ObamaCare Busted Again

Last week, the total number of failed ObamaCare-created insurance co-ops reached eight, as co-ops in Colorado and Oregon announced that they were closing doors at the end of the year.

These co-ops got a total of about $900 million in low-interest loans, most of which are unlikely to be repaid.

The administration handed out more than $2 billion in guaranteed loans to 23 co-ops, as well as additional “solvency funds” when many started suffering financial problems last year.

Now we learn that 11 of the remaining 15 co-ops could be at death’s door too, but the administration is hiding information about their health.

The Daily Caller reports that the administration has “a secret list of 11 ObamaCare health insurance co-ops they fear are on the verge of failure, but they refuse to disclose them to the public or to Congress.”

These co-ops, the Daily Caller reports, are now on “advanced oversight” by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which runs ObamaCare.

Earlier this year, an inspector-general audit noted that all but one of the co-ops had lost significant amounts of money in 2014, due either to lower-than-expected enrollment or because they underpriced their insurance policies.

Democrats exempted the co-ops from disclosure rules that apply to publicly traded corporations.

Oh, and the penalty for not having insurance is going to skyrocket next year too. 🙂

The math is harsh: The maximum federal penalty for having no health insurance is set to jump to $695 or 2.5 percent of taxable income , and the Obama administration is being urged to highlight that cold fact to help drive its new pitch for health law sign-ups.

That means the 2016 sign-up season starting Nov. 1 could see penalties become a bigger focus to motivate millions of people who have remained eligible for coverage, but uninsured.

You Vill Comply with Herr Fuhrer!!

So what if the program you’re complying with is dying and is already a massive failure, that doesn’t even remotely matter!

Remember this is the Tax that is a Penalty that isn’t tax! 🙂  The government said so. 🙂

Just when it looked like Obamacare couldn’t get worse, new statistical evidence shows that it can, and has. Health care insurance is getting more expensive for most workers because of an increase in deductions.

Employer-provided health plans defy earlier predictions that the number of such plans would fall in the face of new Obamacare regulations. While the overall number of plans did not decrease appreciably, subscribers were hit this year with big jumps in deductions, the part of medical bills insurers won’t pay. Nearly 1 in 10 of such deductions range upward from a thousand dollars. The average worker will pay more for medical expenses than ever. The clear message is, “you’re insured, but don’t get sick.”

Gee, I thought it was “They just want you to die” at least that was what the Democrats said about The Republicans… 🙂

The increases continue a growing trend. The average deductible has more than tripled, from $303 in 2006 to $1,077 this year. This is part of the explanation of why wages have flattened. Workers have chosen medical insurance benefits instead of higher wages. These deductibles have increased more than seven times the increase in wages. Increases in medical insurance premiums have actually fallen by 1 percent over 2014, falling for the first time in a decade, though the cost of family plans are up 3 per cent.

The Affordable Care Act, the polite  (DEMOCRAT) name for Obamacare, was intended to supply subsidies to offset increases in premiums. But apart from difficulties in getting these subsidies in place — state-administered funds versus federal funds — the growing difficulty for the average worker is an increase in deductibles (and co-pays) rather than more expensive premiums.

A Kaiser Family Foundation study reports the average deductible for a generous plan this year is $2,500 or more. Predictions that this would undermine company plans is now being borne out. This trend is further reinforced by the so-called employer mandate in Obamacare, which requires employers of a hundred or more employees to provide health benefits; this becomes 50 or more employees in 2016. Businessmen argue that this requirement costs jobs, and accounts in part for the growing structural unemployment even as the economy slowly sputters to life. Managers are reluctant to add workers and try to stay under those ceilings.

Another piece of bad news in the Kaiser study is that the Obamacare’s 13 percent tax on so-called “Cadillac” plans has led many companies to withdraw them. Opposition to the tax is coming as much from the Obama administration’s usually loyal unions as from business companies.

It’s tempting to say to the president and his incompetent fixers that we told you so. But we won’t. The slapdash, do-it-before-anyone-looks Obama administration’s attempt to solve the infinitely complicated shortcomings of the medical care system, comprising a sixth of the economy, with one magic pill was inevitably doomed. No one should minimize the difficulty of matching technology, expensive in its initial development, to the demands of an aging population. Critics of Obamacare who are tempted to search for another magic pill should be careful. Miracle cures are always fraught with peril. (WT and IBD)

Ideologically Driven Ones, doubly so.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

The Real Questions

Kurt Schlichter: CNN’s Republican debate on September 16th will be conducted with dignity and gravitas by questioners like Hugh Hewitt and Jake Tapper, who will treat the candidates with a level of respect and courtesy that many of them just don’t deserve. They have to. I don’t.

On behalf of all infuriated conservatives, I demand the right to interrogate the candidates myself. I get to ask a question and a follow-up, and here are the rules. First, answer the damn question. It insults me when you think I’ll somehow forget what I asked, so bewitching is your oratory. Second, answer, then stop talking. If you use more words than the Gettysburg Address (272) you are so, so very wrong. Third, no clichés. If you use the phrase “for the children,” I get to slap you.

Here goes:

Jeb! Bush:

You support amnesty and Common Core, you won’t undo the Iran sellout of Israel on your first day in office and – as we always expected – you’ve come out in support of more gun control. Since you have adopted Hillary’s platform, why are you running as a Republican?

HILARIOUS! 🙂

Why are you so damn special that despite there being 320 million other Americans, we can’t do any better than a third Bush?

Yeah, baby, why do we have to have another Bush?

Dr. Ben Carson:

You’re proud of not being a politician, but what makes you think D.C.’s establishment won’t chew you up and spit you out?

You’re a guy with tremendous accomplishments, morals, and character. Why do you even want to go to Washington?

The place that operates on none of those to begin with.

Jim Gilmore:

Can you name one person you aren’t related to who wants you to be president?

In fact, are you even supposed to be here on stage tonight?

Where’s Bobbi Jindal? 🙂 Who the fuck are you anways?

Chris Christie:

Let’s deal with the elephant in the room – what the hell were you thinking snuggling up to Obama?

🙂 I like these questions.

Other than talking incessantly about killing terrorists – which is cool – in what way are you even remotely a conservative?

Hehehehehehehehehe…..

Carly Fiorina:

You’re the only female running in the GOP primaries. Would you even be on this stage if you were a dude?

You were a senior officer in a huge corporation that did a lot of government work. Why should we conservatives believe you won’t be just another crony capitalist shafting us and stealing our money for the benefit of your corporate pals?

🙂  “The First Female President” PC crap applies to you to, dear.

Lindsey Graham:

Conservatives detest you, and the feeling is mutual. Are you in this as some sort of establishment stalking horse to make sure a real conservative doesn’t derail Jeb! by snagging South Carolina’s delegates?

Yes,why do we need a  RINO in The White House too?.

Anything else interesting that you’d like to tell us tonight?

Doubt it.

John Kasich:

You decided to go along with Obamacare in Ohio. Why, as a conservative would I ever support you in the primary over someone committed to the destruction of that socialist atrocity?

Not that the present RINOs didn’t in fact run on destroying it and then kissed its ass after the election. What make us think you wouldn’t do the same thing?

Nothing.

Like many, even most, conservatives, I think you’re a smug, sanctimonious jerk who hides his self-righteousness behind a vague, unfocused aura of pseudo-Christian progressivism. Why should I allow you to spend four to eight years in my face telling me how I don’t measure up to your allegedly Jesus-inspired standards?

Good one.

George Pataki:

Since I really have no idea why you’re running, let me just ask you this: Who’s more badass, Captain Kirk or Picard?

Star Wars or Doctor Who?

Marco Rubio:

My family is half Cuban, and we loved you and your life story until you lied to us about amnesty – no, that’s not an invitation for you to try to convince us how your past embrace of amnesty was not really an embrace of amnesty. You lied to me once – why should I ever believe anything you ever say again?

I agree completely.

Here’s your chance to be clear – do you agree with me and most conservatives that America has zero moral obligation to illegal aliens, that they should receive no government benefits, and that they should leave our country?

Now, careful, you might just be a “racist”. 🙂

Ted Cruz:

I think you are a genius lawyer and a true conservative, but you are off-putting to people who aren’t movement conservatives and I fear your candidacy would be Goldwater II: The Revenge. Do the math for me – how can you possibly win 270 electoral votes?

Wouldn’t you better serve conservatism as Chief Justice Ted Cruz?

Can a Cruz missile hit the right target or just explode in our faces when running against Bernie Sanders or Hillary?

Rand Paul:

Like your father, I can listen to you for a couple minutes, find myself nodding in agreement, and then BAM! you say something nutty, usually about foreign policy. How can I be sure you will do the most important thing a president must do – relentlessly and ruthlessly kill America’s enemies?

Chemtrails. Are they a thing?

Just how stable are you?

Scott Walker:

The idea behind your campaign seemed to be that you’re a normal guy who would return us to normalcy, but we conservatives don’t want normalcy anymore. We want vengeance. Will you commit to ruthlessly annihilating liberalism wherever you find it?

More specifically, will you commit to destroying all federal government employee unions?

We need some Wisconsin union missile strikes, not just a guy from Wisconsin.

Mike Huckabee:

You combine a love of big government with a kind of religious paternalism that evokes an unholy love child of LBJ and Elmer Gantry. Can you sketch me out a scenario where you win the general election that doesn’t involve someone releasing tapes of Hillary gleefully vivisecting corgi puppies?

You play bass. Really, is that a president’s instrument?

Bill Clinton played Sax, look what that got us.

Bobby Jindal:

As an Asian-American, can the GOP win over that growing minority group by addressing the systemic racism they face because of Democrat-dominated universities’ admissions policies?

I think you’d be a good president, but I don’t think you can win. Shouldn’t you agree to come on board with someone up here on stage who might win and agree to be his/her HHS secretary?

Be useful.

Rick Santorum:

You lost your Senate seat in Pennsylvania back in 2006, meaning you have failed in every election campaign since 2000. Why is this time different?

It won’t be.

My country is falling apart and, like most conservatives, that’s my No. 1 priority. Why should I vote for you and re-fight the gay marriage battle that we’ve already decisively lost instead of saving our Constitution from these leftist creeps?

And are you the man to do it?

Donald Trump:

Yeah, it’s been a lot of fun watching you make the GOP establishment wince by raising subjects like illegal alien thugs that the elite wants hushed up. We’ve had some laughs. But if you are elected president, you will be the commander-in-chief. This is a no gotcha question – I led soldiers for 27 years, so this is personal to me and to millions of conservatives whose sons, daughters, mothers, and fathers serve. Can you give me one good reason why you are worthy of our trust to lead and to safeguard the lives of the incredible men and women of our armed forces?

I don’t have a follow-up to that question, because at the end of the day, no other question really matters.

This isn’t “Celebrity Apprentice”. You don’t get to vote someone off every week, you have to deal with these assholes for 4 years at least. Can you handle that without saying “You’re Fired” and throwing childish insults at them every week?

These are the questions no one will ask.

The there’s the Iran Deal. Where you give the #1 state sponsor of Terrorism in the World $150 Billion dollars as a bonus gift to develop Nuclear Weapons that they won’t use for …TERRORISM!  <<dramatic music sting>>

So what do think about that?

negotiate with terrorists

nukes

socialism

The Emboldened

Hollywood comedy legend David Zucker (“Airplane,” “Scary Movie,” “Naked Gun” films among many others) has written and produced this hilarious spoof on the disastrous Iran Nuclear Deal.

Now that the RINOs have emboldened our King AGAIN, he will now turned his Majesty to screwing us even more.

Climate Change, aka fuck your energy bills into the stratosphere and get 0ut your 19th Century Luddite Lovers kits because this one’s going to hurt big time.

Oh, and he wants to sell trade and the country off to the Chinese.

But don’t worry, if the next President is a Republican all this will he Bush’s or his fault when it crashes.

So you’ll eventually get nuked by Iran, killed by ISIS, have to heat your house with Candles, ride a government approved horse and buggy… But at least it will make Progressive Liberals feel good and make RINOs happy they were passive aggressive wimps.

He is the King. How can you tell? He ain’t got shit all over him!  (Monty Python).

Buoyed by the success of his nuclear deal with Iran, President Barack Obama is preparing to move aggressively on other long-delayed priorities, including a major climate change summit this winter and his elusive quest to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp.

Yeah, let out more Terrorist to kill us. Maybe they too can be “refugees”. Or even better sue the US for locking them up in the first place!

The National Security Council’s directorate of strategic planning has been quietly building an agenda of action items for the closing year of Obama’s presidency, in a White House that sees its work as far from complete, administration officials say.

He’s far for done in “transforming” America into a 3rd World shit-hole, for it’s own good.

“We have no intention of resting on our laurels,” said one senior administration official. “We have an ambitious foreign policy agenda that we’ll continue to pursue aggressively throughout the remainder of [the] fourth quarter of the administration.”

Read: Screw America, then imperialistic racist dogs that we are! 🙂

Part of that agenda includes striking a calmer post-Iran deal relationship with Israel — including a November visit to the White House by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that officials announced on Friday.

Yeah, the deal is, we will try to keep Iran from nuking you until I’m out of office. Then all bets are off.

Oh, and those people who have been lobbing 1000’s of missiles  at you trying to kill everyone of you (Palestinians) are “the good guys”.

Also high on the to-do list: completing a Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal to which Congress gave “fast-track” approval in June; bolstering counter-terrorism partnerships in Asia and Africa; and putting U.S.-China relations on a firmer footing, a project that will include a state visit to Washington by Chinese President Xi Jingping this month.

Sell the country to the Chinese.

As Obama’s presidency draws to a close, he will focus increasingly on the policies his successor will inherit after he’s gone, according to sources familiar with the administration’s thinking.

Whuich will all be the successor fault when they fail miserably. Oh, if its a Republican who dares to reverse any of it The Ministry of Truth will be out in full force to make sure the meek little RINO (The Republican Elite would never allow anything else) knows his place.

“The last 16 months actually can be very important not only for this president’s legacy, but for setting up the next president’s administration,” said Brian Katulis, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress who is close to Obama foreign policy officials. “No matter what people say in campaigns, you’re most likely to see incremental change from administration to administration.”

That’s why it’s always Bush’s Fault for everything Obama did wrong.

Even as the Iran deal gets implemented in the months ahead, a potentially thorny process that will occupy significant bandwidth in the White House, Obama will shift his focus to climate.

Translation: Screw you personally, next. If the Iran Deal was a little to esoteric for you grasp, wait until your energy costs triple (or worse).

But don’t worry, it will be the fault of those evil Oil & Gas companies, they are so greedy… 🙂

An international climate summit kicks off at the end of November in Paris, where Obama hopes to find agreement on meaningful new limits on carbon gases. The summit is expected to be one focus of Xi’s visit.

The Chinese, the world’s greatest polluters! Did you think he’ll get toug with them while he’s selling the country to them in the trade deal?

Beneath the heady talk of agenda-setting, however, is the grim reality of a global stage where multiple fires burn despite Washington’s efforts to extinguish them.

Hey, because he sets most of them and then blames someone else for them.

Obama could spend much of his final year performing triage on issues like the Islamic State, Syria’s civil war and the conflict in Ukraine.

Which he’s made worse by his own actions. So the clumsy surgeon who chopped off your leg when you had a cold is coming back for more! Rejoice! 🙂

Officials are also braced for possible new crises, including in Afghanistan, as U.S. troops withdraw from a country whose government and security forces remain fragile.

Illegals voting For Hillary, oh, sorry, that’s not a crisis. 🙂

One of Obama’s post-Iran deal projects has already run into trouble as Secretary of State John Kerry has begun new diplomacy to find a political resolution to Syria’s civil war.

Why? You mean the “Assad Must Go” verbal abuse hasn’t worked? I guess we’ll have to step up our rhetoric, maybe hire a speech writer to toughen the language so we sound like a pit bull and act like an angry, yappy, chihuahua.

Russia, a key backer of Syrian President Bashar Assad, has recently sent military personnel and equipment to the country—a dramatic escalation that has surprised and angered Obama and Kerry and may derail that project.

You mean the Russians, The Syranians and The Iranians are all working together! How can this be, I’m Barack Hussein Obama and I’m the Most Important Man in Human History and you will obey me!

“We continue to believe that there needs to be a political solution to the conflict in Syria, and that support for the Assad regime, particularly in a military way, is unhelpful to achieving that goal,” State Department spokesman John Kirby said Friday.

Talk is cheap. It’s the only time a Liberal is cheap.

And although the White House been working on a new plan to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp, a key promise from Obama’s 2008 campaign, it has been bedeviled by old obstacles, including political resistance to the transfer of detainees from Cuba onto U.S. soil.

Well, since he’s now buddies with Castro, maybe Castro will take them and then they can fly back to the Middle East so they can work on our inevitable death and destruction.

But it will make Obama feel good and give the Progressive Media the warm fuzzies, that’s what is important!

Some Pentagon and intelligence officials remain deeply wary of freeing other detainees cleared for release, and some top officials are skeptical that the camp can be shut down as long as a Republican Congress remains in power.

So we have to destroy them. Simple. 🙂

Other disappointments appear inevitable. Obama is likely to leave office having made little progress on defusing the danger of nuclear-armed North Korea

Yeah, he was too busy giving nukes to Iran.

and on stabilizing a volatile relationship with Pakistan, which U.S. officials believe continues to support Taliban factions that attack and kill Westerners in Afghanistan.

So what? That was Bush’s mess anyhow.

Nor does Russian President Vladimir Putin show any sign of ending Moscow’s support for separatist rebels in Ukraine, despite U.S. and European sanctions intended to coerce him to do so.

Putin is very afraid of Obama… 🙂

Another frustration has been the resilience of the Islamic State, also known as ISIS and ISIL. A year of airstrikes and the return of more than 3,000 U.S. troops to Iraq has failed to dislodge the Sunni Muslim group from major Iraqi cities like Mosul and Ramadi.

You mean just lobbing missles at the problem from a far isn’t working? I’m shocked!

As some hawks call for a deeper U.S. engagement in the fight against ISIS, including by moving American soldiers from rear positions to the front lines of battle, Obama shows no appetite for escalation.

Yeah, that whole “Death to America” thing should be a clue.

That is despite his past vow to defeat the group: “Our objective is clear: We will degrade, and ultimately destroy, ISIL through a comprehensive and sustained counterterrorism strategy,” Obama said in a televised national address almost exactly a year ago, on Sept. 10, 2014.

Blah, Blah, Blah. If ISIS could be killed by boring them to death with Obama rhetoric, then yeah, he might stand a chance.

Katulis said he does not expect Obama to take aggressive new steps in the Middle East, where top officials remain deeply skeptical about their ability to shape events constructively.

After all, they have such a great track record…of absolute and total failure, that is.

“After seven years, you get a sense they understand that the lesson is that things are easier said than done,”Katulis said,

DOH! Really? I’m shocked.

citing two failed efforts to achieve an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement. “There’s a cautious pragmatism that I think will restrain the administration’s ambitions on the tougher problems.”

Yeah, that whole “Death to Israel”, “Kill All the Jews”, thing kind of gets in the way. After all, it’s all Israel’s fault don’t you know. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne
give em nukes

Remember when It said Libby, Libby, Libby on the Label, Label Label?

Do you remember Lewis “Scooter” Libby?

I do. I do. 🙂

In 2003, the Department of Justice appointed a special counsel to investigate allegations that Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, unlawfully disclosed the covert status of CIA operative Valerie Plame.

It was all BS, the Democrats were trying there damndest to get Bush but they couldn’t.

Yet Plame may not have been a covert undercover agent, based on the formal government definition of that role.

And the fact that you can’t be an international undercover operative while living comfortably all the time in Virginia!

And even if she were, it was widely known at the time that Secretary of State Colin Powell’s subordinate, Richard Armitage, had most likely disclosed her status earlier.

And in the end, after all the partisan “gotcha” BS had cleared it was announced to no fanfare at all that he had in fact done it, but since he was not on the hit list and meant nothing to the Democrats he was virtually ignored.

In other words, Libby was in an Orwellian position of being accused of a crime that may not have existed. But if it had, it was more likely committed by someone else.

But since it was partisan “gotcha” the Democrats didn’t care. They just wanted BLOOD in the water. They were the sharks hungry for a partisan meal if there was no meat they’d invent it — much like Vegan Chicken Legs!

Publicity-seeking special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald convinced a Washington, D.C., jury to find Libby guilty of obstruction of justice, perjury and making false statements to federal investigators — not the supposed crimes for which he was originally targeted by the media.

And a laughably silly “gotcha” especially compared to Hillary, Obama, Holder and Co.

But that’s the point, They are Democrats. They can do that.  You can’t. 🙂

Apparently, the very suspicion of improper behavior by high public servants once warranted vigorous legal inquiry — by supposedly independent and autonomous prosecutors.

Only if you were a Republican and the Democrat Hit Squad was out to get you (and they missed and got a minor functionary who then became the anti-christ because that’s what they were hungry for in the end run).

In the eight-plus since the Libby trial, the Obama administration has blown up the law as we have known it for centuries.

But since they are Democrats and so much smarter and so much more Holy than you grubby little shits they can do whatever they want in the name of  the “betterment” of all mankind. 🙂

Barack Obama once warned Latino activists that he had no legal authority to suspend enforcement of federal immigration law, stop deportations and offer de facto amnesties.

Until politics said he did and you’re a “racist” if you opposed him.

But that caution was only a campaigning talking point. After his re-election in 2012 and the midterm elections in 2014, Obama made a mockery of immigration law.

The Agenda is The Agenda!

Hundreds of liberal sanctuary cities have announced that federal immigration law does not apply to them. That scary, neo-Confederate idea of legal nullification was sanctioned by the Obama administration — in a way it never would have been if a city had suspended the Endangered Species Act, emissions standards or gun-control legislation.

As a result, once-detained and later-released immigrants with criminal records have murdered innocent American citizens.

And the perp (or his gun) was the victim or to blame, but not the illegal immigrant.

Consider the proposed nuclear deal with Iran. By past custom and practice, the nonproliferation agreement would be treated as what it is — a treaty.

But ratifying treaties constitutionally requires 67 yes votes from the Senate. Obama could never obtain that margin. So he managed to downgrade the treaty into a mere legal agreement. Then he claimed that the Senate required 67 no votes to override his veto.

And the Republicans went along with this gag.

Obama also was worried about the political impact of his new Obamacare legislation on the 2014 midterm elections. So he simply suspended by executive fiat the employer mandate of the Affordable Care Act. Had another president done that to the laws of Obamacare, the left would have demanded impeachment.

Nixon got impeached for a hell of a lot less!

In Ferguson, Missouri, law enforcement eased off and allowed a city to burn. But the cause of the rioting — the supposed improper police killing of criminal suspect Michael Brown — was based on the lie that Brown was shot in the back while fleeing. No matter. The ensuing public outrage seemingly exempted arsonists and looters from arrest.

The Ministry of Truth said he said, so he must have said it, right?

Just as scary is the application of the law on the basis of the perceived politics of a suspect.

IRS bureaucrat Lois Lerner was exposed as a rank partisan whose office gave particular scrutiny to would-be tax-exempt groups deemed opponents of Obama’s re-election efforts. She invoked the Fifth Amendment and refused to testify before a congressional committee about her actions at the IRS. Lerner has never been indicted.

Because the person who’d have to do it, The Attorney General, then Eric Holder, was and still is a partisan for the President and The Party, not the Law.

Almost everything former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has stated about her improper use of a private email account and server has been proven false. A State Department staffer who worked on Clinton’s private server plans to invoke the Fifth Amendment to avoid testifying before a congressional committee about his role in privatizing Clinton’s email.

But she said she was “sorry” so why are you so insensitive as to not accept it? 🙂

It’s not like she erased 18 minutes of White House tapes or anything!

But like Lerner, Clinton has escaped an indictment or jailing.

Because the Jailer is paid political partisan of the King.

Not so Kim Davis. She is a conservative Christian court clerk in Kentucky who apparently thought, given the lawless times, that she could ignore without consequence a Supreme Court decision making gay marriage legal.

Davis was jailed for not enforcing the law. That is a justifiable punishment — if it were applied equally to the progressive mayors of sanctuary cities and all officials who likewise ignore federal law.

But Progressive don’t believe in equality, of enforcement, after all. The laws are for thee, not for them.

In the same manner, rank amateur video maker Nakoula Basseley Nakoula was jailed for violating his probation. Why?

Nakoula made a video insensitive to Muslims and thus was falsely blamed for the riotous 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. The most likely culprit of the preplanned Benghazi attack was not scapegoat Nakoula, but the inconvenient pre-election truth that al-Qaida was quite alive in Libya and U.S. security quite lax.

But that made the King and his minions look weak, so they had to lie their way out of that.

So it was perfectly logical that some Egyptians just happened to be strolling by with their Rocket Launchers, Snipers and Molotov Cocktail and they all had a delayed reaction, like not getting a joke right away, from seeing a You Tube video 4 months ago and went crazy with rage.

After all, “What Difference Does it  Make?” 🙂

America is becoming analogous to the mess in lawless contemporary Venezuela. When the law is suspended or unevenly applied for politically protected individuals and groups, then there is no law.

Welcome to Orwell Land.

So we are now seeing the logical descent into the abyss of chaos. (Victor Davis Hanson)

Yes, and to the Progressives it’s a glorious sight.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

The Purple Card

I’ll say upfront in my heart I am one of those “those the bums out” ‘racists’ because I’m just sick and tired of illegal aliens getting better treatment than actual citizens or LEGAL immigrants because politicians want to play both sides and do nothing about it.

But I like this plan. I endorse this plan and I would advocate for this plan by Derek Hunter.

A lot of sounds like someone has to step up and being the alpha parent who doesn’t take the unruly kids crap anymore.

What it comes down to is discipline. Something a politicians is very squishy about and The Left has totally abandoned.

But discipline is fair. Which is why they don’t want to do it in reality. They just want to score their political points and move on leaving the mess for someone else to clean up, but they don’t because they make their own mess and we, The American people, are left with what’s left after this mutual ass-kissing frat party.

Immigration is not going anywhere as a political issue, as much as some would like it to.

Although Democrats and the media whine over the term “anchor baby” and the concept of our national sovereignty, adults have to address real problems, and millions of people in the country illegally is a problem. So let’s address it, shall we?

Big business and big government love the idea of amnesty; cheap labor for one, a dependent voting bloc for the other. To that end, both agree to the lie that amnesty would be a boon to the economy.

Somehow we’re meant to believe employers of these low-skilled workers suddenly will decide the added expense of having legal workers on the payroll (payroll taxes, worker’s comp insurance, etc.) will be worth their clean conscience, or the fear of a previously unenforced fine will force their hand. They’re already willingly breaking the law. Why stop simply because those who’ve enabled you to do so are threatening to enforce it at some nebulous date in the future?

As for the illegal aliens, their desires never should be considered a priority over Americans. Those not on public assistance either knowingly work “under the table” or with stolen identities. Either way, who cares? Any choice they’ve made was a choice made of free will knowing the consequences.

No covering it up with ideologically convenient excuses.

The only reason to consider anything other than deportation is the expense. But there’s a way around that and to fix the mess politicians of both parties have created.

I’ve written about this before, but allow me to clarify and expand on it again in the hope that one or more of the feckless Republicans running for president decide meaningless platitudes does not a plan make.

First: Seal the borders. No one gets in, from anywhere, until we deal with those who are already here. That means heavy patrols on the southern border and immediate removal of those sneaking across. No excuses, no exceptions. Those seeking refugee status have the rest of the world to choose from; we have to get our house in order.

That always has to be the first step. It’s the one neither party actually wants to do. It is the hardest one also. But it is the most necessary. Without this, the rest of it is meaningless.

Second: Create a “Purple Card” to be offered to those here illegally who can prove they are employed. For lack of a better word, it is a form of amnesty. It will allow them to continue to work legally for a set number of years, after which it can be renewed if no crimes, not even misdemeanors, have been committed. If convicted of a crime, you’re out, no matter what.

1 Strike and you’re out. The hardest thing for politicians will be having the political will to mean it, no exceptions, no deals, no back room compromises.

Especially, in the face of the Left’s “racist” rants.

Illegal aliens will have one year after the border is sealed to apply for a Purple Card. They must provide fingerprints that will remain on file permanently and be accessible to law enforcement. There will be a processing fee. If they can’t come up with it, they add so little to the country that they should not qualify.

Like the Left’s lame excuse for Voter ID. If you can produce an ID for Movie Rental you can produce one for Voting.

No excuses.

After they are checked out and receive a Purple Card, they are free to work in this country for the specified number of years, renewable in perpetuity, as long as they are law abiding. They must verify they are working six months of every year. If they are unemployed for more than two months in any given 12-month period, they’re out. If they’re here to work, as we’re told, a work requirement shouldn’t be an issue.

So they have to live up to their own hype. Shouldn’t be too hard, right? 🙂

By accepting the Purple Card, they receive the right to work and freely move about the country, as well as to leave and return. But they never, ever can obtain U.S. citizenship. Their children, guests in our country just as they are, cannot become U.S. citizens, even those born here during their Purple Card time. We will educate them, but they are not Americans. For that they must go through the legal process in their home country.

Third: They will pay all taxes owed from their earnings, including all FICA taxes. But they will be barred from ever collecting Social Security, qualifying for Medicaid or enrolling in Medicare. That is the price of admission, the price for violating our laws.

No freebies for cutting in line. Actions have consequences.

If, as Democrats say, immigration reform is about getting people “out of the shadows,” this does that. If, as Republicans say, they’re only here to work and help their families, this does that too. If it’s about something else, like creating voters who will undercut Americans’ votes, this will be opposed.

And it will be, because those are just excuses for ideological warfare. Democrats will call you a racist and Republicans will be passive aggressive.

We’re told illegal aliens only want to work to support their families. This allows for that. There will be minimal disruption of the economy since those illegal aliens actually here to work will be free to do just that. Others, criminals and non-contributors, will be weeded out.

Instead of just being the price of no discipline.

This must be coupled with an expedited deportation process. Anyone not willing to meet the criteria for this generous new plan made a choice, and that choice must have consequences. Committing a crime is another conscious choice, Americans must be protected from guests who would do them harm, in any way.

And from Politicians who would do them harm.

Citizenship, or even the right to live here on a temporary basis, is too precious to be handed out like Halloween candy.

Or as Political candy.

Any or all of this idea is available, free of charge, to any politician who wants it. Mix it, mold it, change it, but keep the concept. Citizenship, the end result of amnesty, is what Americans dislike the most. Show some innovative thinking by removing it as a possibility.

Special Needs Education

A new Rasmussen poll shows most Americans favor a wall on our southern border to stop uncontrolled immigration and that 80% want illegal alien felons deported. What about this do our elites not understand?

They understand their Agenda. It’s you who don’t understand that THEIR Agenda and their narcissism is far more important to them than grubby little old smelly you.

The 51% majority in favor of a wall broke down to 70% of Republicans, 57% of independents and a 30% plurality of Democrats. On illegal immigrant felons, 92% of Republicans, 69% of Democrats and 82% of independents want them sent home.

So what? That’s not on The Agenda, so it doesn’t matter.

These percentages represent sizable upticks in public support for the rule of law on immigration. Americans are tired of the law being ignored and city, state and federal officials collaborating in the law-breaking.

But the one’s in power are not. They want them for Votes and cheap labor. That way it’s self-perpetuating power for them.

With such poll numbers, getting behind the majority would seem a no-brainer for elected representatives. But the politicians, along with bureaucrats and nongovernment organizations, resist at every turn.

Because that’s not on THEIR Agenda.

Maybe that’s why sentiment has crystallized behind solutions such as walls and deportation. And why some eloquent cries for justice and democratic representation have been heard in unlikely places.

All the way from the 710 freeway corridor in Los Angeles, a gritty industrial area with many black and Latino residents, a Compton man showed up in Arizona last month to tell thousands at a Donald Trump rally about his talented football-star son who was murdered by illegals in cold blood.

Shortly afterward, citizens of nearby Huntington Park rose up against the nomination by one cynical councilman to city boards of two illegals who couldn’t even qualify for the DREAM Act. The mayor approved the appointments on the grounds there was no difference in the value of citizenship or immigrating illegally.

The outrage in Huntington Park evoked last year’s revolt in middle-class Murrieta, Calif., where federal officials tried to sneak busloads of illegals into the community and dump them at local bus stops. The opposition there was also led by black, Latino and Middle Eastern residents, many of them legal immigrants.

In both cases, residents were protesting against public officials who failed to respect the will of the people.

But it’s the will of the Politicians and their own personal power that matters, right? 🙂

All this started in California in 1998, when a federal judge overturned Proposition 187 denying public services, including education, for illegals. Voters strongly opposed the court’s ruling, but Democrats let it stand after they took power in Sacramento.

A floodgate of benefits has been open ever since. Along with education came “free” health care, college scholarships and special “centers” to attend to illegals’ special needs.

Because some “citizens” are more equal than others. 🙂

In 2003, Gov. Gray Davis was thrown out of office by voters in a recall referendum for attempting to issue driver’s licenses to illegals. Today, despite continued public opposition, illegals get licenses for the asking, and the DMV has hired an extra thousand employees just to process all the askers.

As for rule of law, forget it. This summer, two California women were murdered by illegals — one in broad daylight on San Francisco’s Fisherman’s Wharf and the other in a horrific home invasion in Santa Maria. Both suspects had the special protection of sanctuary cities where they needn’t worry about being deported.

Evidence is now mounting that illegals are casting ballots in California elections, with highly suspicious voting drives noted in areas in which they dominate. In a little-covered move earlier this month, Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill allowing noncitizen “immigrants” to work at polling precincts to help process all the non-English speakers. (IBD)

The Democrats want to welcome the new class of Welfare Democrat voters. They don’t care if there are murderers,rapists, or terrorists in with them. That’s justice the price to be paid by you for their power. It’s no big deal to them. It’s not like you matter.

You’re sheep, and you’ll do as you are told. And if that doesn’t work then we’ll just remind you how heartless, mean, and racist you are for opposing us. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Home Sweet Home

Whether you like it or not. The Agenda, and Future Welfare Democrats, is The Agenda.

The vast majority of 50,000 unaccompanied youths and children who have illegally crossed the Texas border during the last few months have been successfully delivered by federal agencies to their relatives living in the United States, according to a New York Times article.

(with the opening paragraph: “Suddenly, this city <Murrieta,CA> in the desert has become the place that turned away the immigrants.“)

Not Illegal Immigrants, mind you. They hate ALL immigrants. Those hateful raci$ts! 🙂

“What happens when they come here with diseases and can overrun our schools? How much is this costing us?” one resident, Jodie Howard, asked the mayor.

“How do you know they are really families and aren’t some kind of gang or drug cartel?” another person asked federal officials.

Such hateful people… 🙂  (then the article goes on about just that…No bias here…move along…)

Mayor Long said he resented accusations of racism, telling the crowd that both his mother and wife are Hispanic. Mr. Long asked his 86-year-old father-in-law to stand, then praised him for immigrating legally.

Maybe he’s a “white” Hispanic, Like George Zimmerman. 🙂

Had you heard that term before or since? Nope.

A second New York Times article report revealed that officials have caught an additional 240,000 Central American migrants since April, and are transporting many of them to their destinations throughout the United States.

“No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.” The Third Amendment to the Constitution.

To bad it never said anything about Illegal Aliens. 🙂

The 290,000 illegals — so far — are exploiting legal loopholes that allow them to get temporary permits to stay in the United States.

Experts say that President Barack Obama’s administration has failed to close the loopholes and is unlikely to deport more than a small percentage of the illegals, despite the high unemployment rates among American Latino, African-American and white youths, and the strapped budgets of many cities and towns.

Obama blames House Republicans for delaying action on an immigration overhaul. A comprehensive measure the Senate passed last year has been blocked by House leaders who also have done little to advance legislative proposals of their own.

Obama announced earlier this week that, as a result of lawmakers’ inaction, he will pursue non-legislative ways that he can adjust U.S. immigration policy without waiting for Congress to act.

So if you won’t do it my way, I’ll just do by Fiat. After all, I am King am I not? 🙂

The president’s policy has caused protests by frightened citizens in towns such as Murrieta. But Obama’s allies — such as La Raza, an ethnic lobby for Latinos — are eager to escalate the conflict and to paint the protestors as racists. Those protests may escalate before the November elections.

New Democrat Slogan: Vote for me, or You’re a Raci$t!  (or wait they used that in 2008…) 🙂

The Central American parents of the 50,000 youths and children are using a 2008 law to ensure their children are transported to them for free by a relay of border patrol and Department of Health and Human Services officials. The youths are delivered to the border patrol by smugglers, dubbed coyotes, in exchange for several thousand dollars.

But they are “migrants” according to the left, not smuggled ILLEGALLY. But you have to admire the Left’s embracing of capitalism in the venture. 🙂

Half of the 50,000 Central American youths were delivered by taxpayer-funded employees directly to their parents now living in the United States, and another third were delivered to people who said they were close relatives, said the July 3 article.

That new data was included in the 19th paragraph of a 20-paragraph July 3 article.

Top immigration officials choose to not check if the relatives or parents who pick up the children are in the country legally.

Both New York Times articles described the border-crossing illegal aliens as “immigrants.” In fact, “immigrants” is the term for people who legally migrate into the United States.

The 240,000 strong-group largely consists of many mothers and young children, most of whom are now being flown and bussed to destinations near where they wish to settle. That new 240,000 number was included in the seventh paragraph of a 24-paragraph article.

Few of the illegal immigrants are high-school graduates, or have skills that would allow them to earn more than they cost to federal, state and local taxpayers.

Officials have not said where they’ve delivered the adults or youth illegals, but pro-American activists are keeping track of some locations, including San Diego, Calif.

Officials have defended the administration’s catch-and-release policy, which critics say is inviting more Central Americans to cross the border in the hope of being arrested by the border patrol.

“When you have a noncriminal [border-crossing ] mother, they are going to be released,” David Jennings, the head of the Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agency in southern California. “The most humane way to deal with this is to find out where they are going and get them there,” he said at a town meeting held in Murrieta, Calif., according to the New York Times.

They just aren’t going Back to their own country. Because to the Left, they already are already there, they just have to make you shut up about it. You Raci$t!

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

 

Missing Irony

HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelius will now get to enjoy one of the benefits of Obamacare touted by Democrats: She’ll have a lot more time to make dinner.

HAIL HYDRA! She’ll be back in some way, somewhere. Just less visible.

But now at least the next person who’s the head of HHS can continuously say, “But I wasn’t there so I didn’t have anything to do with it. Don’t blame me.” when they blow you off… 🙂

That’s because like a lot of other Obamacare victims, she has now lost her job.

Thank goodness her insurance is portable.

Unlike ours. 🙂

In losing her job as the head of Health and Human Services, she can take satisfaction that she now gets to see Obamacare in the same way the rest of us do, as a job destroyer.

If anybody in the media sees the irony in the fact that Sebelius lost her job because of the disastrous implementation of a disastrous law that have cost so many others their jobs, they’re not acting like it.

“Kathleen Sebelius,” writes the New York Times, “the health and human services secretary, is resigning, ending a stormy five-year tenure marred by the disastrous rollout of President Obama’s signature legislative achievement, the Affordable Care Act.”

Hooray for the president!

Boo for traitors who can’t implement our traitorous laws!

At the beginning of the month—yes, the month of April– we were all treated to a round of triumphant celebration by the leftist wing of the left-wing party as Obamacare was declared to be not just a success, but a stunning triumph of the will over Republican obstructionism, lies– thank you Harry Reid– misogyny and misanthropy.

Four and a Half Years (of Struggle) Against Lies, Stupidity and Cowardice, is what they will someday name the book if a Democrat writes one about the implementation of Obamacare.

Google it; you’ll see.

And again, they’ll miss the irony.

That liberals decided of their own accord that they would crown April Fools’ Day–forever after– as Obamacare Day, is again another irony that seems to be lost on people who believe that a variety selection of chilled cheeses is much more important than having a variety selection of competent doctors.

I mean let’s face it: There really aren’t any good wines that go with doctor anyway.

Ha, ha, ha, ha!

“Interviews with two dozen contractors, current and former government officials, insurance executives and consumer advocates, as well as an examination of confidential administration documents, point to a series of missteps — financial, technical and managerial — that led to the troubles” with the rollout of Obamacare conceded the New York Times in October.

Liberals will try to paint this as the failure of one person.

And they will be right. And they will be wrong.

Right premise; wrong person.

“Secretary of HHS will soon become known as the worst job in America,” says my friend, political consultant Tony Marsh. “It doesn’t matter how competent the director, no one can make this goofy law work.”

Pin the goofy law on our goofy president.

But then you’d be a racist!! 🙂

Whatever else people might say about Barack Obama, even liberals have to admit that when it comes to managerial prowess–even when having the benefit of his pen and telephone– the only executive action the president seems to get right is his tee time.

Don’t let the awesome size of the Obamacare debacle shrink the significance of the other debacles Obama has presided over: $1 trillion stimulus, failed; a Department of Energy loan program for green companies, failed too, just to name two in a growing database of Obama disasters.

Who could’ve predicted at a time when unprecedented money and resources would go into alternative energy production via fiat by the federal government, that the “green” industry would see an unprecedented number of bankruptcies, failures and collapses?

Conservatives could have, and did.

Because the question goes to the fundamental flaw that Democrats have when it comes to governance. If it were all about money and power and influence, Democrats would never have a problem; nor would communists.

But eventually human nature takes over; and human nature is the enemy of control freaks, a.k.a. progressives.

Human nature can’t control the progressive agenda, no matter how many jobs are lost. Democrats and the president mean to implement Obamacare even if they have to fire us all one by one.

That’s where the Thought Police come in. Control thought, control people.

In the old days, in order for healthcare to happen, you only needed to have a sick person.

Under the Democrats, you only need to have one very, very sick person right at the top, so he can do the firing of the rest of us. (John Ransom)

HAIL HYDRA!

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Risk Assessment

It could take a year to secure the risk of “high exposures” of personal information on the federal Obamacare online exchange, a cybersecurity expert told CNBC on Monday.

“When you develop a website, you develop it with security in mind. And it doesn’t appear to have happened this time,” said David Kennedy, a so-called “white hat” hacker who tests online security by breaching websites. He testified on Capitol Hill about the flaws of HealthCare.gov last week.

“It’s really hard to go back and fix the security around it because security wasn’t built into it,” said Kennedy, chief executive of TrustedSec. “We’re talking multiple months to over a year to at least address some of the critical-to-high exposures on the website itself.”

According to the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversaw the implementation of the website, the components used to build the site are compliant with standards set by Federal security authorities.

“The privacy and security of consumers’ personal information are a top priority for us. Security testing happens on an ongoing basis using industry best practices to appropriately safeguard consumers’ personal information,” said the spokesperson.

Another online security expert—who spoke at last week’s House hearing and then on CNBC—said the federal Obamacare website needs to be shut down and rebuilt from scratch. Morgan Wright, CEO of Crowd Sourced Investigations said: “There’s not a plan to fix this that meets the sniff test of being reasonable.”

It’s safe, Trust us, we are from the Government and we are here to help you… 🙂

Speaking of Risks….Self-servicing Liberal Unions.

Egged on by unions, fast-food workers plan to strike in dozens of U.S. cities for much higher wages. Sadly, they’re being used to do something that’s not in their own interests.

Sensing the time is ripe, the Service Employees International Union and union-funded front groups are organizing a walkout of workers at fast-food joints in about 100 cities to protest how tough it is to live on the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour.

A Union had some PAID “protesters” out in Phoenix at a Wal-Mart on Black Friday. It was a dog-and-pony show.

They’d like that nearly doubled to $15 — and not just for fast food, but retailing and other industries too.

So if you want a fast food job, there should be some openings soon. 🙂

Sounds great. But even by the loopy logic of the left, this is economic insanity and would lead to greater misery, fewer jobs and fewer opportunities for all.

That’s not just our opinion. Economists David Neumark and William Wascher, in their comprehensive book “Minimum Wages,” looked at virtually all the scholarly and statistical evidence worldwide, digging up literally dozens of studies.

Liberals and Unions don’t care about statistics. Liberals are about emotion. Unions are about power. Logic has no place in their brains.

Their finding: Minimum wage laws almost always result in a “reduction in employment opportunities for low-skilled” employees while limiting “skill acquisition by reducing educational attainment and perhaps training, resulting in lower adult wages and earnings.”

And, they said, it reduces the total amount of human capital — a huge cost to society.

Like Liberals and Unions care about that…

The minimum wage is so devastating that roughly 85% of all economists in a recent survey — from both the left and the right sides of the spectrum — said they think it’s a bad idea.

Unions will use Americans’ well-known sympathy for the underdog to make their case — and get support. But it’s the underdog who suffers most.

Today, teen unemployment is nearly 25%, up more than a third from just 10 years ago. Jack up the minimum wage by law, and that level will go even higher.

The idea that working families depend on these jobs is false. Most of those working for minimum wage are young, ages 16 to 24. They live in middle-class homes with above-average household incomes.

And as James Sherk of the Heritage Foundation notes, two-thirds of minimum-wage earners get a raise in their first year. This is how they learn to show up, work hard and get along with others — valuable life skills young people acquire as they begin work and the very things that will make them a success later on.

A higher minimum wage would cost young workers jobs and opportunities. They’d be wise to ignore the unions’ siren song of higher wages for nothing. (IBD)

And the sirens of legends led sailors to crash their ships on the rocks and die as their boat sinks.

Yep, that sounds like a Union… 🙂

140306 600 Health Care Change cartoons

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

 Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

The Oncoming Storm…

FYI last night at the Great Falls Grange debate, Democrat delegate candidate Kathleen Murphy said that since many doctors are not accepting medicaid and medicare patients, she advocates making it a legal requirement for those people to be accepted.  

After all, if you defy a Liberal they will try and use trickery or regulations to make you do what they want.

She did not recognize that the payments are inadequate to cover the doctors’ costs.  She also did not recognize there is a shortage of over 45,000 physicians now and that it is forecast to be 90,000 in a few years.  

Democrats appear to want to make physicians slaves of the state, but Democrats don’t admit they would just drive more doctors out of practice into retirement and other occupations.  The Obamacare law and regulations are causing millions of people to lose their health insurance, drop many doctors and hospitals. The HHS internal forecast is 93 million Americans would lose their health insurance due to the Obamacare law and rules about adequacy of insurance.

Many more people will be uninsured.   The penalties for being uninsured start at $95 per year, but the penalties can’t be collected by the IRS if a person does not have a tax refund to attach.  (Mason Conservative)

The Agenda is the Agenda!

And these are the next steps. They are years away, but the biggest storm starts with but a single breeze.

Ann Coulter

Liberals never give up. Nothing is ever the same until they get their way, much like two-year-olds. That’s why we have to go back every few years and remind everyone that we already had this argument, and liberals lost. There’s a reason our Party’s symbol is the elephant — we never forget — and the Democrats’ is a jackass.

American Spectator: Coulter follows this opening by pointing out that liberals spent the 1970’s insisting “the Earth was going to freeze in two years.” That Hubert Humphrey “said he eat his hat if civil rights laws ever led to racial quotas” — and now liberals call conservatives “‘racist’ for opposing racial quotas.” Reminds that “Teddy Kennedy assured us his immigration bill would not alter the country’s ethnic mix” and that since the Kennedy immigration bill passed (back in 1965) the nation’s ethnicity has changed “from nearly 90 percent white in 1965 to about 63 percent white in 2013.”

And their new mission: Control every aspect of your left from Before you are conceived and until well after your dead.

Health Care, Global Warming, etc. And they can wait, like water cutting the Grand Canyon. They can wait. They never give up. They will relentless grind you down.

Coulter: Most people barely pay attention to what’s happening now, much less two years ago — and much, much less a few decades ago. That’s how the liberal version of history becomes accepted fact. It’s not that history is written by the victors. History is written by the pushy. When one side cares MUCH more about the historical record, there’s not a lot you can do about it. Especially when the pushy have tenure.

American Spectator:This is, of course, why liberals expect to be recognized as the Party of Civil Rights — when in fact a more racist party has never existed in all of American history, over the years being determined supporters of slavery, segregation, lynching, the Klan, racial quotas and now race-based illegal immigration. This is why, with the collapse of the Soviet Union — which the Left believed would never happen — and all the liberal legends featuring martyrs to the Red Scare have in fact been revealed as Soviet spies, the storyline about those martyrs never changes. Liberal martyrs from the Rosenbergs to Alger Hiss continue to be celebrated as just poor, persecuted souls victimized by that mean Joe McCarthy.

Coulter asks who can forget the rewriting of the successful Iraq War as a failure? And to use the topic of the day, the Left demands to be seen as the Pro-Choice Party — while deliberately and decidedly willfully denying health care choice to millions who are losing their health-care plans of choice. All in the cause of appeasing the bureaucratic gods of ObamaCare, not to mention the insatiable desire for control over your life.

Whether consciously or not they like to define the terms of world in their vision, but they want you to view the world in their vision and will happily tell you how to (or force it on you).

She understands that when dealing with liberalism and its advocates “facts and evidence are useless.”

Yes. Emphatically if frustratingly so.

VOTE FOR ME! The Other Guys an Asshole! 🙂

VOTE FOR ME! The Other Guys want you to Starve & Die! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Where We are II

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

On the Senate floor before 10 a.m. Friday, the senator gave a speech describing how American politics have reached the level at which “a small group of willful men and women who have a certain ideology”—read: the tea party and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas—have been able to take over the congressional budget debate in the last week. “Since they can’t get their way,” Harkin said, “they’re going to create this confusion and discourse and hope that the public will be so mixed up in who is to blame for this, that they’ll blame both sides.”

This isn’t just congressional business as usual, Harkin said. It’s much, much more dire:

It’s dangerous. It’s very dangerous. I believe, Mr. President, we are at one of the most dangerous points in our history right now. Every bit as dangerous as the break-up of the Union before the Civil War.

Mind you, the Democrats can’t see themselves that way… 🙂

They are so far above you mere mortals that it must be your fault.

Heard this before?

“I will work with anyone who wants to have a serious conversation about our economic future,” Obama said. “But I will not negotiate over Congress’ responsibility to pay the bills it has already racked up. I don’t know how to be more clear about this: no one gets to threaten the full faith and credit of the United States of America just to extract ideological concessions.”

Yes, you have. He will listen to anyone who wants to do it his way, or it’s the highway.

“The Affordable Care Act is one of the most important things we’ve done as a country in decades to strengthen economic security for the middle class and all who strive to join the middle class. And it is going to work.”
Well, with all the exemptions, waivers, and other give-aways the middle class is about the only people who are going to get stuck up their ass with this monstrosity.

And again, if it’s so great, why are the people who didn’t even read the damn thing before they passed it exempting themselves and their friends from it?

Give Democrats as much ObamaCare rope as they want, then sit back and watch them hang themselves. This advice from some pundits is the kind of thing that will make ObamaCare permanent.

After all, wasn’t there a  “elect Obama” and that will bring out another Reagan because he’s so bad that he’ll fail miserably and the people will rise up …

He failed miserably, but got re-elected anyhow.

Yesterday NBC announced it would be running a week of programming to help Obamacare get off its feet. So whether you like the bill or not (and let’s be honest, most Americans are not), NBC is going to hold the President’s hand and tell you all the great things about the new health care law.

The headline of the NBC press release reads:

NBC News Launches “Ready or Not, the New Healthcare Law,” a Multi-Screen Experience to Help Americans Get the Most Out of the Affordable Care Act

Dr. Nancy Snyderman Answers Most Pressing Questions Across Social and Via New Video Series #AskDrNancy

Interactive Tools and Resources Help Audience Navigate New Healthcare Benefits and Marketplaces

 

Starting Monday NBC News will “devote special coverage across all of its platforms to ‘Ready or Not, the New Healthcare Law,’ an extensive series aimed at explaining the complexities of the ACA and its impact on consumers”.

IBD: A group of nuns dedicated to caring for the elderly poor is suing to prevent an uncaring administration from shutting down their compassionate order over their refusal to obey the contraception mandate.

There is no clearer or sadder example of the Obama administration’s war on the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty than the demand by the Department of Health and Human Services to violate their religious consciences or pay heavy fines.

HHS has ruled that if the Sisters don’t offer insurance policies to their employees that include free coverage for sterilization procedures, artificial contraceptives and abortifacients, these vowed-to-poverty women will have to pay about $1 million in IRS fines, effectively making their work nearly impossible.

The Little Sisters of the Poor are a global Roman Catholic congregation of women, founded in 1839 by St. Jeanne Jugan. They operate homes in 31 countries, where they provide loving care for more than 13,000 needy elderly persons. Thirty homes are in the U.S.

Last Tuesday, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Little Sisters of the Poor. It questions the HHS ruling that, while houses of worship are exempt from the contraception mandate, the Little Sisters of the Poor are merely a social service organization that serves and hires non-Catholics, so it does not qualify for an exemption.

“The Little Sisters are driven by their religious faith to do what they do in terms of taking care of the elderly poor,” said Mark Rienzi, senior counsel for the Becket Fund. “The government should not be telling them they have to violate that faith to keep serving the poor.”

That objection has been raised by the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops, which argues that that religious institutions aren’t merely defined by church buildings open on Sunday but by the work they do and that the government needs to ensure the First Amendment isn’t gutted.

“We are not exempt from the (ObamaCare) mandate because we neither serve nor employ a predominantly Catholic population,” Sister Constance Carolyn Veit, the Little Sisters’ communications director, told the Daily Caller. “We hire employees and serve/house the elderly regardless of race and religion, so that makes us ineligible for the exemption being granted churches.”

“Like all of the Little Sisters, I have vowed to God and the Roman Catholic Church that I will treat all life as valuable, and I have dedicated my life to that work,” said Sister Loraine Marie, superior for one of the three U.S. provinces in the congregation. “We cannot violate our vows by participating in the government’s program to provide access to abortion-inducing drugs.”

We are from the Government, we are here to help you!

 

Some Things

“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”-Guess who 🙂

Obama on Obamacare: “We did raise taxes on some things.”

“Some things” means uninsured families, med devices,flex accounts, small businesses, people with high medical bills and even charitable hospitals.

During his Tuesday remarks at the Clinton Global Initiative, President Obama admitted that his health care law raises taxes:  “So what we did — it’s paid for by a combination of things. We did raise taxes on some things.”

Health insurance under Obamacare will cost individuals at least $2,988 a year on average, a price that Republican opponents may target as out-of-reach for many Americans who don’t qualify for U.S. subsidies.

While the $249 monthly payment is intended to be discounted through tax credits, less than half of people now buying insurance on their own may get that help. The release of the data by the Obama administration comes just six days before the Affordable Care Act’s insurance exchanges open for enrollment, and a day after Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, took the floor of the U.S. Senate to oppose the law.

The law’s long-term success “will depend on the changes that are made over the next couple of years to address the affordability issue,” said Brian Wright, an insurance analyst at Monness Crespi Hardt & Co. in New York. “If you have modifications that can help address those issues, then it will ultimately be successful. If not, then it’s an open question.”

So we’ll have to implement it in order to know what to fix…. 🙂

“Premiums nationwide will also be around 16 percent lower than originally expected,” HHS cheerfully announces in its press release. But that’s a ruse. HHS compared what the Congressional Budget Office projected rates might look like—in 2016—to its own findings. Neither of those numbers tells you the stat that really matters: how much rates will go up next year, under Obamacare, relative to this year, prior to the law taking effect. Former Congressional Budget Office director Douglas Holtz-Eakin agrees. “There are literally no comparisons to current rates. That is, HHS has chosen to dodge the question of whose rates are going up, and how much. Instead they try to distract with a comparison to a hypothetical number that has nothing to do with the actual experience of real people.”

Get ready for 24/7/365 Lies, Damned Lies and (False, Misleading and self-serving) Statistics from The White House, Democrats and The Ministry of Truth.

If you tell a lie often enough it becomes the truth. 🙂

ALSO: The IRS is unable to account for $67 million spent from a slush fund established for Obamacare implementation, according to a Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) report released today. 

The “Health Insurance Reform Implementation Fund” (HIRIF) was tucked into Obamacare in order to give the IRS money to enforce the tax provisions of the healthcare law.  The fund, totaling some $1 billion of taxpayer money, was used to roll out enforcement mechanisms for the approximately 50 tax provisions of Obamacare. 

According to the report:  “Specifically, the IRS did not account for or attempt to quantify approximately $67 million [from the slush fund] of indirect ACA costs incurred for Fiscal Years 2010 through 2012.”

The report also found several other abuses of taxpayer funds, including:

Travel abuse:  The report states, “Specifically, we identified 38 IRS employees in two judgmentally selected business units whose travel was charged to the HIRIF in FY 2012, but no portion of their salary and related benefits was charged to the HIRIF.” In short, the IRS was not making sure that employee travel reimbursements had anything to do with the purpose of the fund. This is not the first time that IRS employee travel has created a scandal for the agency.

1,272 IRS Obamacare enforcement agents: The report estimates that total slush fund spending cost taxpayers the equivalent of 1,272 new full time IRS agents.

The IRS requested an additional 859 IRS Obamacare enforcement agents for Fiscal Year 2013: According to the report, “The IRS informed us that it requested $360 million and 859 FTEs for FY 2013 to continue implementation of the ACA. However, the IRS did not receive this requested amount for FY 2013.”

To add insult to injury, the IRS has told the Inspector General that it will comply with the recommendations made in the report; unfortunately, the slush fund has been fully spent, making that promise meaningless. (ATA)

Now, you want to trsut them with your Health Care records, Your Health and your Money. Why??

“Some things” is an understatement. Below is just a partial list of Obamacare’s new or higher taxes on Americans:

Starting in tax year 2013:

Oh, and Congress exempted themselves…

Obamacare High Medical Bills Tax: Before Obamacare, Americans facing high medical expenses were allowed a deduction to the extent that those expenses exceeded 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI).  Obamacare now imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI.  Therefore, Obamacare not only makes it more difficult to claim this deduction, it widens the net of taxable income.

According to the IRS, 10 million families took advantage of this tax deduction in 2009, the latest year of available data. Almost all are middle class. The average taxpayer claiming this deduction earned just over $53,000 annually. ATR estimates that the average income tax increase for the average family claiming this tax benefit will be $200 – $400 per year. To learn more about this tax, click here. 

Obamacare Flexible Spending Account Tax:  The 30 – 35 million Americans who use a pre-tax Flexible Spending Account (FSA) at work to pay for their family’s basic medical needs face a new Obamacare cap of $2,500. This will squeeze $13 billion of tax money from Americans over the next ten years. (Before Obamacare, the accounts were unlimited under federal law, though employers were allowed to set a cap.) Now, a parent looking to sock away extra money to pay for braces will find themselves quickly hitting this new cap, meaning they would have to pony up some or all of the cost with after-tax dollars. 

Needless to say, this tax will especially impact middle class families.

There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children.  Nationwide there are several million families with special needs children and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education. This Obamacare tax provision will limit the options available to these families.

Obamacare Super Saver Surtax: A new, 3.8 percent surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single). This tax hike results in the following top tax rates on investment income:

  Capital Gains Dividends Other*
2013+ 23.8% 23.8% 43.4%

*Other unearned income includes (for surtax purposes) gross income from interest, annuities, royalties, net rents, and passive income in partnerships and Subchapter-S corporations.  It does not include municipal bond interest or life insurance proceeds, since those do not add to gross income.  It does not include active trade or business income, fair market value sales of ownership in pass-through entities, or distributions from retirement plans.

Obamacare Medicare Payroll Tax Increase:

  First $200,000
($250,000 Married)
Employer/Employee
All Remaining Wages
Employer/Employee
Pre-Obamacare 1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
Obamacare 1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
1.45%/2.35%
3.8% self-employed

Starting in tax year 2014:

Obamacare Individual Mandate Non-Compliance Tax:  Starting in 2014, anyone not buying “qualifying” health insurance – as defined by President Obama’s Department of Health and Human Services — must pay an income surtax to the IRS. The Congressional Budget Office recently estimated that six million American families will be liable for the tax, and as pointed out by the Associated Press:  “Most would be in the middle class.”

In addition, 100 percent of Americans filing a tax return (140 million filers) will be forced to submit paperwork to the IRS showing they either had “qualifying” health insurance for every month of the tax year or they obtained an exemption to the mandate.

Americans liable for the surtax will pay according to the following schedule:

  1 Adult 2 Adults 3+ Adults
2014 1% AGI/$95 1% AGI/$190 1% AGI/$285
2015 2% AGI/$325 2% AGI/$650 2% AGI/$975
2016 + 2.5% AGI/$695 2.5% AGI/$1390 2.5% AGI/$2085

(Delayed by Obama to 2015) Obamacare Employer Mandate Tax:  If an employer does not offer health coverage, and at least one employee qualifies for a health tax credit, the employer must pay an additional non-deductible tax of $2,000 for all full-time employees.  This provision applies to all employers with 50 or more employees. If any employee actually receives coverage through the exchange, the penalty on the employer for that employee rises to $3,000. If the employer requires a waiting period to enroll in coverage of 30-60 days, there is a $400 tax per employee ($600 if the period is 60 days or longer).

Obamacare Tax on Health Insurers:  Annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year.  The tax phases in gradually until 2018.  Fully imposed on firms with $50 million in profits.

Starting in tax year 2018:

Obamacare Tax on Union Member and Early Retiree Health Insurance Plans:  Obamacare imposes

a new 40 percent excise tax on high cost or “Cadillac” health insurance plans, effective in 2018. This tax increase will most directly affect union families and early retirees, who are likely to be covered by such plans. This Obamacare tax will be levied on insurance policies whose premiums exceed $10,200 for an individual and $27,500 for a family.  Middle class union members tend to be covered by such plans in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan.  Higher threshold ($11,500 single/$29,450 family) for early retirees and high-risk professions. CPI +1 percentage point indexed. (ATR)

Now that’s “fair”. 🙂

trust-me-i-know-what-i-m-doing-2

The Cost Curve

‘When Americans tried it, they discovered they did not like green eggs and ham and they did not like Obamacare either,’ he said. ‘They did not like Obamacare in a box, with a fox, in a house or with a mouse. It is not working.’– Sen Ted Cruz.

Last night, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services finally began to provide some data on how Americans will fare on Obamacare’s federally-sponsored insurance exchanges. HHS’ press release is full of happy talk about how premiums will be “lower than originally expected.” But the reality is starkly different.

Based on a Manhattan Institute analysis of the HHS numbers, Obamacare will increase underlying insurance rates for younger men by an average of 97 to 99 percent, and for younger women by an average of 55 to 62 percent. Worst off is North Carolina, which will see individual-market rates triple for women, and quadruple for men.

http://www.forbes.com/special-report/2013/what-will-obamacare-cost-you-map.html

“Premiums nationwide will also be around 16 percent lower than originally expected,” HHS cheerfully announces in its press release. But that’s a ruse. HHS compared what the Congressional Budget Office projected rates might look like—in 2016—to its own findings. Neither of those numbers tells you the stat that really matters: how much rates will go up next year, under Obamacare, relative to this year, prior to the law taking effect.

Former Congressional Budget Office director Douglas Holtz-Eakin agrees. “There are literally no comparisons to current rates. That is, HHS has chosen to dodge the question of whose rates are going up, and how much. Instead they try to distract with a comparison to a hypothetical number that has nothing to do with the actual experience of real people.”

So the spin is full swing and if the sun rise in the west because the earth is spinning now in the opposite direction you’ll know why.

It’s Propaganda 24/7/365. The Premiums are low, they have always been low and always will be low. Anyone who disagrees will be shut down, investigate, harassed and destroyed.

There is nothing to see here.

HHS-27-yo-men HHS-27-yo-women

40-year-olds, surprisingly, will face a similar picture. The cheapest exchange plan for the average enrollee, compared to what a 40-year-old would pay today, will cost an average of 99 percent more for men, and 62 percent for women.

For this cohort, men fared worst in North Carolina, with rate increases of 305 percent. (They are a “red State” so who gives a rat’s asses-certainly not Democrats!)Women got hammered in Nebraska, where rates will increase by a national high of 237 percent. Again, Colorado and New Hampshire fared best, with 17 percent and 5-8 percent declines, respectively.

Remember that here, we aren’t conducting an exact comparison. Instead we’re comparing the lowest-cost bronze plan offered to the average participant in the exchanges, to the cheapest plan offered to 40-year-olds today. This approach artificially flatters Obamacare, because the median age of an exchange participant is, in most states, below the age of 40.

All of the analyses I’ve discussed thus far involve changes in the underlying cost of health insurance for people who buy it for themselves. Many progressives object to this comparison, because it doesn’t take into account the impact of Obamacare’s subsidies on the net cost of insurance for low-income Americans.

I’ve long argued that it’s irresponsible to ignore the change in underlying premiums, because subsidies only protect some people. Middle-class Americans face the double-whammy of higher insurance premiums, and higher taxes to pay for other people’s subsidies. However, it is important to understand how subsidies will impact the decisions by Americans as to whether or not to participate in the exchanges.

Remember that nearly two-thirds of the uninsured are under the age of 40. And that young and healthy people are essential to Obamacare; unless these individuals are willing to pay more for health insurance to subsidize everyone else, the exchanges will not serve the goal of providing coverage to the uninsured.

And remember, “subsidies” mean Government artificially suppressing the price with TAXPAYER money. THAT’S YOU!!! 🙂

And once you are truly addicted to it, they can remove the subsidies and then you’re really screwed but your too addicted to complain by then.

Hook you first. Then tell you that “the other guy” wants to take away your drugs!! So vote for me to continue letting you shoot up even if it will kill you. What do I care, if you vote for me life is good.

The bottom line: Obamacare makes insurance less affordable

For months, we’ve heard about how Obamacare’s trillions in health care subsidies were going to save America from rate shock. It’s not true. If you shop for coverage on your own, you’re likely to see your rates go up, even after accounting for the impact of pre-existing conditions, even after accounting for the impact of subsidies.

The Obama administration knows this, which is why its 15-page report makes no mention of premiums for insurance available on today’s market. Silence, they say, speaks louder than words. HHS’ silence on the difference between Obamacare’s insurance premiums and those available today tell you everything you need to know. Rates are going higher. And if you’re healthy, or you’re young, the Obama administration expects you to do your duty and pay up. (Forbes)

It’s only “fair” and “we are in this together” after all…

 

 

Your Federal Family

“mundane matters often get brushed aside by ideological crusaders out to change the world to fit their own vision. When the world fails to conform to their vision, then it seems obvious to the ideologues that it is the world that is wrong, not that their vision is uninformed or unrealistic….To those with the crusading mentality, failure only means that they should try, try again — at other people’s expense, including not only the taxpayers but also those whose lives have been disrupted, or even made miserable and dangerous, by previous bright ideas of third parties who pay no price for being wrong.”

Doesn’t that sum up the Left in a nutshell.

Holder is also taking legal action against the state of Louisiana for having so many charter schools, on grounds that these schools do not mix and match the races the way that public schools are supposed to.

The fact that those charter schools which are successful in educating low-income and minority students that the public schools fail to educate are giving these youngsters a shot at a decent life that they are not likely to get elsewhere does not deter the ideological crusaders.

Nor does it deter the politicians who are serving the interests of the teachers’ unions, who see public schools as places to provide jobs for their members, even if that means a poor education and poor prospects in life for generations of minority students. All this ideological self-indulgence and cynical political activity is washed down with lofty rhetoric about “compassion,” “inclusion” and the like. (Thomas Sowell)

In August, DOJ’s civil rights division — the same bunch that dropped the case of a group of New Black Panthers wearing military garb and carrying billy clubs as they stood outside a Philadelphia polling place in 2008 — filed suit against the state of Texas. In it, the government said it would not allow the Supreme Court’s decision to be interpreted as open season for states to pursue measures that suppress voting rights.

In its suit, DOJ also contends that Texas adopted a voter identification law with the purpose of denying or restricting the right to vote on account of race, color or membership in a language minority group. Under Texas law, Holder said, “Many of those without IDs would have to travel great distances to get them — and some would struggle to pay for the documents they might need to obtain them.”

Holder called such fees “poll taxes,” a mechanism once used by southern states to keep poor minorities from voting.

Holder’s problem is that the Supreme Court has already ruled that requiring photo IDs to vote — as required, for example, at the 2012 Democratic National Convention — does not constitute an undue burden on minorities since the requirement and any fees are applied to all voters equally.

A study by the University of Delaware and the University of Nebraska-Lincoln found that “concerns about voter identification laws affecting turnout are much ado about nothing.” Nothing, that is, unless you are an administration willing to play the race card to gain minority votes in the next election.

Just as in Indiana no one could find a single voter disenfranchised by Voter ID, the vote results in Georgia also expose the myth of voter disenfranchisement, according to an Atlanta Journal-Constitution review of statewide voting patterns after the law took effect in 2008.

“Elections data reviewed by the AJC show that participation among black voters rose by 44% from 2006 — before the law was implemented — to 2010. For Hispanics, the increase for the same period was 67%. Turnout among whites rose 12%,” the newspaper reported.

“If you look at the numbers, they clearly show that critics of this law were wrong,” said Hans von Spakovsky, former legal counsel to the Justice Department’s civil rights division who now works for the conservative Heritage Foundation. “Their argument has always been it would depress turnout. But it didn’t happen — quite the opposite.” (IBD)

But the reason they are so hopped-up about it is clearly just racial politics. Whitey doesn’t want you to vote for a Democrat, that sort of BS.

The politics of racial division , is “inclusion”.

A news release issued Tuesday by Health and Human Services refers to “our federal family.” How charming of Washington to try to con Americans into thinking that it’s a nurturing institution.

The federal government has in fact become a belligerent force, and for HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to make it sound as if it’s a warm, cuddly family that merely wants to protect its own is an insidious use of language. It’s an obvious effort to cloud reality, to reshape Americans’ thinking. (IBD)

Orwell couldn’t do any better.

H.L. Mencken famously said “the urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” He understood what the “federal family” is really all about.

Do you?

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Law & Order: D.C.

The administration is building a detective squad that will target consumers and companies that don’t follow ObamaCare’s rules. The game of “good cop, bad cop” has arrived in American health care.

They are the “good cop” and you are the perp. They are also the “bad cop” and you’re the victim. 🙂

It was bad enough to know that an Internal Revenue Service that targets the political opponents of the Obama administration between partying on the taxpayer dime would be in charge of monitoring compliance with ObamaCare’s individual mandate via our tax returns.

Now, the Daily Mail, which lodged a Freedom of Information Act with Health and Human Services, reports that the agency has hired a bevy of criminal investigators as we continue to learn what is in the Orwellian-named Affordable Care Act.

Post-Obamacare law hiring at the Department of Health and Human Services included 86 ‘criminal investigators,’ but just two ‘consumer safety’ officers

  • On the day President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law in 2010, HHS received authority to make 1,814 new hires
  • The authorization included positions for 50 criminal investigators. The agency increased that number to 86
  • The agency was also authorized to hire  261 ‘consumer safety officers.’ Only two such employees were hired (Daily Mail)

Never did we imagine that buying insurance and going to the doctor or providing coverage to employees would come under the full-time purview of federal criminal investigators.

On the day in 2010 that President Obama signed the bill into law, HHS got authority from the Office of Personnel Management to make as many as 1,814 new hires under an emergency “Direct Hiring Authority” order.

The agency was authorized to hire 50 criminal investigators to ensure compliance with mandatory provisions and regulations. But as is typical with an administration with no respect for the Constitution and the law, HHS unilaterally upped that number to 86.

Of course these investigators won’t be digging into the Obama administration’s lack of compliance with its own law. A president doesn’t have the legal authority to decide what parts of the law he wants to obey; the Constitution does not grant him that authority.

But that’s exactly what Obama is doing with Obama-Care.

As noted in Forbes, first there was the delay of ObamaCare’s Medicare cuts until after the election. Then there was the delay of the law’s employer mandate.

After that there was the announcement, buried in the Federal Register, that the administration would delay enforcement of a number of key eligibility requirements for the law’s health insurance subsidies, relying on the “honor system” instead.

Now comes word that another costly provision of the health law — its caps on out-of-pocket insurance costs — will be postponed for one more year.

According to the Congressional Research Service, as of November 2011, the administration had missed as many as a third of Affordable Care Act’s deadlines specified by law. Adhering to the law, apparently, is of no concern to an administration that hires criminal investigators to make sure we accede to it.

Interestingly, HHS was authorized to hire 261 “consumer safety officers,” presumably to protect us from getting ripped off or being ill-served. So far, to indicate where HHS’ priorities are, it has hired only two. Can we say that HHS seems to be more interested in our acquiescence than our safety or health?

As the IRS targeting of Tea Party and conservative groups shows, the ambition for absolute power has corrupted this administration absolutely. A White House that routinely disobeys the laws, including its own, cannot be entrusted, either through the IRS or HHS, to not further trample our rights under ObamaCare.

“The Obama administration continues to assert near unilateral power when it comes to ObamaCare,” said Dan Holler, communications director for Heritage Action for America, a conservative lobby group that opposes implementation of the Affordable Care Act.

“This blatant disregard for the rule of law raises serious questions as to how these new criminal investigators will behave, what guidelines they will follow and who will provide much-needed oversight.”

Criminal investigators to enforce ObamaCare? Do we have to be Mirandized? Now put down that tongue depressor, and back away slowly.

http://archive.opm.gov/oca/10tables/pdf/gs.pdf

GOING UP!

The average employer-provided family health insurance premiums have climbed $2,976 since 2009, according to an annual Kaiser Family Foundation survey released this week. They’re up $3,671 compared with the year before President Obama took office. That’s despite Obama’s repeated promises that the health care reform law he championed would cut premiums by $2,500 in his first term.

And while annual premium increases have moderated over the past two years, that’s due to trends in the insurance market largely unrelated to ObamaCare, and trends the law could actually reverse.

The Kaiser survey found that the average family premium this year is $16,351, up 4% over last year, and up 22% since 2009. After adjusting for inflation, premiums climbed an average 3.2% a year in Obama’s first term, higher than the 2.7% average during President Bush’s last four years in office.

During his first campaign for president, Obama repeatedly claimed that his health reform plan would, as he said at a Virginia rally in 2008 “lower premiums by up to $2,500 for a typical family per year.”

Nevertheless, the White House has been touting recent signs of health cost moderation as evidence that ObamaCare is “already working to reduce costs.”

Officials cite the fact that national spending on health care climbed just 3.9% in 2011, the same as the previous two years, and the slowest increase since the 1960s.

But the trends driving the slowdown in health spending have little to do with the Affordable Care Act.

The sluggish economy played a big role. “The failure of the economy to bounce back as quickly as it has after past recessions has prolonged this dampening effect on health spending,” noted Joseph Antos, a health care expert at the American Enterprise Institute.

Also important has been a broader shift that has been underway for years toward higher-deductible plans. These plans provide consumers with a stronger incentive to economize on health spending.

The Kaiser survey found, for example, that 78% of workers now face at least some deductible, up from 59% in 2008. And nearly a third has a deductible of at least $2,000, up from 12% in 2008.

In addition, the private insurance market has seen an explosion in Health Savings Account-type plans — an idea long championed by conservative Republicans — which combine high deductibles with a tax-free savings account that consumers can roll over if they don’t spend it all in one year.

Kaiser found that one in five workers are now enrolled in an HSA-type plan, up from 8% in 2008.

A separate survey by America’s Health Insurance Plans finds that more than 15 million people are now enrolled in HSA plans, up 15% from last year andmore than double the number in 2008.

Drew Altman, the Kaiser foundation’s president, on a conference call with reporters called it “part of a quiet revolution in health insurance from more comprehensive to less comprehensive.”

But it’s clearly a revolution that can help control health costs. A Rand Corporation study last year — titled “Skin in the Game” — found that families in HSA-type plans spent 21% less, on average, in the first year after they switched from a traditional plan. The study found that annual health costs would fall $57 billion if half of workers signed up with an HSA.

Unfortunately, ObamaCare will likely shift the market in the opposite direction, toward less out-of-pocket spending, greater reliance on insurance to cover small health coasts, and higher premiums. ObamaCare, for example, already requires that preventive care be provided at no direct cost to the patient. It also puts strict limits on deductibles and out-of-pocket spending.  (IBD)

Which will drive up the costs significantly. More of those perverse (and may not so unintendedly) perverse incentives to suck at tit of Government.

 

Doesn’t this all make you feel so much better? 🙂

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy


136355 600 LOCAL FL Marco Rubio Immigration Reform Shame cartoons


 

 

The Final Arbiters

Thomas Jefferson: When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another, and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated …. — Letter to C. Hammond, July 1821

The Health and Human Services Department earlier this year exposed just how vast the government’s data collection efforts will be on millions of Americans as a result of ObamaCare.

Big Brother will be watching you! And he will know everything…. (and the Supreme Court is the final arbiter -see later farther down)

Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., asked HHS to provide “a complete list of agencies that will interact with the Federal Data Services Hub.” The Hub is a central feature of ObamaCare, since it will be used by the new insurance exchanges to determine eligibility for benefits, exemptions from the federal mandate, and how much to grant in federal insurance subsidies.

In response, the HHS said the ObamaCare data hub will “interact” with seven other federal agencies: Social Security Administration, the IRS, the Department of Homeland Security, the Veterans Administration, Office of Personnel Management, the Department of Defense and — believe it or not — the Peace Corps. Plus the Hub will plug into state Medicaid databases.

And what sort of data will be “routed through” the Hub? Social Security numbers, income, family size, citizenship and immigration status, incarceration status, and enrollment status in other health plans, according to the HHS.

“The federal government is planning to quietly enact what could be the largest consolidation of personal data in the history of the republic,” noted Stephen Parente, a University of Minnesota finance professor.

Not to worry, says the Obama administration. “The hub will not store consumer information, but will securely transmit data between state and federal systems to verify consumer application information,” it claimed in an online fact sheet .

And no one will steal or hack anything. 🙂 No Wiki-Snowden… 🙂

But a regulatory notice filed by the administration in February tells a different story.

That filing describes a new “system of records” that will store names, birth dates, Social Security numbers, taxpayer status, gender, ethnicity, email addresses, telephone numbers on the millions of people expected to apply for coverage at the ObamaCare exchanges, as well as “tax return information from the IRS, income information from the Social Security Administration, and financial information from other third-party sources.”

They will also store data from businesses buying coverage through an exchange, including a “list of qualified employees and their tax ID numbers,” and keep it all on file for 10 years.

In addition, the filing says the federal government can disclose this information “without the consent of the individual” to a wide range of people, including “agency contractors, consultants, or grantees” who “need to have access to the records” to help run ObamaCare, as well as law enforcement officials to “investigate potential fraud.”

Rep. Diane Black, R-Tenn., complained that just months before ObamaCare officially starts, the Obama administration still hasn’t answered “even the most basic questions about the Data Hub,” such as who will have access to what information, or what training and clearances will be required.

Beyond these concerns is the government’s rather sorry record in protecting confidential information.

Late last year, for example, a hacker was able to gain access to a South Carolina database that contained Social Security numbers and bank account data on 3.6 million people.

A Government Accountability Office report found that weaknesses in IRS security systems “continue to jeopardize the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the financial and sensitive taxpayer information.”

A separate inspector general audit found that the IRS inadvertently disclosed information on thousands of taxpayers between 2009 and 2010. In 2011, the Social Security Administration accidentally released names, birth dates and Social Security numbers of tens of thousands of Americans.

If these government agencies can’t protect data kept on their own servers, how much more vulnerable will these databases be when they’re constantly getting tapped by the ObamaCare Data Hub?

In any case, creating even richer and more comprehensive databases on Americans will create a powerful incentive to abuse them among those looking to score political points by revealing private information or criminals who want to steal identities.

A recent CNN poll found that 62% of Americans say “government is so large and powerful that it threatens the rights and freedoms of ordinary Americans.”

What will the public think once ObamaCare and its vast data machine is in full force? (IBD)

More likely, what will they be allowed to think?

The Imperial Judiciary

A House, Senate and president together defending traditional marriage is ruled unconstitutional. Can a Roe v. Wade-like “right” to same-sex marriage — pulverizing religious liberty — be far behind?

Under ObamaCare, the Obama administration is already trying to force religious institutions to violate their precepts and fund abortions, or be found in violation of law. There is little, if any, distance between that kind of disregard for religious freedom and forcing churches to marry same-sex couples — a new kind of “shotgun wedding” for the 21st century.

That is where the imperial judiciary quite clearly intends to take us, running over anything standing in the way. As Justice Scalia’s scathing dissent in Wednesday’s 5-to-4 U.S. v. Windsor ruling observes: “In the majority’s telling, this story is black-and-white: Hate your neighbor or come along with us.”

Justice Anthony Kennedy — Ronald Reagan’s biggest, longest-lasting mistake — joined with the high court’s four liberals, charging in his decision that large majorities of both houses of Congress, not to mention President Bill Clinton, in 1996 chose “to demean those persons who are in a lawful same-sex marriage” today.

The court declared Congress “cannot deny the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.” It takes the judicial elite to construe the Bill of Rights’ safeguard against being “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” as a license to keep elected officials from acting to protect man’s oldest institution from being revolutionized.

As Scalia noted, the court was “eager — hungry — to tell everyone its view of the legal question at the heart of this case” — so much so that it, unprecedentedly, took on a case in which the five justices actually “agree that the court below got it right.”

The result is “a Supreme Court standing (or rather enthroned) at the apex of government, empowered to decide all constitutional questions, always and everywhere ‘primary’ in its role.”

“The most important moral, political, and cultural decisions affecting our lives are steadily being removed from democratic control” Judget Bork 1996 (!)

Thomas Jefferson: If [as the Federalists say] “the judiciary is the last resort in relation to the other departments of the government,” … , then indeed is our Constitution a complete felo de so. … The Constitution, on this hypothesis, is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they may please. It should be remembered, as an axiom of eternal truth in politics, that whatever power in any government is independent, is absolute also; in theory only, at first, while the spirit of the people is up, but in practice, as fast as that relaxes. Independence can be trusted nowhere but with the people in mass. They are inherently independent of all but moral law … Letter to Judge Spencer Roane, Nov. 1819

Thomas Jefferson: You seem to consider the judges the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges … and their power [are] the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and are not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves … . When the legislative or executive functionaries act unconstitutionally, they are responsible to the people in their elective capacity. The exemption of the judges from that is quite dangerous enough. I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society, but the people themselves. ….Letter to Mr. Jarvis, Sept, 1820

“The Teahouse of the August Moon”. Glenn Ford plays an American officer attempting to explain democracy to the Japanese after World War II. He says, “democracy is where the people have the right to make the wrong decisions.” The statement is the essence of democracy. If elected officials make the wrong decision on behalf of the people voters can rectify the situation by electing replacement officials to make the right decisions. If non-elected officials make the wrong decisions the people have no recourse other than overthrowing the government.

People don’t become infallible just because they hold a high government office even if they are absolute monarchs who have supposedly been chosen by their deities to run the government. Those of us who are familiar with the history of the Supreme Court known that it is extremely fallible. The Supreme Court has made some extremely bad decisions, particularly.when it has gotten involved in social issues with decisions involving social theories rather than law.

The decision in Dred Scott v. Sanford is easily the worst decision in the history of the Supreme Court. The Court attempted to use the case to deal with the divisive social issue of slavery. Chief Justice Roger Taney’s ruling inflamed northern public opinion against slavery which many northerners regarded as immoral. The decision insured that slavery would be a major issue in the 1860 presidential election. The decision didn’t cause the Civil War, but provided the catalyst to turn the controversy over slavery and broader economic issues into a war.

The 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision is the Court’s second worst decision. The Court’s acceptance of the questionable social concept of “separate but equal” condemned generations of black southerners to mistreatment including rape and murder. The Court refused to admit that “separate but equal” was nonsense until the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision.

“Separate but equal’ wasn’t the only nonsense theory the Court accepted in the late 19th Century. The Court prevented state government from protecting workers from exploitive employers by accepting a nonsense theory called “freedom of contract”. Under this theory, government protection of workers supposedly prevented their “free” ability to contract with employers. The Court ignored the fact that workers weren’t in a position to negotiate. They had to accept bad working conditions or risk possible starvation. (Free Republic)

So with the trend of making the Supreme Court the final arbiter of everything makes them supremely powerful and that is a very dangerous game.

After all, the people Boo-ing and Hissing the Supreme Court the day before on the Voting Rights Acts are the ones dancing in the street and celebrating the next day!
And Vice  Versa.
If that doesn’t mean the whole thing is unstable what does?
Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

 Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

 Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Transparency

Death Panel anyone?

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius rebuffed an appeal from Rep. Lou Barletta on behalf of a girl who needs a lung transplant but can’t get one because of a federal regulation that prevents her from qualifying for a transplant.

“Please, suspend the rules until we look at this policy,” Barletta, a Pennsylvania Republican, asked Sebelius during a House hearing Tuesday on behalf of Sarah Murnaghan, a 10-year-old girl who needs a lung transplant. She can’t qualify for an adult lung transplant until the age of 12, according to federal regulations, but Sebelius has the authority to waive that rule on her behalf. The pediatric lungs for which she currently qualifies aren’t available.

“I would suggest, sir, that, again, this is an incredibly agonizing situation where someone lives and someone dies,” Sebelius replied. “The medical evidence and the transplant doctors who are making the rule — and have had the rule in place since 2005 making a delineation between pediatric and adult lungs, because lungs are different that other organs — that it’s based on the survivability [chances].”

So it has to be worth the government’s time and money to save you because you don’t meet the bureaucratic guidelines. Gee, that doesn’t sound ominous at all.

Barletta countered that medical professionals think Murneghan could survive an adult lung transplant. During the exchange, he also said that the girl has three to five weeks to live.

Sebelius reminded Barletta that 40 people in Pennsylvania are on the “highest acuity list” for lung transplants.

The good of the many outweigh the needs of the one.

She’s not exactly Spock is she. 🙂

And the other question is, why is someone on the children’s list if a modified adult lung would save them? I don’t understand offhand using a fixed age cutoff instead of a qualitative assessment of each patient to maximize their odds of a transplant. If an adult organ would work for her and there are more adult organs to be had, that’s the list she should be on.

She checking her list.

Having the head of HHS telling Congress “someone lives and someone dies” is poisonous optics with the public already sour on ObamaCare.

Since President Obama’s EPA administrator, HHS Secretary, and nominee for Labor Secretary have all been exposed for using pseudonymous email accounts as an end-run around transparency efforts, have any officials inside the White House employed the same trick?  Sorry, the spokesman for the “most transparent administration in history” won’t comment on that:

“There’s nothing secret,” Carney said. The AP reviewed hundreds of pages of government emails released under the federal open records law and couldn’t independently find instances when material from any of the secret accounts it identified was turned over. Congressional oversight committees told the AP they were unfamiliar with the few nonpublic government addresses that AP identified so far, including one for Secretary Kathleen Sebelius of the Health and Human Services Department.

Now that’s transparency. 🙂

And they get to control your health care. Enjoy.

The Path

First Up: The IRS

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

The Los Angeles Times reported Tuesday afternoon that Lois Lerner, who heads up the Internal Revenue Service’s tax-exempt division, plans to invoke the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in a hearing Wednesday before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Affairs.

Transparent? wouldn’t you say… 🙂

Speaking of transparent…

Liberals are not fond of “cuts”. (Decreases in increases).:)

Well, here’s another sequester they won’t be happy about.

Scientists say the recent downturn in the rate of global warming will lead to lower temperature rises in the short-term.

Since 1998, there has been an unexplained “standstill” in the heating of the Earth’s atmosphere.

Writing in Nature Geoscience, the researchers say this will reduce predicted warming in the coming decades.

But long-term, the expected temperature rises will not alter significantly.

The slowdown in the expected rate of global warming has been studied for several years now. Earlier this year, the UK Met Office lowered their five-year temperature forecast.

But this new paper gives the clearest picture yet of how any slowdown is likely to affect temperatures in both the short-term and long-term.

An international team of researchers looked at how the last decade would impact long-term, equilibrium climate sensitivity and the shorter term climate response.

Climate sensitivity looks to see what would happen if we doubled concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere and let the Earth’s oceans and ice sheets respond to it over several thousand years.

Transient climate response is much shorter term calculation again based on a doubling of CO2.

“The most extreme projections are looking less likely than before.”

The authors calculate that over the coming decades global average temperatures will warm about 20% more slowly than expected. (BBC)

Another sequester for the Liberals to whine about. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

U.S. officials say they have identified five men they believe might be behind the attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, last year. The officials say they have enough evidence to justify seizing them by military force as suspected terrorists _ but not enough proof to try them in a U.S. civilian court as the Obama administration prefers.

So the officials say the men remain at large while the FBI gathers more evidence. The decision not to seize the men militarily underscores the White House’s aim to move away from hunting terrorists as enemy combatants and toward trying them as criminals in a civilian justice system. (Breitbart)

Bringing them to Justice, on the slow path… 🙂

“We’re portrayed by Republicans as either being lying or idiots,” said one Obama administration official who was part of the Benghazi response. “It’s actually closer to us being idiots.” (CBS)

That makes me feel SO MUCH Better… 🙂

Michelle Malkin: Top Obama donor and billionaire Faulkner is founder and CEO of Epic Systems, which will soon store almost half of all Americans’ health information.

If the crony odor and the potential for abuse that this “epic” arrangement poses don’t chill your bones, you ain’t paying attention.

As I first noted last year before the IRS witch hunts and DOJ journalist snooping scandals broke out, Obama’s federal electronic medical records (EMR) mandate is government malpractice at work. The stimulus law provided a whopping $19 billion in “incentives” (read: subsidies) to force hospitals and medical professionals into converting from paper to electronic record-keeping systems. Penalties kick in next year for any provider who fails to comply with the one-size-fits-all edict.

Obamacare bureaucrats claimed the government’s EMR mandate would save money and modernize health care. As of December 2012, $4 billion had already gone out to 82,535 professionals and 1,474 hospitals; a total of $6 billion will be doled out by 2016. What have taxpayers and health care consumers received in return from this boondoggle? After hyping the alleged benefits for nearly a decade, the RAND Corporation finally admitted in January that its cost-savings predictions of $81 billion a year — used repeatedly to support the Obama EMR mandate — were, um, grossly overstated.

Among many factors, the researchers blamed “lack of interoperability” of records systems for the failure to bring down costs. And that is a funny thing, because it brings us right back to Faulkner and her well-connected company. You see, Epic Systems — the dominant EMR giant in America — is notorious for its lack of interoperability. Faulkner’s closed-end system represents antiquated, hard drive-dependent software firms that refuse to share data with doctors and hospitals using alternative platforms. Health IT analyst John Moore of Chilmark Research, echoing many industry observers, wrote in April that Epic “will ultimately hinder health care organizations’ ability to rapidly innovate.”

Question: If these subsidized data-sharing systems aren’t built to share data to improve health outcomes, why exactly are we subsidizing them? And what exactly are companies like Faulkner’s doing with this enhanced power to consolidate and control Americans’ private health information? It’s a recipe for exactly the kind of abuse that’s at the heart of the IRS and DOJ scandals.

Big Brother just wants to know. You have nothing hide, now do you, Citizen…:)

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

 

The Life of Riley

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

The government we entrust our medical records to under ObamaCare has its EPA sharing confidential data on farmers with green groups and the IRS reading your email. Smile and wave at the EPA drone.

The Environmental Protection Agency has acknowledged that it released personal information on potentially thousands of farmers and ranchers to environmental groups, violating their privacy rights and acting in collusion with private groups with private political agendas.

In Nixonian fashion, the EPA has provided these environmental groups with the dossiers of farmers it has gathered to help them create an enemies list of potential polluters. The agency acknowledged the information included individual names, email addresses, phone numbers and personal addresses.

The EPA claimed the data were related to farms in 29 states with “concentrated animal feeding operations” and that the released information was part of the agency’s commitment to “ensure clean water and public-health protection.”

How? By giving environmental groups the identities and addresses of those they need to pressure?

“This information details my family’s home address,” J.D. Alexander, a Nebraska cattle farmer and former president of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, told FarmFutures.com. “The only thing it doesn’t do is chauffeur these extremists to my house.”

Recently we editorialized on how Nebraska’s congressional delegation had sent a justifiably angry letter to then-EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson complaining that her agency had exceeded its legislative and constitutional authority by conducting drone surveillance flights over Nebraska and Iowa farms looking for Clean Water Act violations.

“They are just way on the outer limits of any authority they’ve been granted,” said Sen. Mike Johanns, R-Neb.

The EPA argued that the courts, including the Supreme Court, has already authorized aerial surveillance, such as taking photographs of a chemical manufacturing facility. But nobody has their family home in a chemical plant, and such surveillance observes not only the farm, but also the farmers and their families who rightly have an expectation of privacy.

Such warrantless surveillance has found its counterpart in the claim by the Internal Revenue Service that it does not need a warrant to read our emails and that doing so does not violate the Constitution.

Incredibly, IRS attorneys have asserted in documents that the Fourth Amendment — which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures — does not protect email and that a warrant is not needed to plant a GPS location tracker on a car in its owner’s driveway.

“The Fourth Amendment does not protect communications held in electronic storage, such as email messages stored on server, because Internet users do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in such communications,” says a 2009 “Search Warrant Handbook” by the IRS Criminal Tax Division’s Office of Chief Counsel.

The IRS claims that under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, government officials only need a subpoena, issued without a judge’s approval, to read emails that have been opened or that are more than 180 days old.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which obtained the documents through a Freedom of Information Act request and released the information on Wednesday, begs to differ.

It cites the 2010 Warshak decision by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled the Fourth Amendment’s provisions trumped the provisions of the 1986 ECPA law. That means a warrant is required to read email — no matter where it is stored or how old it is.

In an October 2011 memo obtained by the ACLU, an IRS attorney explained that the Warshak decision applies only in the 6th Circuit, which covers Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee. Since when do our constitutional rights depend on geography?

The Obama administration’s war on the Constitution knows no bounds, whether it be our First Amendment right to religious liberty, our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms or our protection against the government grabbing our possessions unreasonably. (IBD)

OBAMACARE UPDATE

Retired as a city worker, Sheila Pugach lives in a modest home on a quiet street in Albuquerque, N.M., and drives an 18-year-old Subaru.

Pugach doesn’t see herself as upper-income by any stretch, but President Barack Obama’s budget would raise her Medicare premiums and those of other comfortably retired seniors, adding to a surcharge that already costs some 2 million beneficiaries hundreds of dollars a year each.

More importantly, due to the creeping effects of inflation, 20 million Medicare beneficiaries would end up paying higher “income related” premiums for their outpatient and prescription coverage over time.

Administration officials say Obama’s proposal will help improve the financial stability of Medicare by reducing taxpayer subsidies for retirees who can afford to pay a bigger share of costs. Congressional Republicans agree with the president on this one, making it highly likely the idea will become law if there’s a budget deal this year.

But the way Pugach sees it, she’s being penalized for prudence, dinged for saving diligently.

It was the government, she says, that pushed her into a higher income bracket where she’d have to pay additional Medicare premiums.

IRS rules require people age 70-and-a-half and older to make regular minimum withdrawals from tax-deferred retirement nest eggs like 401(k)s. That was enough to nudge her over Medicare’s line.

“We were good soldiers when we were young,” said Pugach, who worked as a computer systems analyst. “I was afraid of not having money for retirement and I put in as much as I could. The consequence is now I have to pay about $500 a year more in Medicare premiums.”

Currently only about 1 in 20 Medicare beneficiaries pays the higher income-based premiums, which start at incomes over $85,000 for individuals and $170,000 for couples. As a reference point, the median or midpoint U.S. household income is about $53,000.

Obama’s budget would change Medicare’s upper-income premiums in several ways. First, it would raise the monthly amounts for those currently paying.

If the proposal were already law, Pugach would be paying about $168 a month for outpatient coverage under Medicare’s Part B, instead of $146.90.

Then, the plan would create five new income brackets to squeeze more revenue from the top tiers of retirees.

But its biggest impact would come through inflation.

The administration is proposing to extend a freeze on the income brackets at which seniors are liable for the higher premiums until 1 in 4 retirees has to pay. It wouldn’t be the top 5 percent anymore, but the top 25 percent.

“Over time, the higher premiums will affect people who by today’s standards are considered middle-income,” explained Tricia Neuman, vice president for Medicare policy at the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. “At some point, it raises questions about whether (Medicare) premiums will continue to be affordable.”

Required withdrawals from retirement accounts would be the trigger for some of these retirees. For others it could be taking a part-time job.

One consequence could be political problems for Medicare. A growing group of beneficiaries might come together around a shared a sense of grievance.

“That’s part of the problem with the premiums — they simply act like a higher tax based on income,” said David Certner, federal policy director for AARP, the seniors lobby.

“Means testing” of Medicare benefits was introduced in 2007 under President George W. Bush in the form of higher outpatient premiums for the top-earning retirees. Obama’s health care law expanded the policy and also added a surcharge for prescription coverage.

The latest proposal ramps up the reach of means testing and sets up a political confrontation between AARP and liberal groups on one side and fiscal conservatives on the other. The liberals have long argued that support for Medicare will be undermined if the program starts charging more for the well-to-do. Not only are higher-income people more likely to be politically active, they also tend to be in better health.

Fiscal conservatives say it makes no sense for government to provide the same generous subsidies to people who can afford to pay at least some of the cost themselves. As a rule, taxpayers pay for 75 percent of Medicare’s outpatient and prescription benefits. Even millionaires would still get a 10 percent subsidy on their premiums under Obama’s plan. Technically, both programs are voluntary.

“The government has to understand the difference between universal opportunity and universal subsidy,” said David Walker, the former head of the congressional Government Accountability Office. “This is a very modest step towards changing the government subsidy associated with Medicare’s two voluntary programs.”

It still doesn’t sit well with Sheila Pugach. She says she’s been postponing remodeling work on her 58-year-old house because she’s concerned about the cost. Having a convenient utility room so she doesn’t have to go out to the garage to do laundry would help with her back problems.

“They think all old people are living the life of Riley,” she said. (yahoo)

That’s the government’s job, did you know that. They run your life from beginning to end and you just trust that they know best and that everything will come out as it should. You should never doubt them.

We are from the Government and we are here to help you…. 🙂