sector to compete for those dollars.

In a brief interview outside the House chamber later in the day, Ryan explained it this way: “There’s only going to be so much money for health care because the economy can only support so much … So is it better spent through the person in a competitive marketplace or through the government under increasing price controls and pressure?”

“If you go through the century, these entitlements consume all money. The GAO calculation assumes Congress is going to wise up and cut back on these programs because people will decide they don’t want 100 percent of their discretionary income going to health care. They want some for food and some for shelter and some for other things. So there will be a curtailment of health care spending in the future,” Ryan said. “The question is which curtailment gets you the better results at going after the cause of health inflation: consumer pressure or government price controls.”

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

More Top Union Contributors to Obama Get ObamaCare Waivers

Posted by iusbvision on January 24, 2011

So much for equal justice unde rthe law. More picking of winners and losers. Welcome to Chicago….

Related: 222 companies and unions get ObamaCare waivers from White House

 

CNS News:

Three SEIU Locals–Including Chicago Chapter–Waived From Obamacare Requirement

Monday, January 24, 2011

Three local chapters of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), whose political action committee spent $27 million supporting Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential election, have received temporary waivers from a provision in the Obamacare law.

The three SEIU chapters include the Local 25 in Obama’s hometown of Chicago.

The waivers allow health insurance plans to limit how much they will spend on a policy holder’s medical coverage for a given year. Under the new health care law, however, such annual limits are phased out by the year 2014. (Under HHS regulations, annual limits can be no less than $750,000 for 2011, no less than $1.25 million in 2012 and no less than $2 million in 2013.)

The SEIU, with more than 2 million members nationally, includes health care workers, janitors, security guards, and state and local government workers.

The three SEIU locals, covering a total of 36,064 enrollees, are covered by the federal waivers, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.

HHS gave a waiver to Local 25 SEIU in Chicago with 31,000 enrollees on Oct. 1, 2010; to Local 1199 SEIU Greater New York Benefit Fund with 4,544 enrollees on Oct. 10, 2010; and to the SEIU Local 1 Cleveland Welfare Fund with 520 enrollees on Nov. 15, 2010.

So far, the Obama administration has issued waivers to 222 entities, including businesses, unions and charitable organizations. Of that total, 45 were labor organizations.

A total of 1,507,418 enrollees are now included in the waivers. More than one-third — 512,315 – of the enrollees affected were insured by union health plans.

SEIU Local 1199’s health plan put a $50,000 cap on medical expenses for its New Jersey nursing home workers, according to 1199 SEIU spokeswoman Leah Gonzalez. That’s $700,000 under the 2011 limit stipulated by HHS regulations.

In September, HHS announced it would grant waivers to employers to prevent some workers from losing their benefits if the insurer could not meet new health care law’s requirements on annual limits. The waivers are granted by HHS if the department determines “compliance with the interim final regulations would result in a significant decrease in access to benefits or a significant increase in premiums,” according to a Sept. 3 memo by Steve L. Larson, director of the HHS Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight.

Local 1199, SEIU’s Greater New York Benefit Fund, requested the waiver specifically with respect to its separate plan for New Jersey members, according to Gonzalez. This waiver primarily affects low-wage New Jersey nursing home workers whose health care plan provides medical, hospital, prescription, dental and vision benefits.

The New Jersey members now have an annual maximum health care benefit of $50,000. Gonzalez said fewer than 1 percent of members have ever reached that cap, and that those members who did received additional help.

“The members’ health benefits are paid for by the employer and are negotiated through collective bargaining,” Gonzalez said in a written statement to CNSNews.com. “Several years ago, facing limited dollars from the employers for this small group, the members themselves chose how to shape their health plan to get the most out of their coverage.”

Gonzalez added that prescriptions are excluded from the cap. “For example, if a member maxes out from a hospital stay, she/he can continue to get their life-saving medications throughout the year while accessing alternative coverage at low-cost community clinics.”

Neither SEIU Local 25 nor Local 1, nor the national organization responded to CNSNews.com’s request for comment.

The SEIU’s Committee on Political Education made $27,829,845.91 in independent expenditures on Obama’s presidential campaign in 2008. SEIU-affiliated groups in Illinois have long supported Obama’s campaigns and endorsed him for the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate in 2004. In 2008, the national union backed Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination. (See earlier story.)

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Government Gone Wild, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

James Madison: Class envy politics leads to chaos and violence

Posted by iusbvision on January 24, 2011

 

James Madison is known as the Father of the Constitution. The left is saying that repeal of ObamaCare in unconstitutional, which is of course laughable to thinking people, but just in a little help is in order here is Federalist #10:

A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation as of practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power; or to persons of other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to co-operate for their common good. So strong is this propensity of mankind to fall into mutual animosities, that where no substantial occasion presents itself, the most frivolous and fanciful distinctions have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly passions and excite their most violent conflicts. But the most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Culture War, Economics 101, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

House votes to repeal ObamaCare – Some members double down on stupid

Posted by iusbvision on January 19, 2011

The vote was 245-189. Three Democrats (McIntyre, Ross, Boren) crossed party lines to support passage. In the past when the elite media got one Republican to vote with the Democrats big government, big spending, or corrupt regulations to pick winners and losers they would say that it enjoyed bi-partisan support. So now we can say that both parties want O-Care repealed!!

John Lewis was asked the inconvenient question:  What part of the Constitution authorizes the government to pass an individual mandate? The only thing I can say after this incredibly wrong headed and vapid answer is that it is time to retire…. wow.

The 14th Amendment has nothing to do with this, and excessive government regulation, taxation and bureaucracy was a complaint in the Declaration of Independence as a VIOLATION of the pursuit of happiness.

Declaration of Independence:

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

Lewis compared John McCain to ultra-racist George Wallace in October 2008.

 

UPDATE: Our friend Lee Doren posted a great rant on this nonsense. Definitely a fun listen! 

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Health Law, Post 2010, Stuck on Stupid, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

Analysis: Herman Cain vs. Bill Clinton on HillaryCare

Posted by iusbvision on January 19, 2011

Notice how Clinton says that it will work because it means that everyone in the business will have to raise their prices the same so it all works out; no it doesn’t. Clinton is engaging in a false assumption that destroys smaller competition and benefits the biggest players in a market.

Cain is explaining that “big pizza” has a higher base percentage of profit, based on both volume and on economies of scale, that gives them lower costs and higher aggregate profitability compared to smaller competitors. While Godfathers has a profitability of 1.5%, “big pizza” has a profitability that is likely close to 6%.

So what does this mean? If Clinton gets his way “big pizza” will not raise their prices at all, on the contrary they will have a sale and keep that sale on till smaller outfits like GodFathers who are forced to raise prices and reduce service via layoffs can’t compete and shut down. At first the barely profitable stores close, then the better ones. The result is more and more markets where “big pizza” progresses its virtual monopoly in each market. With that competition taken out of the picture “big pizza” can charge whatever it likes and prices go up, and the pressure to keep quality up starts to evaporate.

This is why companies like Philip Morris lobbied Democrats to have tobacco taxes and regulations increased.

This brings us to Norton’s First Law:

Big business loves big government, which is why big business loves domestic taxes and regulation because it keeps the small and medium-sized competition out of the competition. It also causes inflation, so ultimately it is you who pays and the poor who are hardest hit. (Big business often gets loopholes written in the laws for themselves such as Nancy Pelosi trying to get a part of the tuna industry exempted from the minimum wage law).

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes, Health Law, Is the cost of government high enough yet? | Leave a Comment »

Former DNC Chair Howard Dean: ObamaCare is designed to force employers off their insurance and force them into the government exchange.

Posted by iusbvision on January 12, 2011

This is exactly what we said from the moment we learned details of the bill. It was obvious that it was designed to make insurance so difficult, so expensive and so regulatory burdensome that employers will just give up.  The owner of a small business in South Bend told me just yesterday that her insurance costs are now up 28%.

[blip.tv http://blip.tv/play/hJNRgpnqMwI%2Em4v%5D

OK do you believe that Obama lied yet?

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

Democrat Leader Pelosi: If All Americans had affordable health care, we would still pass ObamaCare

Posted by iusbvision on January 4, 2011

Wow.

It is amazing to normal people how these politicians will just sit there and lie or repeat a manufactured lie/halftruth.

ObamaCare will create jobs: It sure will, tens of thousands of new government bureaucrat jobs.

The “non partisan Congressional Budget Office said that it would reduce the deficit”:

They said that because the Democrats made the CBO score it according to a set of assumptions that are not going to happen. Such as doctor reimbursements dropping and staying so low that Doctors could not afford to take Medicare patients and other such tricks to hide expenses or count money twice.

Even when the CBO is given realistic scoring instructions they still get it way off. The cost of every program is underestimated, the impact of tax cuts and tax increases is usually wrong. This is because the CBO uses near static Keynesian models to forecast.

I will slightly exaggerate the following example to make the point. McDonald’s sells one million hamburgers a year. Congress tells the CBO that we will place a $100 tax on each burger. How much money will the government take in?

CBO – 100 million dollars.

OK CBO, those nasty Republicans want to cut the tax from $100 to $1. Based on the previous model how much will the Republicans increase the deficit?

CBO – 99 million dollars.

Of course the truth is that no one is going to buy the burger with a $100 tax on each one, but lots of people will buy them if there is only a $1 tax. The reality is that the government will collect more money with the reduced tax rate, but that is not how the CBO would score it under these instructions.

Now you know why the CBO first 20 year outlay estimate for Medicare looked so affordable to Congress, they only underestimated the cost by nearly a factor of 10.

But when asked to give their own opinion when they are not being played or tied to obsolete models the CBO says things like THIS:

Under current law, the federal budget is on an unsustainable path, because federal debt will continue to grow much faster than the economy over the long run. Although great uncertainty surrounds long-term fiscal projections, rising costs for health care and the aging of the population will cause federal spending to increase rapidly under any plausible scenario for current law. Unless revenues increase just as rapidly, the rise in spending will produce growing budget deficits. Large budget deficits would reduce national saving, leading to more borrowing from abroad and less domestic investment, which in turn would depress economic growth in the United States. Over time, accumulating debt would cause substantial harm to the economy.

Even Obama’s own Medicare Actuary says that ObamaCare will make healthcare costs go up on the states, on private insurance and as a percentage of GDP which makes it even less sustainable than it is now; also consider that these are from his Administration’s own rose colored scenario.

Politically the repeal effort, while unlikely to succeed until 2013, when there is a new president, is smart for Republicans, because the Democrats will have to defend the tax increases, the adverse selection spirals and all of the other problems with this bill all over again.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

Washington Post Refuses to Publish Own Poll Showing ObamaCare’s Lowest Popularity Ever

Posted by iusbvision on January 4, 2011

Gotta love the elite media. After all they decide what they think you need to know and leave out what they don’t.

File this one under desperate…

Via Newsbusters:

A new ABC-Washington Post poll found ObamaCare sunk to its lowest popularity yet: 52 percent opposed, and only 43 percent in favor. ABC mentioned the poll without fanfare at the end of a Jake Tapper report on Monday’s World News, and Tapper added this was the health law’s “lowest level of popularity ever.” But Tuesday’s Washington Post reported not one sentence on the poll in the paper – even as they reported in the paper that the same survey found Obama’s tax-and-unemployment-compensation deal has “broad bipartisan support.”

This is the same Post that highlighted the news on Page One on October 20, 2009, when they found a “clear majority” in favor of a socialist “public option” — amid charges they oversampled Democrats.

The numbers weren’t excluded because they arrived late. The Post poll numbers went up on the website yesterday at about 1 pm, under the headline “Health care opponents divided on repeal.” That obscured the numbers a bit, as Cohen found a “slim majority” (not a “clear majority”?) currently oppose ObamaCare:

Overall, 52 percent of those polled oppose the overhaul to the health care system, 43 percent are supportive of it. Fully 86 percent of Republicans are against the legislation; 67 percent of Democrats support it. Independents divide down the middle, with 47 percent in favor and the same number opposed.

Cohen made no mention of that phrase “lowest level of popularity ever.” He did try to suggest that the individual mandate was wildly unpopular — implying other parts of ObamaCare are still worth keeping:

Among the general public, the Kaiser poll showed 68 percent supportive of a repeal of the individual mandate. Of four core components of the health care law tested in the poll, the individual mandate was the one with the highest negatives, by far. Seventy percent of all those polled said they held an unfavorable view of the requirement that everyone carry insurance, including 52 percent who had “strongly unfavorable” opinions.

 

But wait! There’s more! Speaking of oversampling Democrats….

The WashPo poll was posted online December 13th showing 52% opposing ObamaCare, BUT a Rasmussen Reports poll published December 12th shows that 60% favored ObamaCare’s repeal, with 55% favoring repeal the following week and 60% favoring the repeal last week and this week.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Health Law, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Dr. Walter Williams: Washington Cost Estimates Are Lies

Posted by iusbvision on December 31, 2010

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Click & Learn, Economics 101, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

Dr. Walter Williams: Healthcare is not a right

Posted by iusbvision on December 30, 2010

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Click & Learn, Corporatism, Economics 101, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

Washington Post: Health plans for high-risk patients attracting fewer, costing more than expected

Posted by iusbvision on December 29, 2010

Ya think? How long have we been saying this?

Washington Post:

An early feature of the new health-care law that allows people who are already sick to get insurance to cover their medical costs isn’t attracting as many customers as expected.

In the meantime, in at least a few states, claims for medical care covered by the “high-risk pools” are proving very costly, and it is an open question whether the $5 billion allotted by Congress to start up the plans will be sufficient.

Federal health officials contend the new insurance plans, designed solely for people who already are sick, are merely experiencing growing pains. It will take time to spread the word that they exist and to adjust prices and benefits so that the plans are as attractive as possible, the officials say.

State-level directors of the plans agree, in part. But in interviews, they also said that the insurance premiums are unaffordable for some who need the coverage – and that some would-be customers are skittish about the plans because federal lawsuits and congressional Republicans are trying to overturn the entire law.

The Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan, the program’s official name, is an early test of President Obama’s argument that people will embrace the politically divisive health-care overhaul once they see its advantages firsthand. According to some health-policy researchers, the success or failure of the pools also could foreshadow the complexities of making broader changes in health insurance by 2014, when states are to open new marketplaces – or exchanges – for Americans to buy coverage individually or in small groups.

Under the sprawling health-care legislation that Democrats pushed through Congress in March, the special health plans were designed as a temporary coping mechanism for a small but important niche among the nation’s 50 million uninsured: people who have been rejected by insurance companies because they already are sick.

Twenty-seven states have created their own high-risk pools. The rest used an option in the law to let their residents buy coverage through a new federal health plan.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Gallup: Number of people insured by their employer down 5.2%. Number insured by taxpayers up 3.5%

Posted by iusbvision on December 17, 2010

They told us that we would not lose our health insurance and that the cost of insurance is going down. We know as we have covered in our ObamaCare Round-Up posts of elite media coverage that neither is the case. Premiums are rising, companies are dumping their insurance plans, insurers are getting out of some markets and prices have gone up quickly with those who had to do so stating clearly that the new legislation is to blame.

Now we are seeing the effects of big government economics in the aggregate. Prices up and wealth being destroyed so employers and people cannot afford it. Unemployment, uncertainty, debt crisis, monetizing, the cap & trade threat, and ObamaCare all add up.

Gallup:

In U.S., New Low of 44.8% Get Healthcare From Employer

Government healthcare up, employer-based care down in 2010 vs. 2009

by Elizabeth Mendes

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A new low of 44.8% of American adults report getting their health insurance through an employer in November, down from 50% in January 2008, when Gallup began tracking it. The percentage of Americans with government-based healthcare remains elevated, with the 26% who report having it last month similar to the high of 26.3% found in September.

mm

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

222 companies and unions get ObamaCare waivers from White House

Posted by iusbvision on December 12, 2010

It used to be 111, now its 222. More picking winners and losers.

It is just as the White House told the AARP when they were not so thrilled about the new law, “Either help create the menu or you will be on it”. After the favors AARP won they were all for it, but then we saw this:

AARP and Many Others Hiking Premiums or Dumping Coverage Because of ObamaCare

Norton’s First Law: Big business loves big government because big government taxes and regulated the small to medium sized competition out of the competition.

Fox News:

The Obama administration has allowed 222 employers, insurers and unions to opt out of a key mandate in the new health care law – a number that has grown exponentially in the past two months.  Employers like McDonald’s, Waffle House and Universal Orlando are among the companies that have received a one-year waiver, allowing them to maintain minimal coverage below the new law’s standards.

The list has grown significantly since October, when 30 companies had waivers, and has doubled since early November. Taken together, the companies cover more than 1.5 million people, including 34 unions with more than 140,000 members.

Other companies and unions that received waivers include Ruby Tuesday, AMB Bowling Worldwide, and the local chapters of the International Brotherhood of Trade Unions Health and Welfare Fund and the Teamsters.

Although the waivers are to last one year, groups can apply to extend them until 2014.

Many unions had fought hard for health reform and were dismissive about fears that companies would simply dump their coverage if health reform passed. But unions are now demanding to be exempt from the new law.

Many of the nation’s biggest unions also had backed President Obama’s campaign. Early in the health-reform debate, unions won exemptions to the tax on so-called Cadillac health-care plans — those with the most generous benefits.

Workers affected by these exemptions are now left to wonder whether their low-cost health-insurance plans will continue to provide the coverage they need.

Companies who do not get waivers are left wondering whether it’s fair that they must follow the health-reform rules and regulations that every other company in the United States must follow, while their competitors who got waivers do not.

Taxpayers are left wondering if it will be just as easy for them to get waivers on the individual mandate, which says everyone must buy health coverage or pay an annual fine, anywhere from $750 per person to not more than $2,250 per household.

The federal government began granting waivers from a part of the health-reform law in September when it gave the fast-food chain McDonald’s an exemption on its mini-med plans, paid for by the company.

Mini-med plans cover part-time and low-wage workers. McDonald’s threatened to drop its mini-med plans, covering 30,000 workers, if it did not receive an exemption.


Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

New poll says nearly half of all doctors will retire or make significant changes to practice due to ObamaCare

Posted by iusbvision on December 12, 2010

This is the third poll to say this. The first two were the Medicus Poll and the IBD Poll.

IBD:

When we said nearly half of U.S. doctors might close their practices or retire early rather than live under the Democrats’ health overhaul, we were heavily criticized. The critics, though, were wrong.

Four in nine doctors responding to an IBD/TIPP poll sent out in August 2009 said they “would consider leaving their practice or taking an early retirement” if Congress passed what has become known as ObamaCare. That means as many as 360,000 physicians have plans to be doing something other than treating the growing number of patients in this country.

The doctors also told us — 67% to 22%, with 11% not responding — that they expected fewer students to apply for medical school in the future if the plan became law.

Given these views, it’s no surprise that 71% were doubtful that the government would be able to cover the 47 million uninsured Americans with better care at lower costs, which ObamaCare supporters have promised.

Other findings from our poll of 1,376 doctors included: six in 10 agreeing that the Democrats’ plan would strip drug companies of the incentives they need to make lifesaving pharmaceuticals, and 65% believing that a government overhaul would lead to lower-quality care for seniors.

The critics said our poll was not credible, was “shabby” and “garbage.” They accused IBD of being partisan, pursuing an agenda, trying to sway gullible readers with shameless journalism.

Useful rhetoric for keeping the left stirred up, but it was nothing more than an attempt to poison findings the critics didn’t like.

Now a Merritt Hawkins survey of 2,379 doctors for the Physicians Foundation completed in August has vindicated our poll. It found that 40% of doctors said they would “retire, seek a nonclinical job in health care, or seek a job or business unrelated to health care” over the next three years as the overhaul is phased in.

Of those who said they planned to retire, 28% are 55 or younger and nearly half (49%) are 60 or younger.

A larger portion (74%) said they plan to make “one or more significant changes in their practices in the next one to three years, a time when many provisions of health reform will be phased in.”

In addition to retirement, and finding nonclinical jobs elsewhere, those changes include working part time, closing practices to new patients, employment at a hospital, cutting back on the number of patients and switching to a cash or concierge practice.

A deeper look at the results reveals eight in 10 believe ObamaCare “will erode the viability of the private practice model” while six in 10 are convinced they will be compelled to “close or significantly restrict” their practices to at least one category of patient.

Over half (56%) said they believe the government takeover will affect the quality of care they are able to provide their patients and 86% said doctors weren’t “adequately represented to policymakers and the public during the run-up to passage of health reform.”

It’s significant that the Physicians Foundation survey was taken from the membership of the American Medical Association.

After initially indicating opposition to ObamaCare, that group supported the legislation. For that reason, Dr. Marc Siegel said Tuesday on Fox News that he would be “more worried about non-AMA members and what they have to say.”

We think that we already covered that concern with our 2009 poll.

Doctors simply don’t like what the Democrats have force-fed them. A large segment of the healing profession says it’s willing to close its doors rather than endure the problems that will be created by the overhaul.

Unfortunately, this is exactly the sort of outcome that’s expected when lawmakers leave common sense behind and work far outside their moral and constitutional authority.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Health Law, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

700,000 Seniors Forced out of Medicare Advantage Plans – Cavuto: Was this the plan all along?

Posted by iusbvision on November 20, 2010

It is just like we said:

Real Clear Politics Confirms IUSB Vision Analysis: Latest Health Care Bill Designed to Wreck Private Insurance & Make People Cry Out for a Public Option

And we stated again and again and again….

Wall Street Journal:

Seniors enrolling in private Medicare policies starting this week are finding fewer options, as health insurers close down certain types of plans due to legislative changes and looming cuts to federal funding.

Cigna Corp., Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, several Blue Cross Blue Shield plans and others aren’t renewing hundreds of Medicare Advantage plans, which are Medicare policies administered by private insurers. The moves will displace some 700,000 beneficiaries who must find new policies, according to Humana Inc., a large seller of Advantage plans.

For 2011, the Kaiser Family Foundation said there will be a 13% decline in the number of Medicare Advantage plans.

The pullback is largely due to a 2008 law that required the plans to have networks of preferred doctors, with the idea that managed care could be less costly and aggressive marketing could be curbed. Some providers of traditional fee-for-service policies decided to close the plans rather than invest in networks. But some insurers say the federal health-care overhaul, which includes $140 billion in cuts to reimbursements for Advantage plans over 10 years, is a factor as well.

 

Speaker Pelosi used IUSB Vision writer Chuck Norton’s exact words “make them cry out for a public option” on C-Span. Video at bottom of post HERE.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

111 companies and organizations get ObamaCare waivers from White House – UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on November 14, 2010

Picking winners and losers.

UPDATE – Once again Bachmann telling the story ahead of her colleagues

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Dr. Drew Pinsky on ObamaCare: ‘You will see a massive flight of physicians from the field’

Posted by iusbvision on November 12, 2010

Dr. Pinsky of course is the famed radio doctor.

Special thanks to our friends at The Daily Caller.

 

 

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

AARP and Many Others Hiking Premiums or Dumping Coverage Because of ObamaCare

Posted by iusbvision on November 5, 2010

BREAKING – November 1, 2010 It has happened: ObamaCare results in local lay-offs

Associated Press:

WASHINGTON – AARP’s endorsement helped secure passage of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul. Now the seniors’ lobby is telling its employees their insurance costs will rise partly as a result of the law.

In an e-mail to employees, AARP says health care premiums will increase by 8 percent to 13 percent next year because of rapidly rising medical costs.

And AARP adds that it’s changing copayments and deductibles to avoid a 40 percent tax on high-cost health plans that takes effect in 2018 under the law. Aerospace giant Boeing also has cited the tax in asking its workers to pay more. Shifting costs to employees lowers the value of a health care plan and acts like an escape hatch from the tax.

 

AARP raising premiums, citing ObamaCare, but said when they were pushing it that this wouldn’t happen…

White House on Health Care: ‘Nothing’ From Election Suggests People Want Repeal

IBD – 3M cites ObamaCare – Forced to drop care for 23,000 retirees:

Here’s a Post-it note for ObamaCare supporters and opponents: Over the weekend 3M (MMM), the maker of the ubiquitous sticky message pads, along with electronics, optics and more, decided to end its retirees’ access to its health care plan beginning in 2013. According to the Wall Street Journal:

“health care reform has made it more difficult for employers like 3M to provide a plan that will remain competitive,” (3M said in a) memo. The White House says retiree-only plans are largely exempt from new health insurance regulations under the law.

The company didn’t specify how many workers would be impacted. It currently has 23,000 U.S. retirees.

Americans become eligible for the Medicare insurance program at age 65. Starting in 2015, 3M retirees too young to qualify for Medicare will receive financial support through what the company called a “health reimbursement arrangement” and won’t be able to enroll in the company’s group insurance plan. The company described that as an account retirees can use to purchase individual insurance through exchanges that the health law will create in 2014. 3M didn’t provide details on the financial contributions. [Grats that taxpayer subsidized so WE pay for it – Editor]

Or, as opponents of ObamaCare predicted, they’re finding it cheaper to dump their retirees onto the exchange.

That comes on the heels of a report Thursday that McDonald’s was considering dropping its “mini-med” plan for its employees because those plans may run afoul of the forthcoming medical-loss ratio regulations.

Also on Thursday, the Principal Financial Group (PFG) announced it would stop selling health insurance, which means 840,000 employees who receive Principal coverage through their employers will have to look elsewhere. Just the day before, President Obama said, “So there’s nothing in the bill that says you have to change the health insurance that you’ve got right now.” And he’s right: the bill doesn’t say it; it just causes it.

Indeed, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care was giving the lie to Obama’s statement as he was making it. Harvard Pilgrim announced that it would end its Medicare Advantage plans at the end of the year, leaving its 22,000 Advantage customers scrambling for coverage.

A week before that, a number of health plans including Anthem (WLP), Aetna (AET), Cigna (CI), Humana (HUM), CoventryOne (CVH) and some Blue Cross Blue Shield companies decided that they would stop selling coverage in the child-only market. It makes sense, given that under the new ObamaCare regulations, no child can be denied health insurance for a pre-existing condition and insurers can no longer vary premiums based on health status. Thus, the cagey parent will now wait until his or her child is sick before getting insurance. This is known as adverse selection: The healthy drop out, and those remaining in the insurance pool tend to be sicker. As insurers found out when a number of states tried this in early 1990s, it doesn’t make for a very viable business plan.

Of course, the evidence of what happened when these reforms were tried on the state level was available in a short, easy-to-read format for all of the so-called reformers. But, as IBD has noted before, since when has health care reform been about evidence? It has always been about power — the power politicians have over insurance companies, doctors, hospitals and, ultimately, patients.

Remember we were told the bill would lower premiums?

The Promises

August 6, 2008

OBAMA: A system where we’re gonna work with your employers to lower your premiums by up to $2,500 per family per year.

October 4, 2008

OBAMA: We will start by reducing premiums by as much as $2,500 per family.

September 6, 2008

OBAMA: Here’s what change is saying to people who already have health insurance and the employers who are providing it: We’ll work to lower your premiums by up to $2,500 per family per year.

May 3, 2008

OBAMA: I also have a health care plan that would save the average family $2,500 on their premiums.

January 3, 2008

OBAMA: And if you already have health care, then we’re gonna reduce costs an average of $2,500 per family on premiums.

October 7, 2008

OBAMA: We’re gonna work with your employer to lower the costs of your premiums by up to $2,500 a year.

Campaign Ad

OBAMA: And we’ll cut the costs of a typical family’s health care by up to $2,500 per year.

March 14, 2008

OBAMA: And if you’ve got health care, we’re gonna work with your employer to lower your premiums by $2,500 per family per year.

February 23, 2008

OBAMA: And we will lower premiums for the typical family by $2,500 a year.

June 17, 2007

OBAMA: And cut the cost of health care by up to $2,500 per family.

August 17, 2008

OBAMA: And if you already have health care, then we’re gonna work with your employer to lower your premiums by up to $2,500 per family per year.

Campaign Ad

EVAN BAYH: Barack’s policies will provide health care cost reductions of about $2,500 for the typical family.

June 27, 2008

OBAMA: It’s time to bring down the typical family’s premium by about $2,500. And it’s time to bring down the costs for the entire country.

February 19, 2008

OBAMA: And if you already have health insurance, we will lower your premiums by $2,500 per family per year.

April 22, 2008

OBAMA: We’re gonna work with your employer through a catastrophic reinsurance plan to lower premiums by $2,500 per family per year.

October 15, 2008

OBAMA: The only thing we’re gonna try to do is lower costs so that those cost savings are passed on to you. And we estimate we can cut the average family’s premium by about $2,500 a year.

March 1, 2008

OBAMA: We’ll work with your employer to lower your premiums by $2,500 per family per year.

Campaign Ad

NARRATOR: Barack Obama will provide rural America with affordable health care, and save the typical American family $2,500 a year.

May 30, 2008

OBAMA: And reduces every family’s premiums by as much as $2,500.

April 20, 2008

OBAMA: If your employer does offer you health care, then we’re gonna work with your employer to lower premiums by up to $2,500 per family per year.

March 13, 2008

OBAMA: And cut the cost of a typical family’s premiums by up to $2,500 per family per year.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Post 2010 | 1 Comment »

Boehner: “Trust me. I’m Going To Make Sure This H’care Bill Is Never, Ever, Ever Implemented”

Posted by iusbvision on November 5, 2010

Awesome. Folks we have gone through this bill backwards and forwards. This writer tends to stay away from superlatives but it is just this simple; this healthcare bill is so bad, so expensive and so destructive to healthcare, seniors, jobs etc that if you support it you are either a fool, evil, or are in denial about what is in it.

I realize this statement may offend some of my professor friends at IUSB, but I care about you and people enough to give you the splash of cold water that you desperately need. I challenge anyone to debate me publicly on the merits of this bill in front of an audience and when the debate is over perhaps you will realize what the American people made crystal clear on election day.

This is also about “process”. You do not do a power grab on 1/7th of the economy on a party line vote, using secret negotiating and bribes to cram it through.

Rudy Giuliani used to run the second largest health care company in the country. He tells how the bill is and scolds the pinheads on The View that they are stuck in their New York bubble which is not the real world.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law | 1 Comment »