Why You Should Vote Democrat

demWhat you are about to read is the best political comment I have EVER read on a website. It was written by someone who uses the moniker, “The Fall of America.”

The comment was posted on Wednesday morning, March 19, in response to a piece in The Hill.  If you are unfamiliar, this is a Washington “insider’s site” covering the nitty-gritty of what goes on within the hallowed halls of Capitol Hill.

The title of the piece was “O-Care premiums to skyrocket,” although this comment could have been in response to any topic in Washington today.

So thank-you, “The Fall of America,” whoever you are, for writing such brilliant truth and I hope that the re-posting of your comment here on RedState finds its way back to you after it goes viral. (Hint-hint to our readers.)

Why I vote Democrat    
(comment by TheFallofAmerica on March 19, 2014) 

I vote Democrat because I believe it’s okay if our federal government borrows $85 Billion every single month.

And has taken in more in Taxes in the last 18 months than anytime in American History.

When in Debt, SPEND EVEN MORE!

I vote Democrat because I care about the children … but saddling them with trillions of dollars of debt to pay for my bloated leftist government is okay.

That is if the survive Planned Parenthood.

I vote Democrat because I believe it’s better to pay billions of dollars to people who hate us rather than drill for our own oil, because it might upset some endangered beetle or gopher.

I vote Democrat because I believe it is okay if liberal activist judges rewrite the Constitution to suit some fringe kooks, who would otherwise never get their agenda past the voters.

skip

I vote Democrat because I believe that corporate America should not be allowed to make profits for themselves or their shareholders. They need to break even and give the rest to the federal government for redistribution.

I vote Democrat because I’m not concerned about millions of babies being aborted, so long as we keep all of the murderers on death row alive.

And news of Fetal baby parts selling out of the news.

I vote Democrat because I believe it’s okay if my Nobel Peace Prize winning President uses drones to assassinate people, as long as we don’t use torture.

And “Muslim Terrorists” don’t exist, you islamophobe!

I vote Democrat because I believe people, who can’t accurately tell us if it will rain on Friday, can predict the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don’t start driving a Chevy Volt.

And do everything they tell us regardless of how much it costs. Who cares if it “works”. It make me “feel good” about “doing something”.

I vote Democrat because Freedom of Speech is not as important as preventing people from being offended.

Gotta have my “safe space”. Those people who disagree with me are morons anyways… 🙂

I vote Democrat because I believe the oil companies’ profit of 3% on a gallon of gas is obscene, but the federal government taxing that same gallon of gas at 15% isn’t obscene.

And Obama is responsible for the lowering of Gas Prices in 2016 but it’s the Republicans fault for the $4 Gas.

I vote Democrat because I believe a moment of silent prayer at the beginning of the school day constitutes government indoctrination and an intrusion on parental authority ….. but sex education, condom distribution and multiculturalism are all values-neutral.

And Showing R-Rated Michael Moore Films is good “education”.

I vote Democrat because I agonize over threats to the natural environment from CO2, acid rain and toxic waste ….. but I am totally oblivious of the threats to our social environment from pornography, promiscuity and family dissolution.

I vote Democrat because I believe lazy, uneducated stoners should have just as big a say in running our country as entrepreneurs who risk everything and work 70 hours per week.

And those stoners should make $15/hr if they bother to work at all.

I vote Democrat because I don’t like guns ….. so no one else should be allowed to own one.

Especially not Cops, they just kill minorities. But when someone breaks into my house I call the..whoops…

I vote Democrat because I see absolutely no correlation between welfare and the rise of illegitimacy.

fish1

I vote Democrat because I see absolutely no correlation between judicial leniency and surging crime rates.

Nor “Strict Gun laws” and rising crime.

I vote Democrat because I believe you don’t need an ID to vote but you do to buy beer.

California alone created 605,000 Illegal Immigrant Voters!

I vote Democrat because I believe marriage is obsolete, except for homosexuals.

I vote Democrat because I think “fairness” is far more important than freedom.

I vote Democrat because I think an “equal outcome” is far more important than equal opportunity.

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY.

I vote democrat because I would rather hide in a class room while others fight for my freedom.

And don’t even think of challenging my beliefs, I need my “safe space”.

I vote democrat because I’m not smart enough to own a gun and I need someone else to protect me.

But Cops are evil and they kill people wantonly and the Military is just a bunch of PTSD Psychos.

I vote democrat because I would rather have free stuff than freedom.

And lastly, I vote Democrat because I’m convinced that government programs are the solution to the human condition, NOT freedom.

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

bernie-free-college-750

THE LAND OF THE IGNORANT AND THE HOME OF THE SLAVE.

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

 

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

O-penned

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

To NPR: Obama stood with his party members in the Senate. Steve asked if that opportunity to avoid a shutdown exists, what was he willing to offer.

“Steve when you say what can I offer? I shouldn’t have to offer anything,” Obama said. “They’re not doing me a favor by paying for things that they have already approved for the government to do. That’s part of their basic function of government; that’s not doing me a favor. That’s doing what the American people sent them here to do, carrying out their responsibilities.

“I have said consistently that I’m always happy to talk to Republicans and Democrats about how we shape a budget that is investing in things like early childhood education, rebuilding our roads and bridges and putting people back to work, growing our economy, making sure that we have the research and development to stay at the cutting edge and that deals with some of our long-term debt issues. But we’re not going to accomplish those things if one party to this conversation says that the only way that they come to the table is if they get 100 percent of what they want and if they don’t, they threaten to burn down the house.”

I’m happy to talk to you if you’ll do exactly as I say. Otherwise, not interested. But I’m not a rigid partisan ideologue.

“Steve , let’s be clear, we’re not going to delay the Affordable Care Act,” Obama said.

Except for the Employer Mandate, Union “cadillac” plans, Waivers, and exemptions for Congress and it’s staff. 🙂

So what if a vast majority of the American people are against it. They crammed it down your throat and they want it. Shouldn’t that be enough for you people. Geez, you’re ungrateful!! 🙂

“There are millions of Americans, right now, who don’t have health insurance and they are, finally, after decades going to be in a position where they can get get affordable health care just like everybody else and that means that their families, their kids, themselves, they’ve got the basic security that you and I enjoy.”

That’s why we had to make it mandatory, with fines and penalties. It’s a TAX increase. The IRS will be watching you!! Oh, and some 30 million STILL won’t have insurance according to the CBO.

But, hey, like they  care what you think. They wanted it. They got it. F*ck you!

And the notion that we would even delay them getting that kind of peace of mind, potentially going to a doctor to get treated for illnesses that they currently have simply because the Republicans have decided, ideologically, that they’re opposed to the Affordable Care Act is not something that we’re going to be discussing.”

But we will delay it for political reasons, and we will exempt ourselves from it and make you pay for it with taxpayer money.

Aren’t we the greatest!

It’s our Holy Grail. Government deciding who lives and who dies. What else could we want?

Single-Payer. Complete control.

That’s President Hillary. 🙂

It gives us something to look forward to.

And we’ll negotiate in good faith. You’ll do exactly as you are told, or else we’ll shut this place down and pout until you do. After all, IT’S YOUR FAULT!

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

 

The New World & Food For The Sowell IV

hate me for disagreeing

“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.”–President Obama 2008.

Well, so much for that… 🙂

Americans will face a broad increase in taxes Tuesday for the first time in at least two decades, ending a prolonged period of declining taxation that has become a defining characteristic of the U.S. economy.

Despite the tentative agreement reached late Monday to avoid much of the fiscal cliff, many Americans will see a higher tax bill because of the expiration of the payroll tax cut, which was enacted in 2011 as a temporary measure to boost economic growth. The tax holiday was preceded by a similar temporary cut in 2009 and 2010.

Unlike income taxes, which rise along with a worker’s income, the payroll tax is a fixed percentage of an employee’s salary. Allowing the tax cut to expire increases taxes on salaries by 2 percent for every American worker. Up to $110,100 a year in salary is subject to the tax.

This jump in payroll taxes, combined with other tax increases affecting the very wealthy as a result of the deal, would make for the largest increase in taxes in about half a century.

Payroll taxes last went up in 1988.

Middle-class Americans will not only be wrestling with higher taxes this year; they will also be earning less than they did just five years ago.

You mean the very people that Obama is “defending” 🙂

“Many more households are living paycheck to paycheck than just a few years ago given the very tough economy and the decline in real incomes. This amplifies the negative fallout from the expiration of the payroll tax holiday,” said Mark Zandi, an economist with Moody’s Analytics. “The still very weak consumer confidence, due in part to lower real incomes, also reinforces the negative impact of the end of the holiday.”

Economists say the expiry of the tax cut will be a major drag on the economy this year. Estimates suggest it could cost between 500,000 and 1 million jobs, leaving the unemployment about 0.4 percentage points higher than it otherwise would be.

Tax increases on the wealthy, by contrast, are expected to have much less of an effect on the economy. (WP)

But don’t worry, it’s the Republicans/Bush’s Fault! 🙂

Thomas Sowell: The beginning of a new year is often a time to look forward and look back. The way the future looks, I prefer to look back — and depend on my advanced age to spare me from having to deal with too much of the future.

If there are any awards to be given to anyone for what they did in 2012, one of those rewards should be for prophecy, if only because prophecies that turn out to be right are so rare.

With that in mind, my choice for the prediction of the year award goes to Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal for his column of Jan. 24 titled: “The GOP Deserves to Lose.”

Despite reciting a litany of reasons why President Obama deserved to be booted out of the White House, Stephens said, “Let’s just say right now what voters will be saying in November, once Barack Obama has been re-elected: Republicans deserve to lose.”

To me, the Republican establishment is the eighth wonder of the world. How they can keep repeating the same mistakes for decades on end is beyond my ability to explain.

Stephens said, back at the beginning of 2012, that Mitt Romney was one of the “hollow men,” and that voters “usually prefer the man who stands for something.”

Yet this is not just about Mitt Romney. He is only the latest in a long series of presidential candidates backed by a Republican establishment that seems convinced that ad hoc “moderation” is where it’s at — no matter how many of their ad hoc moderates get beaten by even vulnerable, unknown or discredited Democrats.

Back in 1948, when the Democratic Party splintered into three parties, each one with its own competing presidential candidate, Republican candidate Thomas E. Dewey was considered a shoo-in.

Best-selling author David Halberstam described what happened: “Dewey’s chief campaign tactic was to make no mistakes, to offend no one. His major speeches, wrote the Louisville Courier Journal, could be boiled down ‘to these historic four sentences: Agriculture is important. Our rivers are full of fish. You cannot have freedom without liberty. The future lies ahead.'”

Does this sound like a more recent Republican presidential candidate?

Meanwhile, President Truman was on the attack in 1948, with speeches that had many people saying, “Give ’em hell, Harry.” He won, even with the Democrats’ vote split three ways.

But, to this day, the Republican establishment still goes for pragmatic moderates who feed pablum to the public, instead of treating them like adults.

It is not just Republican presidential candidates who cannot be bothered to articulate a coherent argument, instead of ad hoc talking points. Have you yet heard House Speaker John Boehner take the time to spell out why Barack Obama’s argument for taxing “millionaires and billionaires” is wrong?

“Jar Jar” Boehner! Mes No Think so!

It is not a complicated argument. Moreover, it is an argument that has been articulated many times in plain English by conservative talk-show hosts and by others in print. It has nothing to do with being worried about the fate of millionaires or billionaires, who can undoubtedly take care of themselves.

What we all should be worried about are high tax rates driving American investments overseas, when there are millions of Americans who could use the jobs that those investments would create at home.

Yet Obama has been allowed to get away with the emotional argument that the rich can easily afford to pay more, as if that is the issue. But it will be the issue if no one says otherwise.

One of the recent sad reminders of the Republicans’ tendency to leave even lies and smears unanswered was a television replay of an old interview with the late Judge Robert Bork, whose nomination to the Supreme Court was destroyed by character assassination.

Bork said that he was advised not to answer Ted Kennedy’s wild accusations because those false accusations would discredit themselves. That supposedly sophisticated advice cost the country one of the great legal minds of our time — and left us with a wavering Anthony Kennedy in his place on the Supreme Court.

Some people may take solace from the fact that there are some articulate Republicans such as Marco Rubio who may come forward in 2016. But with Iran going nuclear and North Korea developing missiles that can hit California, it may be too late by then.

With ObamaCare, and voter willful ignorance it already is…
Now we just have to try and salvage the pieces and glue the broken tea cup back together so it’s not as obvious that it was broken except for the missing pieces and hope no one notices…

Knee Jerk 590 cdn

Happy Tax Increases Everyone!

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

As part of the fiscal cliff, the top tax rate on dividends is scheduled to nearly triple in 2013.  Here are some questions you might have:

What is a dividend?  A dividend is a cash payment that a company makes to shareholders.
What type of people receive dividends?  Almost everyone benefits from dividends.  If you are covered by a traditional pension or 401(k) plan at work, you almost certainly own dividend-paying stocks and mutual funds that own dividend-paying stocks.  Ditto for your IRA or Roth IRA.  Additionally, the IRS data cited above shows that over 25 million American families choose to receive dividends directly.

Traditional pensions, 401(k)s, and IRAs are accounts for middle class Americans, not rich people.  That’s where many dividends end up.  Additionally, nearly 23 million out of the 25 million American families that get paid dividends directly earn less than $200,000 per year.  Over 40 percent of all taxable dividends are earned in these households.

Not just evil “rich” “angry white guys” or “evil” Corporate America. 🙂

Obamacare contains twenty new or higher taxes. Five of the taxes hit for the first time on January 1.  In total, for the years 2013-2022, Americans face a net $1 trillion tax hike for the years 2013-2022, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

The five major Obamacare taxes taking effect on January are as follows:

The Obamacare Medical Device Tax:  Medical device manufacturers employ 409,000 people in 12,000 plants across the country. Obamacare imposes a new 2.3 percent excise tax on gross sales – even if the company does not earn a profit in a given year.  In addition to killing small business jobs and impacting research and development budgets, this will increase the cost of your health care – making everything from pacemakers to artificial hips more expensive.

The Obamacare Flex 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 will face a new government cap of $2500. This will squeeze $13 billion of tax money from Americans over the ten years. (Currently, the accounts are unlimited under federal law, though employers are allowed to set a cap.)

There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children.  There are several million families with special needs children in the United States, 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.

The Obamacare Surtax on Investment Income: This is a new, 3.8 percentage point surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single).  This would result in the following top tax rates on investment income:

Capital Gains   Dividends  Other*2012
    
15%                     15%             35%2013+ (current law)
    

23.8%                43.4%       43.4%

The table above also incorporates the scheduled hike in the capital gains rate from 15 to 20 percent, and the scheduled hike in dividends rate from 15 to 39.6 percent.

The Obamacare “Haircut” for Medical Itemized Deductions: Currently, those Americans facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction to the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI).  This tax increase imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI. By limiting this deduction, Obamacare widens the net of taxable income for the sickest Americans.  This tax provision will most harm near retirees and those with modest incomes but high medical bills.

The Obamacare Medicare Payroll Tax Hike:  The Medicare payroll tax is currently 2.9 percent on all wages and self-employment profits.  Under this tax hike, wages and profits exceeding $200,000 ($250,000 in the case of married couples) will face a 3.8 percent rate instead. This is a direct marginal income tax hike on small business owners, who are liable for self-employment tax in most cases. The table below compares current law vs. the Obamacare Medicare Payroll Tax Hike:
 
First $200,000                 All Remaining Wages
($250,000 Married)        Employer/Employee  
Employer/Employee    
                       
Current Law
1.45%/1.45%                       1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed           2.9% self-employed

Obamacare Tax Hike
   
1.45%/1.45%                       1.45%/2.35%
2.9% self-employed           3.8% self-employed

2012 CBO Report on Revenue Effects of Obamacare
Tax Hike
2013-2022

Tax Penalty Payments by Uninsured Individuals $55 billion

Tax Penalty Payments by Employers $106 billion

Excise Tax on High-Premium Insurance Plans $111 billion

Associated Effects of Coverage Provisions
on Tax Revenues $216 billion

Reinsurance and Risk Adjustment Collections $184 billion

Fees on Manufacturers and Insurers $165 billion

Additional Hospital Insurance Tax $318 billion

Other Revenue Provisions $87 billion

Courtesy of ATR

This won’t hurt everyone, the economy and job “growth” now will it!

But don’t worry,it’s still Bush’s Fault!! That will keep you warm by the fire, until they ban it (bad for the environment, you know) or tax it that is…

Happy New Year. Happy New Tax Increases EVERYONE…. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

The Book of Revelations

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

…a group calling itself Catholics for Obama had been making push poll phone calls in support of the president’s re-election bid. Among the questions being asked, he said, was “How can you support a ‘Mormon’ who does not believe in Jesus Christ?”

The phone banker making the call, which in this case went to a woman Hudson identifies as “the head of a pro-life committee at a parish I know” reportedly also asserted that “President Obama did not support abortion” and that Planned Parenthood “helps children get healthcare and prenatal care and does not promote abortion.” In fact, the group is one of the nation’s largest abortion providers.

All this amounts to a whispering campaign that is both dishonest about the president’s record on abortion and deviously attempts to divide the Catholic electorate on the issue of GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s religion—something the Obama campaign has repeatedly promised it would not do. With the election getting closer, the comments and attacks are getting nastier. Some people, apparently, will do anything to hold on to power. (US News)

He’s Rich. He’s Mormon. He’s a Cultist. He must be Evil! 🙂

FALSE SENSES

A little seen video shows a group associated with Al Qaeda attacking the Red Cross outpost in Benghazi with a rocket propelled grenade. The Red Cross attack took place in May and the group responsible delivered an IED to the front gate of the US Consulate in Benghazi two weeks later.

Still think it was about a Film?

The attack on the Red Cross took place on May 22nd and resulted in no injuries. It was later determined that a group calling itself the Imprisoned Omar Abdul Rahman Brigades was responsible.

Two weeks after the attack on the Red Cross, the same group assembled an IED and dropped it at the front gate of the US Consulate in Benghazi. The consulate attack was made in retaliation for a US drone strike in Pakistan that killed Al Qaeda’s 2nd in command, Abu Yahya al-Libi. During the June 5th consulate bombing the group left leaflets at the scene identifying themselves and taking responsibility. However, as with the Red Cross attack, no one was injured in the consulate bombing.

A report Monday by the New York Times suggests that the ineffective attack in June may have led to a false sense of security at the Benghazi consulate. The group which attacked the site on September 11th resulting in the death of four Americans was not the same group that attacked the site in June. (Breitbart)

THE FISCAL CLIFF APPROACHES

On January 2nd, 2013, absent some kind of budget deal, America will fall off the “fiscal cliff” and face a massive tax increase and across the board cuts in government spending. Like most crisis these days, it’s a creation of politicians. 

A new study from the Brookings Institution’s Tax Policy Center finds that the expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts at the end of the year will hit Americans with a $500 billion tax hike. While liberal talking points suggest that only the wealthy received a tax cut under Bush, in fact every income group saw their taxes reduced. The rich got “more” tax cuts for the simple reason that they pay more in taxes. The expiration of the Bush tax cuts will hit everybody.

An average middle-class household — making between around $40,000 to $65,000 — would see an almost $2,000 tax hike next year, while those making under $20,000 a year would see their bill rise by an average of just over $400. Both groups would see their after-tax income drop by around four percent. 

But households in the top 20 percent of earners would take a $14,000 hit, and those making a half million dollars or more a year — the top one percent of taxpayers — face an average $120,000 increase. That top one percent would see a more than 10 percent hit to their after-tax income. 

According to the study, almost nine out of ten households would see higher taxes. The economic impact is likely to be disastrous, as the economy is already teetering on the brink of recession.

The companion to this debate will be a fight over “sequestration,” a process triggering across-the-board spending cuts throughout government. The anticipated cuts fall heavily on defense programs, which could lead to wide-spread layoffs and cuts in military forces. This event was caused by last year’s punt on the debt ceiling fight. It was meant to be a “trigger” to pressure the President and Congress to come up with a real plan to reduce government spending. 

The Senate Democrats have failed to produce even an annual budget in the past 3 1/2 years, so no surprise that they failed to agree to a plan to cut government spending. 

Congress will have two months to sort out this mess after the elections. Much of what happens depends on the outcome of the elections. If Obama loses, it’s doubtful he’ll be in any kind of mood to avert the tax hikes or across-the-board cuts. He’s more than petulant enough to let Romney inherit his mess. 

If the GOP makes significant gains in Congress, they too may want to wait until the new Congress is sworn in, when they’ll have greater leverage to take action. 

Keep in mind, though, that this whole “fiscal cliff” mess was brought to you by the very people who are supposed to fix it. At some point, you have to stop punting and actually fix the problem. (Breitbart)

But that might make them unpopular. Giving out free stuff is so much easier.
🙂

FAST & FURIOUS

Irony Alert: Two U.S. Border Patrol agents were shot, one fatally, Tuesday morning in an area south Arizona known as a major drug-smuggling corridor, authorities said.

The identities of the agents were not immediately released, but the shooting occurred at the Brian Terry Station near Naco, Ariz., which is just south of Tucson. The station was named after an agent who was killed in the line of duty in December 2010. The area is considered a remote part of the state and sources tell Fox News that the shooting occurred about eight miles from the border. 

Confirmed: Weapons from Fast and Furious were used to gun down teenagers at a birthday party in Mexico in January 2010.

As news breaks that 57 more Fast and Furious weapons have been found in Mexico, it is also being confirmed that some of those weapons were used to slaughter 14 Mexican teenagers and wound 12 more near Ciudad Juarez.

According to reports, a group of armed commandos parked outside a birthday party attended by high school and college students on January 30, 2010, and opened fire with some of the weapons which had been smuggled across the border during the Fast and Furious operation.

The deaths magnify the already gut-wrenching news of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry’s death by a man armed with Fast and Furious weapons in December 2010. The slaughter of the teenagers also draws renewed attention to the hundreds of Mexican citizens who have been confirmed dead by weapons from Fast and Furious over the last two years.

Is this blood on Attorney General Eric Holder’s hands? (Breitbart)

Yeah, but it’s all Bush’s Fault! 🙂

NOVEMBER IS COMING

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

 

 

Helping the Poor

Obama administration officials have insisted that their decision to grant states waivers to redefine work requirements for welfare recipients would not “gut” the landmark 1996 welfare reform law. But a new report from the Congressional Research Service obtained by the Washington Examiner suggests that the administration’s suspension of a separate welfare work requirement has already helped explode the number of able-bodied Americans on food stamps.

In addition to the broader work requirement that has become a contentious issue in the presidential race, the 1996 welfare reform law included a separate rule encouraging able-bodied adults without dependents to work by limiting the amount of time they could receive food stamps. President Obama suspended that rule when he signed his economic stimulus legislation into law, and the number of these adults on food stamps doubled, from 1.9 million in 2008 to 3.9 million in 2010, according to the CRS report.

But I’m sure it’s Bush’s fault!

The CBO (The Congressional Budget Office) has released some bad news for President Obama and his signature Health Care law the Affordable Care Act.  The CBO has found that almost 6 million Americans, the majority of them in the middle class, will be hit with a tax penalty for failing to comply with the insurance mandate provision of the Affordable Care Act.

The number of 6 million is significantly higher than the first estimates released by Democrats when the bill was still being debated.  Critics are saying this is another example of how the President has broken promises in relation to his Health Care Initiative.

The CBO, a nonpartisan group of number crunchers that work for Congress, had originally estimated that less than 4 million Americans would be hit with the tax surcharge in 2016 when the law is fully implemented.

The cost of the penalty s around $1,200 per year per family.  Obama had campaigned on a promise to not raise taxes on people making less than $250,000 for a family of four.  The CBO estimates says that the vast majority of those that will be hit with the surcharge will make significantly less than that. (aka “middle class”)

Whoops, Did Obama do that again! 🙂

REDISTRIBUTION

Barack Obama back in 1998.

Addressing an audience at Loyola Chicago, Obama said he “believes” in redistribution:

I think that the trick is figuring out how do we structure government systems that pool resources and hence facilitate some redistribution. Because I actually believe in redistribution — at least to a certain level to make sure that everybody’s got a shot.

But he’s “evolved”? 🙂

Thomas Sowell: The recently discovered tape on which Barack Obama said back in 1998 that he believes in redistribution is not really news. He said the same thing to Joe the Plumber four years ago. But the surfacing of this tape may serve a useful purpose if it gets people to thinking about what the consequences of redistribution are.

Those who talk glibly about redistribution often act as if people are just inert objects that can be placed here and there, like pieces on a chess board, to carry out some grand design. But if human beings have their own responses to government policies, then we cannot blithely assume that government policies will have the effect intended.

The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty. The communist nations were a classic example, but by no means the only example.

In theory, confiscating the wealth of the more successful people ought to make the rest of the society more prosperous. But when the Soviet Union confiscated the wealth of successful farmers, food became scarce. As many people died of starvation under Stalin in the 1930s as died in Hitler’s Holocaust in the 1940s.

How can that be? It is not complicated. You can only confiscate the wealth that exists at a given moment. You cannot confiscate future wealth — and that future wealth is less likely to be produced when people see that it is going to be confiscated. Farmers in the Soviet Union cut back on how much time and effort they invested in growing their crops, when they realized that the government was going to take a big part of the harvest. They slaughtered and ate young farm animals that they would normally keep tending and feeding while raising them to maturity.

People in industry are not inert objects either. Moreover, unlike farmers, industrialists are not tied to the land in a particular country.

Russian aviation pioneer Igor Sikorsky could take his expertise to America and produce his planes and helicopters thousands of miles away from his native land. Financiers are even less tied down, especially today, when vast sums of money can be dispatched electronically to any part of the world.

If confiscatory policies can produce counterproductive repercussions in a dictatorship, they are even harder to carry out in a democracy. A dictatorship can suddenly swoop down and grab whatever it wants. But a democracy must first have public discussions and debates. Those who are targeted for confiscation can see the handwriting on the wall, and act accordingly.

Among the most valuable assets in any nation are the knowledge, skills and productive experience that economists call “human capital.” When successful people with much human capital leave the country, either voluntarily or because of hostile governments or hostile mobs whipped up by demagogues exploiting envy, lasting damage can be done to the economy they leave behind.

Fidel Castro’s confiscatory policies drove successful Cubans to flee to Florida, often leaving much of their physical wealth behind. But poverty-stricken refugees rose to prosperity again in Florida, while the wealth they left behind in Cuba did not prevent the people there from being poverty stricken under Castro. The lasting wealth the refugees took with them was their human capital.

We have all heard the old saying that giving a man a fish feeds him only for a day, while teaching him to fish feeds him for a lifetime. Redistributionists give him a fish and leave him dependent on the government for more fish in the future.

If the redistributionists were serious, what they would want to distribute is the ability to fish, or to be productive in other ways. Knowledge is one of the few things that can be distributed to people without reducing the amount held by others.

That would better serve the interests of the poor, but it would not serve the interests of politicians who want to exercise power, and to get the votes of people who are dependent on them.

Barack Obama can endlessly proclaim his slogan of “Forward,” but what he is proposing is going backwards to policies that have failed repeatedly in countries around the world.

Yet, to many people who cannot be bothered to stop and think, redistribution sounds good.

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

 

The Battle Begins Anew

A Little From our Post Traumatic Image is Everything First (Constitution Second) Conscious Chief Justice:

U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts joked that he’ll spend some time on an “impregnable island fortress” now that the court has ended a session that featured him casting the decisive vote to uphold President Barack Obama’s health care law.

Responding to a question about his summer break, Roberts said he planned to teach a class for two weeks in Malta, the Mediterranean island nation.

“Malta, as you know, is an impregnable island fortress. It seemed like a good idea,” Roberts said, drawing laughter from about 300 judges, attorneys and others attending a four-day conference Friday at a posh southwestern Pennsylvania resort.

The only direct question Roberts got about the health care opinion came when those at the conference were invited to ask questions.

That’s when Roberts was asked what he thought his court’s legacy would be in 50 years and “how one recent opinion might fit into that” – an obvious reference to the health care decision.

“Well, I won’t answer anything that has to do with the second part of that,” Roberts said. But he said he hopes that the court under him is remembered as one that “did our job according to the Constitution, of protecting equal justice under the law.”

Lamberth hinted at the controversial decision when he asked Roberts if it bothered him that he can’t respond to his critics.

“No,” Roberts said, his brief answer hanging in the air to more laughter.(AP)

Public opposition to the health care law remains high. Forty-seven percent of respondents in a recent Associated Press-GfK poll said they oppose the law while 33 percent said they support it. Thirteen percent said they are neutral. Those who strongly oppose the legislation also outnumber those who strongly support it, 32 percent to 17 percent, about a 2-to-1 margin.

Critical to both parties, just 21 percent of independents support it, the lowest level of support the AP-GfK poll has recorded on the issue. (AP)

But here comes the old fearmongering and division that Liberals are so congenitally wired for:

“Now the American people are going to say, `Now what’s in that for me?'” Harkin said. “As long as Democrats are willing to go out there and positively say, `Look, now you are guaranteed that you will get affordable health insurance if you had breast cancer in the past … preventive care, free mammograms. … And they (Republicans) want to take it away from you. You have it now and they want to take it away from you. If you want it taken away from you, you just go ahead and vote for them.'” (AP)

So…

Republicans also used the ruling to craft a new attack line. Chief Justice John Roberts’ majority opinion said the law’s requirement that Americans purchase health care is a tax, which Republicans argued contradicted Obama and Democrats who insist they aren’t raising taxes on the poor and middle class.

“The court blew the president’s cover,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said.

The tax debate will be at the forefront when the House votes the week of July 9 to overturn the law, a largely symbolic step with a Democratic-controlled Senate but one that will put Democrats and Republicans on record and provide fodder for the campaign.

Because guess what, IT’S A TAX!  The Supreme Court says so!!

And who will get it in the shorts the  most– why the middle class and the poor!! Will the Democrats tell them that? Nope. It’s all Fear, Loathing, and Me-Generation Greed.

The Battle begins again.

The medical overhaul is also a choice killer. Many will recall Obama promising that under his plan, “If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period.”

Those aren’t the facts.

As we reported in April, the CBO estimates that as many as 20 million Americans will be forced out of their plans as employers toss workers into government health exchanges to avoid ObamaCare’s costs.

A survey by McKinsey and Co. found that nearly one-third of employers will likely to drop coverage for their workers once ObamaCare kicks in.

And an analysis by the Medicare actuary found that ObamaCare’s attacks on Medicare’s private insurance options will force nearly 8 million seniors out of the coverage they’ve chosen.

• Consumer costs will rise. CBO says premiums will increase over the next decade faster than they did in the past five years.

• The Affordable Care Act is just the beginning. It’s the door to a single-payer government system run by a DMV-type bureaucracy.

• The quality of care will suffer. The Democrats’ law will chill the incentives to become a doctor, to create innovative drugs and to produce live-saving and life-enhancing medical equipment.

• Don’t be surprised when treatment is rationed by government. As it takes over a larger portion of health care — it already controls nearly half — resources won’t be able to keep up with demand. Somebody wins, somebody loses based on someone else’s whim. (IBD)

But don’t worry, the Democrats will just focus on fear, intimidation, and “mean” old Republicans who want to throw grandma off a cliff and you to “just die” as former Rep. Grayson once said on the House floor.

Meanwhile, the Democrats WILL tax you to death and give you 2nd-3rd world care (unless you are “rich” that is) but it won’t be their fault. 🙂

And if you increase demand but they supply doesn’t increase or even decreases then what happens? Hmmm….

And it all points to a single solution: Repeal the law before it takes deep root, and replace it with policies that put the patient in charge.

“What has happened in this system for too long is that the patient has kind of been second or third in line behind everybody else,” Ed Haislmaier health policy worker for the Heritage Foundation says.

And then he made a good point on why Democrats may be opposed to it if they get their ideological heads out of their asses:

Critics of the mandate say Republicans and Democrats alike oppose it.

“Republicans are against it because they see it as an impingement on their personal freedom,” says Ed Haislmaier, who works on healthcare policy at the conservative-leaning Heritage Foundation in Washington. “The Democrats are against it because they don’t like health insurance companies in the first place, and they don’t like to be told they have to go buy from someone they don’t like.(VOA)

And I would add, make them aware of how much everything costs because this is far from “free healthcare”.

Yahoo question from the public at large: Since conservatives are so greedy, I am surprised they would oppose Free.

Need I say more? 🙂

How about From a UK message board: congratualations {sp} USA on your free healthcare – now you can do something about your obesity and retardation.

The Bright Spot from the perspective of damage and ability to provide clarity on what this really means:

Because the one ”bright spot” of the ruling was on the matter of Medicaid expansion.

Medicaid is the joint federal-state health insurance program for the poor, in which both governments split the cost. ObamaCare mandated states accept more federal money and expand eligibility to ensnare a larger number of Americans in this dismal government-run plan. But along with that mandate for the states to spend hundreds of millions more than they can afford, the law included a penalty for states that didn’t expand the Medicaid eligibility – the loss of all federal Medicaid money. Essentially it was a choice between spending more money that states don’t have or receiving no federal money, yet still being obligated to provide Medicaid.

The Supreme Court rejected that provision. It said states can be offered the option but can’t be forced to accept the expansion money, nor to extend Medicaid to people who don’t currently qualify. Given many states are going broke now, and Medicaid is their largest expenditure already, it’s highly doubtful many will spend more on this program.

So, given Medicaid was a key component to extending coverage to all Americans under ObamaCare, and given it’s now dead or at least an unlikely option, the uninsured near-poor – the people this whole mess was designed to help – won’t be getting Medicaid. Since they also probably won’t soon earn enough to buy insurance on their own, they finish right where they started – in no-man’s land.

Middle-class Americans without insurance will have to pay an Obama Tax that will grow with each passing year. The near-poor were exempted from the tax, but they won’t get insurance either.

Given the ease – relative to the rest of the world – with which Americans can move up the economic ladder, many will work at jobs that can’t afford to provide insurance under ObamaCare and are too small to be required to provide it. But those jobs will pay enough so employees eventually will qualify for the Obama Tax. So, just as these near-poor approach some semblance of economic security, the IRS (which Obamacare empowered to enforce the Obama Tax) will be right there to whack them back down.

Therefore, and not for the first time, the people ObamaCare was supposed to help will be hurt the most.

Middle-class families also will take a hit.

Most Americans work for small businesses. The law requires businesses with more than 50 employees to provide health insurance or pay a fine. Since ObamaCare forces insurance companies to accept everyone with pre-existing conditions – which is like requiring car insurance companies to insure cars after their owners have wrapped them around a tree – premiums will skyrocket. Companies quickly will notice it’s easier to simply pay the fine. This means a new group of uninsured Americans.

If the slight bump in pay doesn’t permit them to afford insurance, they will be hit with the Obama Tax. (And for those of you keeping score at home, they make significantly less than the $250,000 per year the President promised to never, ever raise taxes on. “Read my lips!” anyone?)

The government doesn’t care about your expenses. It doesn’t care about your kids in private school, your mortgage or student loans or the relatives you’re trying to help through a bad time. It doesn’t care how or really even whether you make ends meet as the Obama Recession rolls into another year. It sees you as a number – the number of dollars you make, whether you make enough to buy insurance according to its formula.

Don’t believe me? Try discussing with a bureaucrat anything you owe government on any level and see if you can appeal to their mercy. You might get a traffic fine reduced occasionally if you catch the right bureaucrat on the right day. But the IRS deals with tens of millions of people over hundreds of billions of dollars. Bureaucracies are not in the mercy business.

So now that Obamacare has morphed into a tax on staying alive, it will become yet another liberal “well-intentioned” attempt to “strengthen the social safety net” that ends up functioning more like a spider web that ensnares people in the life it was supposed to help them escape.

It also forces the health insurance market into a bastardized market that threatens its very existence. It will cause many insurers to fail, which will lead to consolidation, concentration and ultimately corporate welfare. Or the government will step in, take over the entire market and give us the American version of Britain’s detestable National Health Service, which is something Democrats have been working towards for decades. Either way, government wins and we – all of us – lose.

Of course none of these taxes and insurance drops will take effect for these impacted people until after the election, which was by design. Costing people you need to vote for you more before they vote is fool’s errand, a lesson Barack Obama learned from President George H.W. Bush. But once he no longer need their vote, ever, for the rest of his life…lookout.

Did we reject a tyranny 236 years ago to gradually create our own without the accent and powdered wig? Did we replace “No taxation without representation” with “Taxation through misrepresentation”? As you celebrate our nation’s independence this week, commit yourself to talk to as many people as you can about how we’ve lost that which we are celebrating and how November is our next, and maybe our only, chance to declare it again. (Derek Hunter)

Time for a more literal TEA PARTY revolution against our Would-be King. And time to re-instill freedom into this great land.

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne