‘Twas the Night Before the Deadline

Because Santa Barack extended the Deadline.

Liberals feel free to ignore the information because it comes from a Thought Police unapproved source. 🙂

But first, a Little Night Before Christmas, Obama Style:

‘Twas the night before Christmas, and at the computer, the family still huddled; the season was neutered. The stockings were hung by the chimney, all right, but getting Obamacare would take half the night.

There is nothing Americans like better than gathering together as families, swearing at the computer, as it grinds, slower and slower. The anticipation of finally getting through to the government, to sign up to pay another tax, is so thrilling, we have looked forward to it for nearly four years. In fact, we’ve been trying, with great enthusiasm, to do this since October 1.

During his umpteenth vacation, the president, lounging in Hawaii, interjected himself again into the most blessed Christian – and most-festive secular — holiday, proclaiming as only he can that the population is blessed to have such a tuned-in guy running things. He said, on what has now become the penultimate day to sign up for the new healthcare insurance tax, that we can’t forget about him and just put things off for another day. We have until midnight Christmas Eve to pay his tithe.

Obamacare’s original supporters in the health insurance industry must also be ecstatic. They will have another few hundred thousand application to process by January 1, atop the five million or so that may already be properly signed up – and they’ll have one-seventh less time. (One fifth less, if you think they’ll get Christmas and New Year’s Eve off.)

So, thank you again, Mr. President, for putting yourself front and center, for giving us another opportunity to pay your taxes, for disrupting family and sacred traditions. Enjoy Hawaii and your own super-duper health insurance. We all love you. (WP)

Americans now have until Christmas Eve to choose a health plan under Obamacare, if they want to be covered starting Jan. 1 — thanks to a one-day extension announced Monday .

Completing the enrollment process has been complicated due to technical glitches, ever-changing enrollment options, and shifting regulations, but 34% of MarketWatch readers who participated in a poll last week said they have already picked a plan.

The survey of more than 18,000 readers conducted on our website last week also found that of those who have enrolled in insurance plans or intend to, 55% said they expect their health insurance costs to increase. About 40% expect their costs to decrease and roughly 4% expect their expenses to stay the same.

Mark Grueser, a car salesman in Hibbing, Minn., is among those consumers expecting to save on health spending by moving onto an exchange plan. Grueser picked a platinum plan for him and his wife that will charge slightly more than $800 a month in premiums after subsidies and require a $2,000 deductible. That compares to a plan Grueser had with his previous employer where he paid about the same in premiums but had a $6,000 deductible. “It wasn’t really smooth sailing but it’s done,” says Grueser, 60, adding that the state exchange website froze frequently when he first created an account in late November. “The coverage is better than the coverage i had in the past.”

For Grueser, the health reform law has helped in another way: he felt more comfortable moving to a dealership that doesn’t offer insurance to employees last month partly because he knew he and his wife would soon be able to purchase insurance on the new public marketplaces. Previously, he hesitated to change jobs and lose his workplace insurance because he feared the couple would’ve been locked out of the individual market since his wife had breast cancer 12 years ago.

The Obama administration has granted consumers more time to pick a plan, pushing the deadline back by one day to Tuesday, Dec. 24 for coverage beginning at the start of next year. Among other 11th hour changes announced in recent weeks: last Thursday, government officials said that people whose individual insurance plans were set to be canceled Jan. 1 because they did not meet the minimum coverage requirements set by the Affordable Care Act will be allowed to purchase bare bones catastrophic plans or forego buying insurance altogether. Earlier that week, insurance companies announced they would give consumers until Jan. 10 to pay premiums for coverage starting on Jan. 1.

Some consumers are struggling to keep up with the last-minute rule changes. David Mak, a 31-year-old day trader in Merced, Calif., said he selected a bronze insurance plan from Anthem that comes with a monthly premium of roughly $200 and a $5,000 deductible. Being a healthy person who doesn’t smoke, Mak says he may be a good fit for one the catastrophic plans just extended to people like himself. But those plans aren’t eligible for subsidies, and there is at least one technical issue causing him to stick with the bronze plan: as of Friday his state exchange still hadn’t registered that he was eligible to enroll in a catastrophic plan and he couldn’t get through to the exchange over the phone because of high call volume. (Marketwatch)

“Now Dashel! now, Demogogues! now, Pevish and Schultz!
On, Sebelius! On, Michelle! on, on Matthews and Biden!
To the top of the Hill! to the top of the Castle Wall!
Now dash away! Dash away! Dash away all!”

And the Cookies you leave out for Santa Obama are fattening and bad for you so we’ll have to fine you and that Milk, well, it was a from a cow that penned up in a cell you nasty little bugger… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 

 

 

Insurance 101

ObamaCare and Insurance 101. It may be a bit dry, but this is the problem with it and why the claims of lower premiums was such a lie and why this whole thing was either a scam or more pie-in-the-sky feel good liberalism taking a piss on reality.

So the Democrats have started working on what if it’s struck down:

Under the law, insurers would still have to accept all applicants regardless of health problems, and they would be limited in what they can charge older, sicker customers.

As a result, premiums for people who directly buy their own coverage would jump by 15 percent to 20 percent, the Congressional Budget Office estimates. Older, sicker people would flock to get health insurance but younger, healthier ones would hold back.

To forestall such a problem, the administration asked the court – if it declares the mandate unconstitutional – to also strike down certain consumer protections, including the requirement on insurers to cover people with pre-existing health problems. That would mitigate a damaging spike in premiums. (AP)

So the administration wants the parts that they say “the people love” to be struck down to mitigate the damage. Fascinating… 🙂

Kind of like the Mandate was going to be great for everyone, then 1700+ waivers, mostly to unions, were granted because it was going to hurt these people.

And of course, it wouldn’t be there fault when grandma gets thrown off a cliff and run over by the bus! 🙂

Mind you, as I have said since this whole thing started that ObamaCare was designed to destroy the private insurance industry and replace it with nothing but government controlled insurance anyhow.

Adverse Selection: It describes a situation where an individual’s demand for insurance (either the propensity to buy insurance, or the quantity purchased, or both) is positively correlated with the individual’s risk of loss (e.g. higher risks buy more insurance), and the insurer is unable to allow for this correlation in the price of insurance. This may be because of private information known only to the individual (information asymmetry), or because of regulations or social norms which prevent the insurer from using certain categories of known information to set prices (e.g. the insurer may be prohibited from using information such as gender, ethnic origin, genetic test results, or preexisting medical conditions, the last of which amount to a 100% risk of the losses associated with the treatment of that condition). The latter scenario is sometimes referred to as ‘regulatory adverse selection’.

The insurance company is unable to screen out “pre-existing conditions” so premiums will be higher simply because people with conditions that will cost more than the premium can charge will rush to the door and flood the system thus causing a financial hardship on the company. Thus premiums will inflate to cover this.

This has always been one of the factors in ObamaCare that made me laugh when they said premiums would go down.

That is simply NOT POSSIBLE with “pre-existing conditions” mandated.

But does that mean that people like this are just left out in the cold by mean old, greedy insurance companies?

No.

There are risk pools for that. Pools usually subsidized for their high risk, much like Flood is or that idiot driver that you can’t refuse auto insurance to even though they’ve had 5 DUI’s in the year (yes, that does really happen- rare, but it does happen).

2010: Last year, Charles Baker, former CEO of Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, one of Massachusetts’s largest health plans, noticed some health insurance brokers posting comments on his widely read blog. They were suspicious that people were applying for health coverage after a medical condition developed, got the care they needed, and then dropped the coverage.

From April 2008 to March 2009, 40% of the individuals who applied to Harvard Pilgrim stayed covered for less than five months. Yet claims were averaging about $2,400 a month, about six times what one would expect.

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Massachusetts has now confirmed it is experiencing similar problems. The company says that in 2009, 936 people signed up for three months or less and ran up claims of more than $1,000.

And that’s just Two Examples. Just Two. From 2010. Imagine the Future.

Furthermore, if there is a range of increasing risk categories in the population, the increase in the insurance price due to adverse selection may lead the lowest remaining risks to cancel or not renew their insurance. This leads to a further increase in price, and hence the lowest remaining risks cancel their insurance, leading to a further increase in price, and so on. Eventually this ‘adverse selection spiral’ might in theory lead to the collapse of the insurance market.

And ObamaCare does this in spades, but with the Mandate in place these lowest risk individuals are not allowed to cancel and assume their own risks. Not without a penalty and a visit from an IRS agent that is. But if the penalty is less than the premium then you just keep gaming the system.

To counter the effects of adverse selection, insurers (to the extent that laws permit) ask a range of questions and may request medical or other reports on individuals who apply to buy insurance, so that the price quoted can be varied accordingly, and any unreasonably high or unpredictable risks rejected. This risk selection process is known as underwriting. 

That’s why now a policy can be cancelled by Underwriting if it is found you made fundamentally false statements because it has to be assumed at the time of the contract that both parties are acting in good faith.

Mandates increase a moral hazard is a situation where there is a tendency to take undue risks because the costs are not borne by the party taking the risk.

Uber Liberal Economist Paul Krugman described moral hazard as “any situation in which one person makes the decision about how much risk to take, while someone else bears the cost if things go badly.”

Aka, you and higher premiums.

Also you get high premiums from what could be called REGFARE (aka Regulatory Warfare) and boy does the Obama Administration love using this with HHS, The EPA, The FCC, the IRS, Justice Dept., ad nauseum.

In insurance markets, moral hazard occurs when the behavior of the insured party changes in a way that raises costs for the insurer, since the insured party no longer bears the full costs of that behavior. Because individuals no longer bear the cost of medical services, they have an added incentive to ask for pricier and more elaborate medical service—which would otherwise not be necessary. In these instances, individuals have an incentive to over consume, simply because they no longer bear the full cost of medical services.

And does this not sound like ObamaCare to you?? :)

Example: if you know you have terminal cancer and you buy insurance to cover your last 6 months but don’t disclose this to the insurance company (“pre-existing condition”) the company will be paying 10’s of thousands of dollars in claims potentially with virtually no premium to cover that.

Now multiply that by millions of people. The 30 million uninsured. They may not all have this intent, but the scale is still relevant and the effect is too.

Are you starting to see the problem here and how ObamaCare was meant to subvert it?

And if it’s struck down, the Democrats will just come back with another pig and new lipstick.

Being able to decide who lives and who dies and to control every facet of your life “to cut your costs” (Food Police anyone?) is the Holy Grail of Liberalism so they won’t give up if even if it’s unconstitutional. They’ll just re-brand it and call the pig by another name but the effects will still be the same though.

LAWFARE. Waging a war by lawsuits and REGFARE, waging war by regulation and subversion of Adverse Selection and Moral Hazard.

That’s the Insufferably Morally Superior Left in a nutshell.

So endeth the lesson.

Political Cartoon by Chuck Asay
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Outrageous

Time to get up on my high horse and be an old fart. I nearly flipped out when I found out about this one.

You wonder why your insurance rates are going up:

Replace your normal rearview mirror with this complete all-in-one Bluetooth Rearview Mirror, featuring hands-free cell phone calling, built-in GPS navigation, multimedia on-the-go, DVR capabilities, radar detector, and a wireless parking camera! Also featuring a 4.3 inch touchscreen, this high-tech rearview monitor is one of the safest and smartest car gadgets available.

Safe?!!! Multimedia on your rear view mirror? A DVR?!!

What nutcase definition of safe is that!!! WTF!!!

So we have alcohol,drugs,sleepiness, distractions, cell phones, DVD’s, internet and texting…Now you can play games and record “American Idol” on your rear view mirror!

Now that makes me feel safer, how about you!? 😦

The state of Arizona leads the nation in accidents caused by Texting. Can you imagine what this idiotic thing will do?

Your Car is NOT YOUR F*CKING LIVING ROOM!!!!!!!

I may be old fashioned, but I thought  driving was a serious mental exercise involving a half-ton (or more) vehicle that could kill you or someone else and was a serious business and it needed your full attention!

Silly me.

People want it to be your multi-media entertainment center at 60 miles an hour!!

WTF!!!! ARE YOU CRAZY!!!!

In 2008, at any given moment, over 800,000 people were texting, making calls, or using a hand-held cell phone while driving in the United States. With distracted driving killing nearly 6,000 Americans in the same year, it’s no mystery that cell phone use is risky for drivers. In fact, a study published in the American Journal of Public Health said that auto accident deaths involving cell phones and texting while driving rose 28% from 2005 to 2008, even though states continue to enact laws to restrict cell phone use while behind the wheel.

Most adults who drive admit to engaging in distracted driving behaviors, according to a HealthDay poll from November 10-14, 2011. More than 2,800 American adults responded to the poll. Results showed the following statistics:

  • Approximately 86% of drivers said they ate or drank while driving at some point, and 57% said they do it “sometimes” or “often.”
  • Over 1/3 of drivers (37%) have sent or received text messages while driving, and 18% said they do it regularly.
  • Forty-one percent of adult drivers have set or changed a GPS system while driving, and 21% do it “more frequently.”
  • Many adult drivers (36%) have read a map while driving, and 10% do it “sometimes” or “often.”
  • One in five drivers have combed or styled his or her hair while driving. One in ten does it regularly.
  • Have you ever seen a driver putting on makeup? Approximately 14% have done it once, and 7% do it frequently.
  • About 13% of adult drivers have surfed the Internet while driving.
  • Results of the poll showed that younger drivers were more likely to engage in distracted driving. Men were more likely to drive while drowsy, drive after drinking, read a map, use a GPS system, and use the Internet.
  • A large percentage of the people said they know distracted driving is dangerous, but do it anyway.

Texting While Driving Statistics

  • About 6,000 deaths and a half a million injuries are caused by distracted drivers every year.
  • While teenagers are texting, they spend about 10 percent of the time outside the driving lane they’re supposed to be in.
  • Talking on a cell phone while driving can make a young driver’s reaction time as slow as that of a 70-year-old.
  • Answering a text takes away your attention for about five seconds. That is enough time to travel the length of a football field.

2009 Cell Phone and Distracted Driving Statistics

Please note that 2010 and 2011 cell phone and distracted driving statistics are not yet available.

  • In 2009, 5,474 people were killed in the U.S. because of accidents that involved distracted driving. Another 448,000 were injured.
  • Of the 5,474 killed because of distracted driving, 995 involved reports of a cell phone as a factor. However, the number of fatalities caused by cell phone use could be much higher. For those who were injured, 24,000 involved reports of cell phone use as a distraction.
  • The under-20 age group had the highest percentage of distracted drivers; 16% of drivers under 20 years old involved in fatal crashes were distracted while driving.
  • The 30- to 39-year-old age group had the highest percentage of cell phone use in fatal crashes.
  • More people are driving while distracted when they are involved in fatal crashes. The percentage of fatalities associated with distracted drivers increased from 10% in 2005 to 16% in 2009.
  • In 2009, 867 fatal crashes were reported to have involved cell phones as a means for driver distraction (18% of all fatal distracted-driving crashes).
  • People driving light trucks and motorcyclists had the highest percentage of total drivers reported as distracted at the time of fatal crashes (12% each).
  • A teen driver riding with one other passenger doubles the risk of being involved in a fatal car crash. With two or more passengers, the risk increases to five times as likely.
  • Research reveals that 46% of drivers under 18 admit to texting while driving. Driver distraction is a factor in 25- to 50% of all car accidents, with 61% of teen drivers admitting to risky driving habits.
  • In 2009, the South had the highest percentage of cell phone use while driving at 6%. The Northeast came in at 4%.

Teen Driver Cell Phone and Text Messaging Statistics

  • Despite the risks, the majority of teen drivers ignore cell phone driving restrictions.
  • In 2007, driver distractions, such as using a cell phone or text messaging, contributed to nearly 1,000 crashes involving 16- and 17-year-old drivers.
  • Over 60 percent of American teens admit to risky driving, and nearly half of those that admit to risky driving also admit to text messaging behind the wheel.
  • Each year, 21% of fatal car crashes involving teenagers between the ages of 16 and 19 were the result of cell phone usage. This result has been expected to grow as much as 4% every year.
  • Almost 50% of all drivers between the ages of 18 and 24 are texting while driving.
  • Over one-third of all young drivers, ages 24 and under, are texting on the road.
  • Teens say that texting is their number one driver distraction.

Adult Driver Cell Phone, Texting, and Car Accident Information

  • Talking on a cell phone causes nearly 25% of car accidents.
  • One-fifth of experienced adult drivers in the United States send text messages while driving.
  • A study of dangerous driver behavior released in January 2007 by Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. found that of 1,200 surveyed drivers, 73 percent talk on cell phones while driving.
  • The same 2007 survey found that 19 percent of motorists say they text message while driving.
  • In 2005, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration found that ten percent of drivers are on hand-held or hands free cell phones at any given hour of the day.
  • A study conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Motorists found that motorists who use cell phones while driving are four times more likely to get into crashes serious enough to injure themselves.
  • In 2002, the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis calculated that 2,600 people die each year as a result of using cellphones while driving. They estimated that another 330,000 are injured.
  • According to the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, drivers talking on cell phones are 18 percent slower to react to brake lights. They also take 17 percent longer to regain the speed they lost when they braked.
  • An estimated 44 percent of American drivers now have cell phones in their automobiles.
  • Of cell phone users that were surveyed, 85 percent said they use their phones occasionally when driving, 30 percent use their phones while driving on the highway, and 27 percent use them during half or more of the trips they take.
  • 84 percent of cell phone users stated that they believe using a cell phone while driving increases the risk of being in an accident.
  • The majority of Americans believe that talking on the phone and texting are two of the most dangerous behaviors that occur behind the wheel. Still, as many as 81% of drivers admit to making phone calls while driving.
  • The number of crashes and near-crashes linked to dialing is nearly identical to the number associated with talking or listening. Dialing is more dangerous but occurs less often than talking or listening.
  • Studies have found that texting while driving causes a 400 percent increase in time spent with eyes off the road.

Study Reveals the Dangers of Texting While Driving

The following statistics come from a study conducted by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute (VTTI):

  • Of all cell phone related tasks – including talking, dialing, or reaching for the phone – texting while driving is the most dangerous.
  • Teen drivers are four times more likely than adults to get into car crashes or near crash events directly related to talking on a cell phone or texting.
  • A car driver dialing a cell phone is 2.8 times more likely to get into a crash than a non-distracted driver.
  • A driver reaching for a cell phone or any other electronic device is 1.4 times more likely to experience a car crash.
  • A car driver talking on their phone is 1.3 times more likely to get into an accident.
  • A truck driver texting while driving is 23.2 times more likely to get into an accident than a trucker paying full attention to the road.
  • A truck driver dialing a cell is 5.9 times more likely to crash.
  • A trucker reaching for a phone or other device is 6.7 times more likely to experience a truck accident.
  • For every 6 seconds of drive time, a driver sending or receiving a text message spends 4.6 of those seconds with their eyes off the road. This makes texting the most distracting of all cell phone related tasks.

Now you want to add more multi-media distractions!!!

“I’m sorry officer I didn’t see the lady in the crosswalk because I was DVRing ‘American Idol’ and playing Mario Kart on my Rear View Mirror”

But it wasn’t my fault! 😦

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Bad Day For BO

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration’s signature health overhaul law, under relentless assault by Republicans, has suffered its first major casualty – a long-term care insurance plan.

The program, expected to launch in 2012, had been dogged from the beginning by doubts over its financial solvency.

Proponents, including many groups that fought to pass the health care law, have vowed a vigorous effort to rescue the program, insisting that Congress gave the administration broad authority to make changes. Long-term care includes not only nursing homes, but such services as home health aides for disabled people.

Known as CLASS, the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports program was a long-standing priority of the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass.

Although sponsored by the government, it was supposed to function as a self-sustaining voluntary insurance plan, open to working adults regardless of age or health. Workers would pay an affordable monthly premium during their careers and could collect a modest daily cash benefit of at least $50 if they became disabled later in life. The money could go for services at home or to help with nursing home bills.

But a central design flaw dogged CLASS. Unless large numbers of healthy people willingly sign up during their working years, soaring premiums driven by the needs of disabled beneficiaries would destabilize it, eventually requiring a taxpayer bailout.

After months insisting that could be fixed, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius finally acknowledged Friday she doesn’t see how.

“Despite our best analytical efforts, I do not see a viable path forward for CLASS implementation at this time,” Sebelius said in a letter to congressional leaders.

The law required the administration to certify that CLASS would remain financially solvent for 75 years before it could be put into place.

But officials said they discovered they could not make CLASS both affordable and financially solvent while keeping it a voluntary program open to virtually all workers, as the law also required.

Monthly premiums would have ranged from $235 to $391, even as high as $3,000 under some scenarios, the administration said. At those prices, healthy people were unlikely to sign up. Suggested changes aimed at discouraging enrollment by people in poor health could have opened the program to court challenges, officials said.

“If healthy purchasers are not attracted … then premiums will increase, which will make it even more unattractive to purchasers who could also obtain policies in the private market,” Kathy Greenlee, the lead official on CLASS, said in a memo to Sebelius. That “would cause the program to quickly collapse.”

Gee, someone just discovered this? My how cluelessly ideological were they? 🙂

You mean government health care isn’t “free” or “cheap”. Gee, no one saw that coming… 🙂

That’s the same conclusion a top government expert reached in 2009. Nearly a year before the health care law passed, Richard Foster, head of long-range economic forecasts for Medicare, warned administration and congressional officials that CLASS would be unworkable. His warnings were disregarded, as President Barack Obama declared his support for adding the long-term care plan to his health care bill.

The demise of CLASS immediately touched off speculation about its impact on the federal budget. Although no premiums are likely to be collected, the program still counts as reducing the federal deficit by about $80 billion over the next 10 years. That’s because of a rule that would have required workers to pay in for at least five years before they could collect any benefits.

“The CLASS Act was a budget gimmick that might enhance the numbers on a Washington bureaucrat’s spreadsheet but was destined to fail in the real world,” said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

Administration officials said Obama’s next budget would reflect the decision not to go forward. Even without CLASS premiums, they said the health care law will still reduce the deficit by more than $120 billion over 10 years.

Kennedy’s original idea was to give families some financial breathing room. Most families cannot afford to hire a home health aide for a frail elder, let alone pay nursing home bills. Care is usually provided by family members, often a spouse who may also have health problems.

“We’re disappointed that (Sebelius) has prematurely stated she does not see a path forward,” AARP, the seniors lobby, said in a statement. “The need for long-term care will only continue to grow.” (and we want to exploit them for it!)

Sebelius said the administration wants to work with Congress and supporters of the program to find a solution. But in a polarized political climate, it appears unlikely that CLASS can be salvaged. Congressional Republicans remain committed to its repeal.

As should we all. The government does need and we should not desire for them the power of life and death.

MORE UNFLATTERING NEWS:

The Treasury has recorded the second highest annual deficit in US history:

The government ran a $1.3 trillion deficit for the budget year that ended last month, the third straight year it has operated more than $1 trillion in the red.  The 2011 budget deficit was the second highest on record. It’s slightly ahead of the previous budget year’s $1.29 trillion deficit but below the $1.41 trillion imbalance record in 2009.  A decade ago, the government was running surpluses and trillion-dollar deficits seemed unimaginable. But those deficits now loom over tense negotiations in Washington.

But don’t worry, That’s Bush, The Republicans, and The Tea Party’s fault. They forced the Keynesian Economics of Socialist Democrats to do it!! 🙂

Billionaire Obama donor backer and major Solyndra investor, George Kaiser, has paid almost zero taxes over the last decade:

the Solyndra scandal is far from Kaiser’s first brush with political controversy. As the Sunlight Foundation’s Bill Allison reports today, Kaiser has become extraordinarily wealthy by taking advantage of the federal tax code in ways that some tax experts – including the IRS – believe to be illegal.  As Allison describes it in his Sunlight post today, “in one six year period, during which he increased his net worth enough to land him on the Forbes list of the 400 wealthiest Americans, Kaiser reported taxable income to the Internal Revenue Service just once, totaling $11,699–equivalent to a full-time hourly wage of $5.62.”  During the 1980s bust in the oil industry in Oklahoma and Texas, Kaiser bought up struggling energy companies whose losses provided him with tax deductions that effectively hid his own income.
The president prattles on endlessly about the rich paying “their fair share.”  Perhaps he should lecture his own buddies first.  Incidentally, during today’s Solyndra hearings on Capitol Hill, a veteran Treasury official admitted he’d never seen a federal loan structured in such a way that taxpayers are “subordinated” to private investors (as was the case with Solyndra, despite the recommendations of OMB, and after the company had already defaulted on the terms of the loan):

But don’t do as I do, do as I say! 🙂

THE OCCUPIERS

Yet more stirring words of wisdom from the mindless hoardes.

DENVER — “We’re really tired of the government fucking everyone over,” one “Occupy Denver” protester told Daily Caller roving Colorado video reporter Kelly Maher this week.

“There’s a lot of stuff that needs to change,” our boy added, “and if it doesn’t, violent revolution will come.”

How to change things for the better? Apparently it just takes a box of bullets and some rope.

If you get the thirteen families that own the world, including George Bush and his administration, get them in front of the White House and hang them and shoot them, because they deserve that.

Talking to protesters, Forrest Gump might have said, is like a box of chocolates: You never know what sort of lunatic, homicidal flavor you’re going to get.

Now there’s one flavor I could do without.

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

 

Can I have an Order of Fear & Freeloaders, Please…

A Michigan man who won $2 million in a state lottery game continues to collect food stamps 11 months after striking it rich.

And there’s nothing the state can do about it, at least for now.

Leroy Fick, 59, of Auburn won $2 million in the state lottery TV show “Make Me Rich!” last June. But the state’s Department of Human Services determined he was still eligible for food stamps, Fick’s attorney, John Wilson of Midland, said Tuesday.

Eligibility for food stamps is based on gross income and follows federal guidelines; lottery winnings are considered liquid assets and don’t count as income. As long as Fick’s gross income stays below the eligibility requirement for food stamps, he can receive them, even if he has a million dollars in the bank.

Food stamps are paid for through tax dollars and are meant to help support low-income families.

“If you’re going to try to make me feel bad, you’re not going to do it,” Fick told WNEM-TV in Saginaw on Monday.

After all, he’s “entitled”. As I have said before and will say again, Liberals are the greediest, most self-centered because they feel the most entitled to other people’s money.

Oh, and if you disagree with Liberals on this Grandma is going to be thrown off a cliff (that’s coming later on in this blog).

Then there are the frauds. Like AARP.

“I think I’m scheduled to get my AARP card in a couple of years?” President Barack Obama asked today.

“Anytime you want one,” the organization told him. “Platinum.”

Obama at AARP.jpg

The stage was set at AARP, the powerful Washington-based lobby for senior Americans, for Obama to host another “town hall” forum on healthcare reform, where the president allowed that both he and his wife Michelle have “living wills” drafted but hope they don’t have to use them anytime soon.

“If you have insurance that you like, you will be able to keep that insurance,” Obama said of the healthcare reforms that he is pursuing on Capitol Hill. “Nobody is trying to change what works.” (Obama 2009)

They were a massive supporter of ObamaCare.

Now they get a waiver for their MediGap insurance. Their main rival, Medical Advantage gets savaged by ObamaCare.

Effectively, AARP is no longer a senior advocacy group, but just another “evil” “greedy” insurance company. But since they are in bed with Obama and the Liberals, that’s ok.

Their moral outrage is selective.

The Daily Caller has learned that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) rate review rules, which it finalized on Thursday, exempt “Medigap” policy providers, like the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), from oversight when such providers increase payment rates for their supplemental insurance plans.

Insurance providers who aren’t exempt from Obamacare’s rate review rules are required to publicly release and explain some health care payment rate increases.

The AARP is the nation’s biggest seller of Medigap policies, or supplemental healthcare plans that add onto what Medicare won’t cover for seniors. The senior citizens interest group advocated for Obamacare to include an attack on Medigap policies’ biggest competitor, Medicare Advantage.

Though the White House and HHS dismiss allegations of political favoritism when it comes to who’s getting exceptions from the new health care regulations – such as in the recent uproar over the disproportionate number of Obamacare waivers that went to companies in House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s district — Obamacare critics say the mere appearance of the administration helping friends is disturbing.

The appearance of favoritism exists with the new AARP exemptions, too. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sens. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, and Max Baucus, Montana Democrat, wrote to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius last October asking her not to do what HHS just finalized today – that is exempt Medigap policies from rate increase oversight.underwriter

“While Medicare Advantage premiums are declining, we are hearing disturbing stories from beneficiaries across the country about excessive premium increases for Medigap supplemental insurance policies,” Reid, Baucus and Kerry wrote to Sebelius on Oct. 6.

“For example, some beneficiaries enrolled in the United of Omaha Life Insurance Company will see their Medigap premiums increase by approximately 40 percent between 2010 and 2011,” the letter read. “An increase of this magnitude raises serious concerns about premium-setting practices and rate review procedures in place for Medigap policies.”

Instead of listening to three top Senate Democrats, the Obama administration decided to go ahead anyway with the Medigap exceptions from rate increase reviews.

The AARP was a driving force behind getting Obamacare through Congress, contributing a large sum to the $121 million advertising campaign pushing it, and spending millions more lobbying for it on Capitol Hill.

The senior citizen advocacy organization stands to make huge profits from Medicare Advantage cuts and from the exemptions it will benefit from when it comes to the Medigap plans sold under what AARP CEO A. Barry Rand calls the AARP’s “for-profit side.”

The AARP’s support of Obamacare during the debate over the legislation raised lots of eyebrows nationwide, as President Obama called for $313 billion in cuts to Medicare to push the plan through. Seniors weren’t happy about it, and many ripped AARP representatives at town hall meetings nationwide.

Now, though, it’s clear that the AARP is set to make millions, if not billions, of extra dollars in Medigap plan sales moving forward because they’ve effectively knocked out their biggest competitor, Medicare Advantage, through Obamacare. (DC)

AARP aided and abetted Democrats’ efforts to inflict a disastrous bill on an unwilling public.  They now stand to profit from the resulting law — while simultaneously receiving convenient exemptions from provisions that may hurt their bottom line.  Ed Morrissey pens the appropriate response to this outrageous report:  “If the AARP and the labor unions that backed ObamaCare need waivers from its consequences, then we all do.”  Amen.  I’ll leave you with this delightful AARP/Obama walk down memory lane.  This clip still makes my blood boil:
Update from AARP: “To be clear, AARP is a non-partisan, non-profit organization with a membership. While there are insurance products that carry the AARP name, they are underwritten by insurers such as Delta Dental, UnitedHealth Group, and Aetna and others—not AARP.  We work to ensure those products meet our standards and provide value to our members.

And, NATO is the US so the US didn’t attack Libya…right….. 😦
Oh and if you disagree with them, Grandma is going off a cliff…
Democrats continue to try to scare seniors with a new anti-GOP Medicare ad that shows “Grandma” getting thrown off a cliff and then asks, “Is America beautiful without Medicare?”

Welcome to the land of the freeloaders and the home of the depraved. No image captures America’s regressive ethos better than that of 30-year-old Stanley Thornton Jr., self-proclaimed “Adult Baby.” Profiled on a recent National Geographic reality television show, Thornton claims to suffer from a bizarre infantilism that leads him to wear diapers, lounge around in an oversized crib and seek constant coddling.

The nappies may be extreme, but let’s face it: Thornton Jr. — let’s just call him Junior — is a symptom of our Nanny State run amok, not an anomaly.

Junior came to Washington’s attention this week when Oklahoma GOP Sen. Tom Coburn challenged the Social Security Administration to probe into how the baby bottle-guzzling 350-pound man qualified for federal disability benefits. A former security guard, Junior is handy enough to have crafted his own wooden high chair and playpen.

Junior can drive a car and has sense enough not to go out in public in his XXL footie pajamas. Yet, welfare administrators treat him as an incurable dependent. Also collecting taxpayer-subsidized paychecks: Thornton’s adult roommate, a former nurse, who has indulged Thornton’s baby role-playing for the past decade.

Junior, naturally, threw a tantrum when his government teat-sucking was called into question. He wiped his nose and un-balled his fists long enough to type out an e-mail to The Washington Times: “You wanna test how damn serious I am about leaving this world, screw with my check that pays for this apartment and food. Try it. See how serious I am. I don’t care,” Junior threatened. “I have no problem killing myself. Take away the last thing keeping me here, and see what happens. Next time you see me on the news, it will be me in a body bag.”

Not from nowhere has this stubborn, self-destructive sense of entitlement sprung. As I reported last month, a record-breaking 12 million Americans have been added to the federal food stamp rolls over the past two years, and the bloated $6 billion AmeriCorps social justice army has been converted into a publicist corps for the welfare machine.

Just this week, a Michigan man boasted that he’s still collecting food stamps after winning a $2 million government-sponsored lottery prize. “If you’re going to … try to make me feel bad, you aren’t going to do it,” he told a local TV reporter. Embedded in his rebuke is the eternal refrain of the self-esteem-puffed teenager: “You can’t judge me!”

Diana West, author of “The Death of the Grown-Up,” traced the modern abdication of adulthood to the Baby Boomer generation. “The common compass of the past — the urge to grow up and into long pants; to be old enough to dance at the ball (amazingly enough, to the music adults danced to); to assume one’s rights and responsibilities — completely disappeared” after World War II. A culture of behavioral restraint gave way to “anything goes” and morphed into the current generation’s “whatever” attitude.

Look around: Junior’s infantilism is of a piece with the refusal of celebrity mothers Dina Lohan and Tish Cyrus to act like parents — and instead serve as best friends and tattoo parlor pals for their wayward daughters Lindsay and Miley. They’re the kind of women who shop at Forever 21, buy beer for their daughters’ prom parties and give them Botox certificates for high school graduation.

Junior’s penchant for pajamas is of a piece with perpetually stunted Hugh Hefner’s fetish for velvet robes 24/7 and self-indulgent decadence. Junior’s giant playpen is a cringe-inducing symbol of the Farmville-tethered, “funemployed” class of self-gratifiers who continue to live for today and spend like there’s no tomorrow.

Adult Baby Syndrome isn’t an isolated pathology. It’s the new American Way. Or, I should say, the new American Wahhhhh. (Michelle Malkin)

On issue after issue, Republicans are putting forward serious, sober and often politically risky solutions (if sometimes a bit weak kneed) to the nation’s most pressing problems, while Democrats play class-warfare games and stoke the public’s fear.

Oh, and today was supposed to be the end of the world… 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

A Little Perspective

He laughs cynically… 🙂

Two of the central promises of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul law are unlikely to be fulfilled, Medicare’s independent economic expert told Congress on Wednesday.

The landmark legislation probably won’t hold costs down, and it won’t let everybody keep their current health insurance if they like it, Chief Actuary Richard Foster told the House Budget Committee. His office is responsible for independent long-range cost estimates.

Foster was asked by Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif., for a simple true or false response on two of the main assertions made by supporters of the law: that it will bring down unsustainable medical costs and will let people keep their current health insurance if they like it.

On the costs issue, “I would say false, more so than true,” Foster responded.

As for people getting to keep their coverage, “not true in all cases.”

So is it “uncivil” of me to cackle cynically and say “I told you so!” 🙂

Foster says analysis by his office shows that the health care law will raise the nation’s health care tab modestly because newly insured people will be getting medical services they would have otherwise gone without.

Costs could also increase if Medicare cuts to hospitals, nursing homes and home health agencies turn out to be politically unsustainable over the years. The actuary’s office has projected those cuts would eventually force about 15 percent of providers into the red. The health care law funnels savings from the Medicare cuts to provide coverage to uninsured workers and their families.

As for people getting to keep their health insurance plan, Foster’s office is projecting that more than 7 million Medicare recipients in private Medicare Advantage plans will eventually have to find other coverage, cutting enrollment in the plans by about half.

The health care law gradually cuts generous government payments to the plans, so insurers are expected to raise premiums or even drop out. And the main reason seniors have flocked to the private plans is that they offer lower out-of-pocket costs.

Medicare recipients who lose private coverage would still be guaranteed coverage in the traditional program, but they would likely have to take out a supplementary insurance plan for gaps in their coverage. (Fox and AP)

If you dig you can find it on ABC News and they post this also (they are too busy talking about Snow to put it in the headlines):

The White House responded to Foster’s testimony in a blog post by Stephanie Cutter, a top aide helping to guide the political strategy on health care. “Once again, we disagree,” Cutter wrote. “History shows that it is possible to implement measures that will save money for Medicare and the federal government.”

And what are those measures, pre tell??

Then the trash talk starts.

Obama White House officials predict that Foster will be proven wrong about the health care law. Republicans hang on his every word.

NBC and CBS all lead with the Snow and make finding this story very hard (smelling a pattern here…:) )

Damn That Global WARMING! 🙂

The Leftists at the Huffington Post banner headline was bashing Republicans (as always) but if you search you can find the story. While the headline suggests what the other did the text doesn’t. It starts with  story about how the Obama vision is correct and here are the “experts” who say the Actuary is full of crap first then they get “civil”.

It’s a dispute about numbers and how they’re bandied about by powerful people in Washington.

But you don’t need an economics degree to follow this one. All you have to do is remember your fractions.

But then there’s : The health care law expands coverage, reducing the number of uninsured by more than 32 million, although about 24 million will remain without coverage.

Gee, I thought this was supposed to cover EVERYONE. After all EVERYONE is required BY LAW to have insurance or else the jackboots at the IRS will come a kick in your door and FINE you!

Curiouser and Curiouser!

If you divide total national health care spending by a bigger number of insured people, you get a smaller per-person result.

“It’s not that it’s false, it’s just that it will be a little misleading,” John Allen Paulos, a mathematics professor at Temple University in Philadelphia, said of the White House number, calling it an “apples-to-oranges miscomparison.”

Talk about schizophrenic. The Huffington Post is trying to convince itself WHILE it’s writing the article!

And should we mention just how simplistic this line of reasoning actually is and how this so simplistic as to be silly?

Probably Not. They’ll just hate me anyways.

In 2019, when the overhaul is fully phased in, the tab will be $4.6 trillion. (Huffington Post)

Gee, that’s not much. 🙂

Then there’s this one:

The White House has renominated Donald M. Berwick to be Medicare chief six months after bypassing the Senate and installing him in the job in a recess appointment.

Obama initially nominated Berwick last April. After the recess appointment in July, Berwick could serve through this year without Senate confirmation. (CBS)

So they have avoided having him go through a Senate Confirmation TWICE now.

So what are they hiding. 🙂

Could it be “The decision is not whether or not we will ration care – the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open.”

or

“Using unwanted procedures in terminal illness is a form of assault. In economic terms it is a waste.”

Nothing to worry about. Nothing to see here.

Ignore the 800 lb gorilla about pound you into ground.

Don’t worry about the inconsistencies and the bold faced lies.

Be “civil” and just ignore all the “investments”.

Political Cartoon

ANN COULTER

I missed the middle section of Obama’s State of the Union address when I took a break to read “War and Peace,” but I gather he never got around to what I was hoping he’d say, which is: “What was I thinking?”

The national debt is $14 trillion, the Democrats won’t stop spending, and President Nero gave us a long gaseous speech about his Stradivarius.

I feel so Southern whenever I watch a Democrat give a State of the Union address — and not just because it makes me want to secede. Consternating the rest of the family, my Kentucky mother always talked back to the TV. I do it only when a Democrat is giving a speech.

And if liberals didn’t like Samuel Alito mouthing the words “not true,” they should be really happy I wasn’t in the House chamber Tuesday night.

All I kept hearing was, “Ann pays more.” That’s all I ever I hear when Democrats start in with all that “investing.”

Apparently the government will be “investing” in education, “investing” in technology, “investing” in roads and “investing” in lots and lots of government workers. Ann pays more, Ann pays more, Ann pays more.

Obama compared “investing” in education to our sending a man to the moon after the Russians launched Sputnik. Say, who was the president who recently gutted spending on NASA? Oh yes, that was Obama.

So he reminded us of the glory days of the space program, but now he’s taking that money and funneling it to public school teachers. As the Democrats say: “If we can put a man on the moon, why can’t we hire another 10,000 public school teachers?”

Also, solar panels. Obama said the government was already “investing” in solar panels! That’s a total relief. This must be how the president who brought us “Recovery Summer” is going to dig us out of the second Great Depression.

But I do wonder why no private lender considered solar panels a wise investment, forcing solar panel manufacturers to turn to the government for loans, followed by endless tax credits just to break even.

I guess people who work for the government are just smarter. We’re so lucky to have them “investing” our money for us! Boy, egg must be on Warren Buffett’s face!

Remember how massive government “investments” gave rise to the telephone, the light bulb, the automobile, the airplane, the personal computer … OK, none of those.

But massive government expenditures did give us Amtrak and the TSA!

The only thing Obama vowed to cut were “earmarks.” Yippee!

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid though is Mad at Obama For it!

Senate Majority leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has a message for the president when it comes to his call for earmark elimination: “Back off.”

“It’s an effort by the White House to get more power. They’ve got enough power as it is.”

You just can’t write this kind of comedy. Imagine, The Senate Majority leader who was the instrument that crammed ObamaCare down your throat through unconstitutional and immoral tricks of procedure is complaining about government power reaching into his drug of choice!! Imagine that!! 🙂

Hilarious.

The guy with the ears is against earmarks. Yes, the same president who quadrupled our deficit by giving money away to his UAW pals, Wall Street cronies and government workers is now lecturing us about earmarks. This is a bit like being scolded by Charlie Sheen for ordering a second wine cooler (and the hooker).

You knew it was bad when John McCain leapt up and enthusiastically applauded. The last time I saw McCain applaud Obama like that was when he debated him. 🙂

Obama said, “We are the nation that put cars in driveways and computers in offices; the nation of Edison and the Wright brothers; of Google and Facebook.”

And then the government outlawed Edison’s great invention, made the Wright brothers’ air travel insufferable, filed anti-trust charges against Microsoft and made cars too expensive to drive by prohibiting oil exploration, and right now — at this very minute — is desperately trying to regulate the Internet.

On the bright side, President Al Gore would have actually outlawed the cars in those driveways.

I especially enjoyed his pitch for high-speed trains where you “don’t have to receive pat-downs.” At least until one of those Muslims who is “part of our American family” blows one up — at which point they’ll be staffed with armies of genital-fondling, unionized TSA agents on the public dime.

Still, I can’t wait for Obama’s America. An America where I can use lightning-fast, high-speed Internet to file electronically for my unemployment benefits. Or better yet, I can ditch my old “oil-powered” car and take a “sunlight and water”-powered high-speed train to the unemployment office for a change.

And I hear CalTech is working on biofuels to power “Recovery Summer 2011.”

The big laugh line was when Nero said mockingly, “I heard rumors that a few of you still have concerns about the health care law.” That’s called “60 percent of the American public.” It’s not a joke, and it’s not funny.

Here’s one: Hey, Obama! Guy walks into a bar in the Gaza Strip. The bartender says, “What’ll you have?” But the guy is killed instantly when an Iranian-made CT-28 missile strikes the bar, also killing a woman and small child next door. Get it, Obama? HA HA!

Synthesizing Karl Marx and Ronald Reagan, Obama said the government will soon be taking over every aspect of our lives, and Republicans can’t stop him — but gosh, isn’t America a great country! Teachers are great, we need to innovate, children are our future, we need paved roads, kids should do their homework, Labrador puppies are cute, I like apple pie, I (heart) Justin Bieber, and how about them Yankees! Now, here’s your 2011 tax bill — how would you like to pay for that?

Actually, I was glad to hear him say that “there isn’t a person here” — which presumably included Democrats — who would live anyplace else.

Then why are they always trying to turn us into Western Europe?

We see the problems in Greece, The Uk, Ireland and Portugal.

We see the train coming. But instead of getting out of the way of the train, the Democrats just want to “invest” in more tracks!!

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

Comedy & Tragedy

At a fundraising dinner after the rally in Minneapolis, Obama was frank with the 100 attendees who paid between $2,500 and $50,000 to attend. (But they aren’t “rich”…)
“I’ve got to admit, Mr. President, sometimes over the last couple of years, with all the negative ads and all the money that’s been pouring in, all the filibustering and obstruction in Congress, sometimes I just start losing altitude, start losing hope,” Obama said. “It just seems like change is so hard to bring about.” (Daily Caller)
What were they serving, Talking Points?  Because this guy swallowed them whole and is now regurgitating them.
And he paid big bucks for the “privilege” of being in the Almighty’s presence and vomiting up Talking Points.
Yikes!!
Speaking of Talking Points:

“Everything was going great and all of a sudden secret money from God knows where – because they won’t disclose it – is pouring in,” Pelosi said.

Obama, who has attacked the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and American Crossroads in the past week or two, did not mention any organizations by name on Saturday but called them “phony front groups.”

“They are pouring millions of dollars through a network of phony front groups, flooding the airwaves with misleading attack ads,” Obama said, reprising his charge that the money from unkown donors is “a threat to our democracy.”

Two Words for you, Mr President: GEORGE SOROS!  🙂

Did you know he gave NPR 1.8 million dollars? Or that the main push to fire Juan Williams was CAIR (The Council on American Islamic Relations) a “civil rights advocacy” group just like the NAACP thinks they are, but for terrorists instead.

No, you probably don’t care.  You’re too busy campaigning for yourself. And your Ministry of Truth Media doesn’t care either.

So how is business going to feel about you after you continue to trash them now, AFTER the election?? Hmmm…

**************************

Funny: http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/24/airplane-director-cuts-ad-poking-fun-at-boxer-for-maam-exchange-with-general/

**************************

FUTURE OBAMACARE UPDATE

The numbers are as startling as tragic. According to the Daily Mail, “Up to 20,000 people have died needlessly early after being denied cancer drugs on the NHS, it was revealed yesterday. The rationing body NICE has failed to keep a promise to make more life-extending drugs available.”

British cancer patients are routinely denied access to critical life-extending drugs because of their costs.

The Telegraph noted two year ago, that the British health care system’s decision to deny patients four kidney cancer drugs on the NHS was denounced by doctors as ‘poor’ and ‘unsuitable’. They said it was a “tragedy” that Britain’s leading role in cancer research was not being translated into treatment for all patients, who were often left struggling to pay for the drugs themselves. The decision has led patients to mortgage their house in order to obtain the drugs and treatment they need to survive.

The occurrences on the other side of the pond are notable not because they are rare, but because they are commonplace. There are no howls of protests from patients who are powerless and are forced to live under the dictates of bureaucrats who make life and death decisions based upon budget constraints and not what’s best for the patients. This is the fundamental basis of government-run health care.

And Americans are perhaps 60 days away from our cancer patients suffering a similar fate.

That’s because the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has apparently opened the door to using cost as part of their evaluation process for drugs. The late-stage cancer drug Avastin has been proven effective in extending the life of cancer patients. Rather than testing the safety and efficacy of the drug, the FDA created a new standard that would allow patients who could afford the drug to use it, while those who cannot would be denied their use.

They are considering “de-labeling” the drug for breast cancer patients – essentially allowing Medicare and private insurance to deny coverage of the drug under their policies.

The FDA has moved a final decision about the fate of Avastin and breast cancer patients until after the elections. Not a great sign.

Will the American people accept the bureaucratic dictates that will deny them to a valuable treatment option or will they stand up and say rationing is not the American way? (Townhall)

Ah, the wonders to be had by ObamaCare. But don’t worry, according to the Democrats it’s just “misunderstood” and a “lack of communication”.

In their view, you’re too dumb to understand the wonderment of ObamaCare as demonstrated by it’s Cousin, The NHS.

So re-elect Democrats so they can bring on the Public Option and take complete and total absolute control of who lives and who dies, how and when. At their beck-and-call.

And it will bring down the deficit to boot!!  (yes, they are still touting that Fairy Tale- PA Governor Ed Rendell was touting it mightily on FOX the other night).

Doesn’t that sound like Utopia to you! 😦

A survey by the National Business Group on Health that found that roughly 63% of businesses plan to make their workers pay a higher portion of their health care insurance costs next year.

One might reasonably ask why an entrepreneur would start a new business knowing that once she navigates the usual business risks, negotiates the regulation-burdened, lending-leery Main Street banks, now reluctant to finance a new venture or expansion, and she climbs the trough of the J-curve into profitability, the tax man is hovering to further dampen the business’ prospects.

So you have ObamaCare, Cap-n-Trade, The EPA, a racially-blind Justice dept, and the Democrats wish for the Public Option.

No reason to fear.

The only scenario that can save their businesses is to drop their insurance, pay the penalty and dump their employees onto the government-mandated exchange. Even paying the penalty may push low-profit-margin rural small businesses into the red, forcing them to downsize their work force.

Perhaps the most pernicious of the administration’s tax policy concoctions is the 2011 reinstatement of the death tax. Aged ranchers and farmers contemplate dying this year rather than next, when the tax goes from the current zero rate to a maximum of 55%.

As a result, some intend to discontinue dialysis or other life-extending treatments this fall, going to their graves with the knowledge that they could not cheat death but that they could keep the family ranch in the family.

In agriculture circles, Dec. 31, 2010, is being referred to as “Kevorkian Day” — I kid you not. The president and his departing team of advisers are apparently oblivious to such concerns, advocating for such class-based tax increases in 2011. (REP. CYNTHIA LUMMIS R-WY)

Vote Democrat! Utopia Awaits! 🙂

Political Cartoon by Eric Allie