Dear Dumbasses

I keep forgetting that I’m doing my blogs after work… 🙂

 

Dear Whiners who want the government to have more power so you feel “safer,”

Idiots like you who simply fall for whatever line you’ve been fed are jeopardizing our freedoms. All of our freedoms. Because you’re wimps. Allow me to explain.

 

Today I was looking at a HuffPo article about the Apple vs. FBI debacle. The article tries desperately to pass itself off as reasonable. Problem is it’s HuffPo, so I wasn’t fooled. The article opens with this:

Apple’s decision to challenge a federal court order to help the FBI “hack” into a shooting suspect’s iPhone 5C is drawing into focus a battle which has been brewing for the past several years.

The way this debate has been shaped thus far is, as follows: which do we value more, privacy or security?

Firstly, let’s talk some facts about the incident in question. The government FUBARed what happened in San Bernardino. We’ve already documented a lot of it, so lemme break it down here: terrorists were allowed into the country. They killed 14 people. The local authorities got access to the iPhone belonging to Farook. They effed it up by trying to access it, thereby resetting the phone. Now the FBI is demanding Apple write software which will undermine the security of all iPhones to get into “that specific phone.” And if you believe the FBI will only use that new software to access that one phone, you were born in a land before toilet paper.

Before you nuclear turd bombs say “But, but, the FBI needs access for US TO BE SAFE…”

 

ManCryingwithMascarra

Don’t. Spare me your spineless, weak, desperate attempts to sound intelligent. You’re a wimp. If you’re a man and you are siding with the government over this iPhone debacle, you’re without testicles. Which is convenient for your skinny jean-wearing ways. If you’re a woman, you’re probably a feminist. There’s no hope for either of you. I’m merely writing this post to expose just how pathetic you are. Trigger-warning: comparisons to bodily functions abound.

Here’s the deal: Yes, the government has a responsibility to keep the nation safe. But when it comes to the FBI vs. Apple, we’re well past safety. The government did not keep us safe. Proof? The terrorists were let into the country in the first place and they killed people. Also, our borders are as effective as a strainer is at holding water. If you think gaining access to all iPhones is the best solution to keep the country safe…

Here’s where all of you butt wiping-ninnies are missing the point: You think it’s about a phone. Wrong.

This is about a much bigger issue that begins with privacy and ends with freedom, the phone is just the vehicle. Let me try to illustrate my point. Your phone is an extension of you. Yes, this might sound silly, but bear with me for a second. Your smart phone has more than your photos. It has your financial information. It may have an app for your bank. It contains personal conversations with your friends, family, co-workers. It is a map giving you directions. It knows where you have been and where you are going. It can track your health, it reminds you of your tasks, it contains a schedule of your life. It knows who you call, who you have called, who you plan on calling. Your phone is an extension of you.

What the FBI wants is the ability to access that phone, which Apple built to be secure. If you’re dumb enough to say “well don’t keep anything on your phone you don’t want shared with the world…”

Maybe, but I'm not that far off.

I volunteer you as tribute. Why stop at just the phone? Just let them into your house. If you don’t want the world seeing embarrassing things, don’t keep them in your house. You never know, one day the FBI might need to come in without a warrant. Your freedom, your privacy, is subject to the safety of the collective…as deemed by you.

That’s the real, bigger issue here. Safety vs. Freedom. It’s sadly a point that is lost on many who focus on a problem that isn’t the actual problem.

Are you seeing the bigger picture or you trying to figure out if the trees are poplars or pine?

You see, having freedom doesn’t always mean having safety. Yes, sometimes the world is a scary place. Sometimes when the government fails at what it’s required to do, like keep the nation safe from other nations or, in this case, terrorists who seek to do us harm, it’s easy to give up your rights in hopes you can sleep safely at night. But that’s how we lose our freedom. It’s been done countless times before, just ask any ten year old who’s been patted down by the TSA.

Balls

Having freedom, having privacy, requires personal responsibility. Sometimes that means you protect yourself. That’s why we at LwC love our Second Amendment rights. Which, incidentally, plenty of liberals also say we need to give up for the “safety of the collective.”

Sometimes you are not only responsible for your own finances, but your own safety. The government, after all, is just a collection of elected officials who employ other people and talk to the public with the use of a teleprompter. The government is people like a corporation is people. Except the government people take from the corporate people to finance their crap. Sorry, going down a bunny trail there…

They’re not better at life than you are. Surrendering a little bit of your freedom to these elected officials for a little more safety is insane. Also, “safety” is rarely defined. Put that in your pipe and smoke it before a liberal demands to stop smoking it because it affects them.

Here’s a mental exercise for you to bear in mind if you’re cheering on the FBI vs. Apple: Where’s the line? At what point do you say the government does not have a right to sacrifice your freedom for safety? Today it’s an iPhone, but what will it be tomorrow? Where is your personal line? If you think it’s okay for the government to have a backdoor entrance to iPhones, for terrorists or for you, you must have a personal line in the sand. So what is it? Think about it. For by the time the government has crossed the iPhone line, they’ll queue up to cross your personal line. If you’re willing to let go of freedom now for security later, you’ve already bought into the scam.

I’ll close with this quotation from our Founding Father Benjamin Franklin (often misatributed to Thomas Jefferson): “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

ClappingGroup GIF

~Written by Courtney Kirchoff.

bernie the pied Piper

The Diversity Games

CBS’ new Nancy Drew will look very different should the network move forward with the reboot.

CBS Entertainment president Glenn Geller revealed Tuesday that the network’s reimagining of the iconic character will be diverse.

“She is diverse, that is the way she is written,” the executive told THR immediately following his time in front of the press at the Television Critics Association’s winter press tour Tuesday. While Geller said it was too early in the process to explain just what he meant by diverse — whether Nancy is African-American, Asian-American or Latino, he said it would hinge on finding the right actress for the part. “[She will] not [be] Caucasian,” he stressed. “I’d be open to any ethnicity.”  

Nancy Drew first appeared in books in 1930 and was originally created by Edward Stratemeyer.

But White People are politically incorrect.

The news comes a day after Netflix announced it was teaming with Norman Lear for an all-Latino remake of his classic sitcom One Day at a Time, as networks make diversity a priority in a bid to attract new underrepresented communities and better reflect society.

During his time in front of the press Tuesday, Geller stressed that diversity is playing a major role in his development season. “We have a lot of new series in development, both series targeted to have full African-American or Latino casts but also many leads that are being developed [as diverse]. We’re not casting color blind, we’re casting color conscious,” he said. 

As we found out in yesterday’s blog, color blind is racist.

We’re not “racists” :), we just will not employ any more White people. 🙂

They win us no points in the Politically Correct “diversity” game. White people are not “diverse”.

We are “inclusive” of anyone EXCEPT white people.

“I’m just a gay guy from Indiana who doesn’t play basketball, but now I’m the president of entertainment at CBS,” he said to laughs.

Isn’t he wonderful? 🙂

No Wedding Pizzas for him…

No Straight White People need apply.

That’s The Diversity Games.

THR: Minorities make up 13.7 percent of writers rooms while comprising 37.9 percent of the population nationwide, with only 10 individuals of color (out of 73) on THR’s 2015 Power Showrunners list.

But there’s no quota. 🙂

There are no stats available on how many minority writers made it in TV without going through a program, though one Latino alum jokes: “John Ridley had to win an Oscar to get a television show.” Which is why new-talent development and “inclusion” programs, such as the ones every single broadcast network supports — no doubt part good business, part public relations, part social conscience — are a key part of writers room staffing. Like college scholarships for minorities, these programs are all about removing as many barriers to entry as possible, including financial ones. But with every good intention can come inadvertent side effects, from writers of color who are perceived as less qualified to the subsidization of first-season salaries that can lead to a “freebie” mentality among showrunners toward those scribes.

None of the programs guarantees a job afterward, but they work closely with graduates to provide them priority consideration for staffing, often as a diversity hire. (Diversity is nowadays defined broadly by the programs to include unique voices and experiences, but it usually refers to underrepresented demographics — chiefly minorities, women and LGBT individuals.) A diversity hire is a minority scribe who occupies a staff-writer position that is fully network-subsidized. Showrunners are thus incentivized to take on an unfamiliar face since his or her salary isn’t coming out of the show’s budget. There’s no limit to the number of times a writer can be the diversity hire, provided he or she is fine with staying at entry-level pay.

But there’s no quota and no discrimination against majority White writers of the same or better talent, right? 🙂

…the network-funded diversity initiatives that help writers rooms avoid homogeneity also have created a system that can condition showrunners to regard diverse writers as unpaid labor. “After they are no longer free, the vast majority of diversity writers are released from their shows,” says a Latina writer who wasn’t hired on her network program (she later was independently staffed on a cable series). Jones agrees: “Programs should stop pitching diverse writers as ‘free’ because it creates an affirmative action mentality.”

But affirmative action was “diversity” before “diversity”was all the liberal rage. So what if they lack respect and low pay, it’s “diversity” for “diversity” sake right? 🙂

On rare occasions when strained showrunners can’t cover the cost of a diversity hire beyond the program, Disney-ABC vp creative talent development and inclusion Tim McNeal will subsidize half the salary from a safety-net reserve called the breakage fund. “It’s important that shows don’t look at this as a free pass to get an extra body, so I ask them to match dollar for dollar so they have skin in the game,” he says. “This is a onetime payment.”

A Bailout!  How Leftist is that. 🙂

…as the Latina writer puts it: “I’d hate to see what our statistics would be like without these diversity initiatives.”

Evil Racist White people as far as the eye can see, of course.

It’s only Natural. 🙂

 

 

 

 

 

 

You Just Might Be A Liberal…

Are you not sure that you’re a liberal? Well, there’s an easy way to find out. You might be a liberal if…

1) ….Your newspaper calls people “bigoted” for being worried about bringing Syrian refugees to America, but you won’t run pictures of Muhammad because you’re afraid Muslims might kill you for it.

2) ….You think every man accused of sexual assault is guilty until proven innocent except Bill Clinton.

3)….You insist that anyone who questions global warming hates science even though you don’t understand any of the science behind it yourself and you say we have to do something about climate change primarily because you want to impress your liberal friends.

4) ….You are terrified that holding terrorists at Guantanamo Bay who are trying to murder Americans might make the other terrorists who are trying to murder Americans mad.

5) ….You believe there’s a “Republican War on Women;” yet you are okay with aborting baby girls for any reason, think any man who says he identifies as a woman should be able to use the women’s bathroom and you want to put Bill Clinton back in the White House.

6) ….You claim to constantly hear Republican “dog whistles” that 99% of the population misses; yet you’d deny you’re racist for insisting that black Americans aren’t competent enough to get an ID to vote.

 

7) …You think there’s a possibility that Obama might be able to have a productive conversation with radical Islamists who want to kill us, but dialogue with the NRA is impossible.

8)….You believe Hillary Clinton is telling the truth. About anything. Ever.

9) ….You simultaneously believe the police are violent trigger-happy racists who shoot people for no good reason and that we should disarm the populace so that only the government has guns.

10) ….You went to a talk given on your campus by a conservative just so you could scream at him for “invading your safe space.”

11) ….You think Chris Kyle was a monster for killing so many enemies of America while Bowe Bergdahl deserves to be treated with respect and compassion after deserting his unit.

12) ….You believe you’re a caring and compassionate person because you advocate giving other people’s money away to people you hope will vote for candidates you like.

13) ….You believe that anyone who dislikes Barack Obama must hate him because he’s a minority, but your hatred of Ted Cruz and Clarence Thomas is perfectly justifiable.

14) ….You think you are a sophisticated person with a deep understanding of complex political issues, but sum up every one with some variation of, “Republicans are evil, racist, and they hate you while liberals like me are nice!”

15) ….You think it’s vitally important to increase the number of Muslim immigrants coming to America so they can inform on all the other Muslims who are planning terrorist attacks.

16) ….You blame the Republicans for the failure of Obamacare even though none of them voted for it.

17) ….Your first response to a terrorist attack committed by radical Islamists who’ve sworn allegiance to ISIS is to try to disarm every law-abiding gun owner in the country.

18) ….You think an unemployed, white factory worker who’s struggling to feed his family has some sort of racial privilege compared to Barack Obama, Melissa Harris Perry or Al Sharpton.

19) ….You say fences don’t work and gun-free zones do, but if Republicans wanted the fence around the White House taken down and demanded that the Secret Service be disarmed, you’d accuse them of trying to get Obama killed.

20) ….You believe Bruce Jenner is a woman, Rachel Dolezal is black and Elizabeth Warren is an Indian.

21)  Food in any way can be a “microagression” based on race, religion, sex, or ethnicity.

22) Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. Guns kill people so getting rid of Guns will kill less people.

23) The Power of Life and Death is “Pro-Choice”.

24) Any immigration is good no matter how it was done and anyone opposed to any immigration of any kind is “racist”.

25) A Religion is a Race, unless they are Christians, then they are just bigots.

26) Utter the word “islamophobia” and mean it.

27) Anything with a (D) after their name is ok and can do anything they want because it’s better than they alternative.

28) Democrats Lie, but it’s your fault not theirs.

29) A Tax is a Penalty, even after it’s ruled a Tax it’s still a Penalty.

30) “What Difference Does it Make?”

31) It was the fault of a You Tube Video.

32) That the Media is not biased and that people like Hillary and Barack are “moderates” and any Republican is “extreme”.

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

And the Childish Shall Lead

Humanity has wondered throughout its history “what is this world coming to.” And every generation believes that those coming behind it are doomed because of their long hair, loud music and curious conduct.

So far, every end-of-the-world prediction has been wrong. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t some things we need to be concerned about.

Here are five recent developments that make us wonder if America is not only in decline but is reeling sharply toward disorder, where up is down, down is up, and character, honor and decency have become anachronisms:

* Riots are becoming more commonplace and, so far, the worst ones have been based on nothing, touched off by uninformed reaction rather than the facts. We don’t yet know why Freddie Gray died. But even if it were police negligence — or, worse, police malfeasance — rioting is not a civilized response. Yet the riots are being excused.

* Worse, the riots are apparently organized events rather than spontaneous acts. An analysis of social media shows that there are links between the Ferguson, Mo., riots of last year and the Baltimore riots. How long can a peaceful society exist under these circumstances, when professional rioters incite violence and promote unrest at whim?

* Meanwhile, University of the District of Columbia Law School Dean Shelley Broderick has told students they can delay taking one final exam if they help protesters with their legal troubles. It’s a hallmark of our legal system that everyone charged with a crime is entitled to legal representation. But this woman is singling out (suspected) violent protesters as virtuous members of the community deserving of special protections. Would she offer the same deal to help right-of-center groups that need representation because they’ve been targeted by the IRS?

* California Gov. Jerry Brown is threatening fines of $10,000 a day — $10,000! — for those he thinks use too much water as the state withers from drought. Meanwhile, the state of California has dumped millions of foot-acres of fresh water into the Pacific Ocean for irrational environmental reasons while people, livestock, crops and lawns parch.

* Our universities are no longer institutions where free thought and open discourse are welcome and encouraged. Those whose ideas differ from the thinking that is required by campus bullies — a league of students, professors and administrators — are shunned. Dissenting voices are shut down and chased off of campus. A focus on trigger warnings, microaggressions and safe spaces has replaced attention to academics.

Also since the government essentially owns the Student Loan market the Universities can just raise tuition because they want to build a new $2 Million statue and then complain that they are underfunded. The Liberals then up the amount for student loans so more people can get in deeper debt and the University can build their statue AND get more money and since they have no incentive to not continue doing more and more of this the tuition goes higher and higher and more people get loans they can’t pay back and it spirals upward until at some point it will crash and their will be a bailout and the cycle can continue.

None of this means students have become delicate daisies who wilt in the face of anything they find even mildly offensive. They have actually become more aggressive toward those with differing views, and this is the way they are telling them to shut up.

No, the country isn’t going to collapse due to these five issues. But they are examples of troubling behavior, of an unhealthy trend. It seems fewer and fewer adults are in charge while childish and intemperate acts, and twisted thinking are becoming dominant in our culture.

And I would add what I call “unenlightened narcissism”. It where you think the universe not only revolves around you and what you want, but that it MUST do so.

That everything you want you are “entitled” to because you want it or some government bureaucrat/politician told you you were “entitled” to it for their own narcissistic reasons.

But it sounded good. “Free” always sounds great until the real price is paid. But since the world revolves around you and only you you don’t give a damn.

And if all else fails, just call them “racists” or “bigots”. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

It’s A Trap!

John Hawkins: When liberals look at the poor, first and foremost, they see people who will vote for them in exchange for goodies. This gives liberals a perverse incentive to keep as many Americans mired in poverty as humanly possible.

This is why liberals are always willing to make a government handout a little bigger, easier to qualify for, or to make sure as many people as possible are using it. They want poor people to remain poor – and no wonder. Show me a ghetto in America and I will show you an area that votes heavily Democrat despite the fact that its condition never seems to improve.

Incidentally, that’s just how liberals like it. If you’re poor today, they’d like you to remain poor next year, the next ten years or even for the rest of your life. Then, not only do liberals get your vote, they get to feel better about themselves because they’re “helping” a “pitiful, helpless failure” like you. It’s the best of all worlds for liberals: they get to feel “generous,” it helps keep them in power, and other people pick up the bill.

Of course, it’s certainly not the best of all worlds for the poor.

Having been poor, I can tell you that it’s no picnic. Nobody likes living in a dangerous neighborhood, struggling to pay the rent or not knowing where the money will come from if his car breaks down. This is where liberals try get the fishhook in your jaw. They offer “free” money, “free food,” “free” housing. When you’re struggling, that looks pretty good.

While I have also been desperately poor in my life I have never taken government assistance while I was poor. I was nearly homeless for several years while working 129 hours a day 5 days a week because of debts accumulated. It never occurred to me to seek assistance from the government. It just wasn’t my mind set. It was my problem, It had to be my solution, not expecting other people to “fix” it for me.

But, what many poor people eventually realize is that all the “free” things liberals want to give them are part of a trap. Sure, government benefits make life a little easier, but they also help keep you poor long term. Being on the dole undercuts your motivation to change your situation. It encourages you to treat receiving handouts from the government as a primary source of income. In fact, many people start to worry that if they do TOO WELL, they’ll lose their “free” benefits.

On the other hand, conservatives don’t believe anyone is destined to remain poor.

We believe if you make good decisions, work hard and are willing to pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, you can at least join the middle class. Unlike the Democrats, Republicans get most of their votes from the middle class; so unlike them, we’re incentivized to help poor Americans improve their situation financially. The same poor person who won’t vote Republican today may vote for the GOP tomorrow if he is off the dole, has a better job and is living in a better neighborhood.

And that doesn’t involve being a career burger flipper and expecting my employer to pay me $15/hr to do it. IMHO.

So conservatives do believe in a social safety net, but we believe it should be temporary.

It’s not a hammock on the beach where they serve you mai tai’s until dawn. It’s a net, not a bed.

We don’t want anyone to become dependent on the government or to take advantage of the system. In other words, we don’t want the safety net to become a hammock.

🙂
That’s why we want people to work for welfare, think drug addicts should be ineligible and believe there should be limits to how long someone can stay on a program.

We agree with Ronald Reagan who once said, “I believe the best social program is a job.”

Want to know why conservatives oppose high corporate taxes and want to keep taxes low in general? Why we don’t like the minimum wage? Why we try to cut regulations as much as possible?

It’s mostly about jobs. If the economy is growing, thriving and creating lots of jobs, it helps everybody, including the poor. Increasing the minimum wage to $15 may help a few people live more comfortably in poverty, but it will also lead to the loss of starter jobs for millions of poor people who desperately need the experience so they can improve their situations.

The government will NEVER lift you out of poverty, but a good job can. That’s where we believe we should be focusing our efforts. That’s why conservatives have long touted enterprise zones that allow businesses to have tax breaks in poor neighborhoods. The more businesses that move into low-income areas, the more poor Americans can get jobs.

Conservatives also believe in being tough on crime and protecting the Second Amendment rights of Americans. Nobody benefits more from that than the poor who are often trapped in crime-ridden neighborhoods that Democrats haven’t bothered to clean up, despite being in charge for decades.

They just get you to blame white rich people who obviously “hate” you. Vote for me, here’s a handout to show “I care”. 🙂

Conservatives don’t believe there’s anything shameful about being poor, but we also believe the best thing we can do to help poor Americans is to make it possible for them leave poverty behind for good. A liberal “success story” is someone who gets lots of government benefits while he lives in poverty for decades. A conservative “success story” is a poor American who no longer needs government benefits because he got a good job and moved into the middle class.

That’s why liberalism is for poor people who are content to remain poor and conservatism is for poor people who want to make a better life for themselves.

Amen.

Just remember, to a Liberal that means you’re mean, you hate poor people, woman and children, you kick the dog and steal candy from babies and push grandma out of her house and over a cliff because your Snidley Whiplash and you are greedy, heartless, and maniacal. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

The Collective II: The Skunk Defense

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Latest From Comrade Harris over at MSNBC

(MSNBC= My Siblings/Self Need to Belong to the Collective)

First she referred to a baby in the womb as a “thing,” that is the individual woman’s sole choice (Pro-Choice), then she declared that our things ,children don’t belong to their parents, now you are “allowed” to earn a “Little more” if your better at something than others but “you have a right to free healthcare, free education, free housing, and free food at all times.”.

So, “just to be clear” 🙂 When it’s a “thing” (not born) the “thing” is the sole right and responsibility of the individual woman. But once it is born it’s the property of The State (aka “community” or “collective”). That is unless it was born alive during an abortion then that gets even weirder.

Doublethink: The ability to believe two contradictory ideas at the same time and believe both are true.

From individual “thing” to “collective” responsibility.

Bottom Line: Children in whatever stage of life are PROPERTY!!

Gee, didn’t we fight a War over this concept once??

So naturally, when she got a lot of heat for her “children don’t belong to their parents” comments she ignored it and changed the argument in a very “well I was misquoted” when I was quoted Liberal fashion of going off on a tangent and proclaim this is is what I meant but you took my exact words the wrong way kind of BS. I am far too arrogant and elitist to admit I put my foot in my mouth by saying out loud exactly what I actually think. So I will cover it up with BS.

Well, not exactly “doubling down.” You see, Perry changed the parameters of the debate by ignoring what she said in the ad, and creating an entirely new argument that is far more mainstream than what she actually implied:

One thing is for sure: I have no intention of apologizing for saying that our children, all of our children, are part of more than our households, they are part of our communities and deserve to have the care, attention, resources, respect and opportunities of those communities.

Is that what she said? No:

In the ad, Harris-Perry calls for “breaking through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents.” Instead, she says, we should “recognize that kids belong to whole communities.”

She didn’t say kids were “a part of more than our households.” She said they “belong to whole communities.” That’s a damn sight more radical than what she now claims she said.

Here’s more of her deep thinking:

I believe wholeheartedly, and without apology, that we have a collective responsibility to the children of our communities even if we did not conceive and bear them. Of course, parents can and should raise their children with their own values. But they should be able to do so in a community that provides safe places to play, quality food to eat, terrific schools to attend, and economic opportunities to support them. No individual household can do that alone. We have to build that world together.

Again, this is not what she said in the ad. Her statement that we should break through “our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents” is a truly shocking statement, one that for all her “non-apologies” she never gets around to explaining. (American Thinker)

She never intends to. If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with BS!

Or of it they object to your super communist pronouncements try and hide it with lots of wordy Orwellian BS.

Don’t defend, Obfuscate! They’ll be so baffled they’ll leave you alone!
The SKUNK defense!! 🙂
Spray your foul scent all over everything and get them to back off and be too confused and busy with the stink to continue the attack. 🙂

OBAMACARE UPDATE

Speaking of Skunk spray…
The $5 billion fund set up by ObamaCare to cover new high-risk insurance pools in each state from pre-existing conditions is already running out of money — a full year before projections.
HA! 🙂 Why am I not surprised…So why should anyone believe ObamaCare’s overall cost projections are any more accurate?Only if you are a mindless liberal or a low to no-info voters.Panicked to control mushrooming costs in its pre-existing conditions insurance plan, or PCIP, the Health and Human Services Department is having to curtail benefits to cancer patients, among others.

So much for Ms. Harris’s “Free Healthcare” 🙂

It’s a bad omen for the larger plan.

ObamaCare funded the PCIP with $5 billion to cover patients with pre-existing conditions from 2010 to 2014. Less than a third of the people HHS projected would enroll in the plan actually signed up for the coverage.

Yet despite the low enrollment, the plan is broke. In fact, it started running out of money at the beginning of this year, which means it busted its budget a full year ahead of projections.

In a 2012 report, HHS conceded that it had miscalculated (though not until page 11 of its 15-page report): “On average, the PCIP program has experienced claims costs 2.5 times higher than anticipated.”

SURPRISE!!!  (only to liberals)

Now it’s cutting off coverage.

What a shock. Guess who’s next?  Look in the Mirror!… 🙂

“I feel like the rug has been pulled out from under me,” a 61-year-old Virginian with breast cancer complained to the Washington Post.

Bet you voted for it too! 🙂

The crisis at PCIP is a harbinger of things to come for the rest of ObamaCare.

Americans can look forward to the same cost overruns followed by cost controls followed by curtailed benefits followed ultimately by denial of care.

Surprise!!! 🙂

Controlling this massive new entitlement will require government-mandated rationing of medical services and care for the sick and higher taxes for the middle class.

Surprise!!! 🙂

If the Democrats in Congress and the White House miscalculated how much it would cost to fund hundreds of thousands of ObamaCare applicants with pre-existing medical problems, imagine how badly it’s low-balling the cost of subsidizing millions of other uninsured Americans, who’ll be eligible for a generous array of “free” preventive-care services?

Imagine how badly they’re underestimating the cost of expanding Medicaid?

The higher-than-expected costs from PCIP “could be an indication that other cost projections for ObamaCare are also underestimated,” the Heritage Foundation recently understated on its blog.

That’s more like a statistical certainty. In 1965, the Johnson administration figured Medicare would cost $12 billion by 1990. Its actual cost was $110 billion. Now it’s almost $600 billion and climbing.

Obama’s comically named Affordable Care Act doesn’t fully go into effect for another nine months, when some 30 million uninsured crash the medical system (not counting illegal immigrants). (sorry, “undocumented Democrats”)

Yet it’s already exploded original cost estimates.

In its first decade, ObamaCare will cost twice as much — more than $2 trillion — than first projected by the Congressional Budget Office.

Obama in 2009 promised to create a new health-delivery system that “cuts costs” and won’t add “one dime to the deficit.” He’s already practicing red medicine, in more ways than one. (IBD)

When in doubt SPRAY!!

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay
Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay