Posts
Crossposted at Conservative Badlands
"That thing looks great - I could really use one of those."
"But wait, there's more!"
"They'll send me two for the price of one. Now I know what to give my brother-in-law for Christmas. Sweet!"
Have you ever wondered why so many As-Seen-On-TV products aren't available in stores? It's because so many of these gadgets do not stand up to closer inspection - the lack of quality would be immediately apparent if you were able to test the product in person. Have you ever noticed that the shipping and handling may approach the cost of the product - especially when they're sending you something "free, just pay the additional shipping and handling"?
And so it is with the Obama infomercial. He did his best to convince us that we can't live without what he's selling. It all sounds great on TV. Better healthcare. More jobs, growth, prosperity, unity. And the enthusiasm of his studio audience made the pitch sound almost believable. But his proposals are not economically sound, and the added costs - the shipping and handling, so to speak - make an Obama Presidency far more costly than we bargained for.
For example, if you buy now, businesses will get a tax credit for creating jobs. Keeping jobs in America is a noble goal, of course. But you'll be paying higher freight on those new employees, that will far exceed any tax credit you receive.
The higher minimum wage Obama is selling will have an inflationary impact on all wages.
The Union Free Coercion Act will mean you can't easily fire those new higher priced employees if they don't work out, not after your employees have been harrassed into unionizing.
You'll have higher benefit costs, as your choices for health insurance will be limited to expensive, gold-plated plans. You won't be permitted to provide an economical plan that covers only serious conditions. Instead you will be required to provide insurance that covers everything from flu shots to birth control to marriage counseling.
But aren't comprehensive insurance plans - covering everything from major medical to maternity to mental health to preventive care - a good idea? Maybe, but it should be your choice.
You won't be able to buy a cheaper plan that covers only catastropic issues, while you pay your own preventive and routine care out of pocket, even if it works out better for your budget.
If you don't have a pre-existing condition, you won't be able to buy a cheaper plan doesn't them, or one that has a reasonable waiting period.
If you are a man, you won't be able to buy a plan that doesn't cover maternity care.
And as a special deal for the youth of today, the required uniformity of coverage means they get to subsidize the elderly and infirm. If that sounds like social security to you, you're right!
Obama's healthcare eliminates our options, and as an added bonus, he tramples states' rights to determine how they will administer their own programs.
Act now, and the government will be rolling in cash after ending the Iraq War. Once in office though, I suspect (hope...pray...) the Generals will beat some sense into Obama, preventing a precipitous withdrawal. If not, we'll be shipping more soldiers home in boxes than if we stayed in to win the war, and handling vastly more instability in the region.
Bipartisanship? Obama points with pride to how he "reached across the aisle" on the issue of preventing terrorists from getting their hands on nuclear weapons. Let's ask our studio audience ... "If you think terrorists should have access to nukes - raise your hand. Anyone? No? Wait, you there in the back with the pipe bomb..." When has Obama joined with Republicans on any issue that was distinctly conservative?
Unity? It'll only cost you a little free speech. With the UnFairness Doctrine, he can shut down those nasty, partisan hacks on right-wing talk radio. We can have unity - in the media. But if Obama thinks he can shut down dissent, he's fortunately mistaken. It may come as a surprise to him, but there are millions of informed Americans with conservative principles who don't need Rush or Hannity to tell them what they should think and where to focus their outrage. Honestly, sometimes I find talk radio boring because they're telling me what I already know. But that doesn't mean the power of the Federal government should be used to censor them. I would gladly contribute to an UnFairness Doctrine Legal Defense fund, and I think others would do the same. There will be no unity. There are too many of us who know socialism is wrong for America.
Obama promises to review Federal spending line-by-line and cut programs that aren't working. Ignore the earmarks behind the curtain. Buy now, and we'll throw in more touchy-feely, purple pen educational programs.
Worse yet, there is no money back guarantee with the Obama infomercial. A government program is as close to eternal life as anything on earth, to paraphrase Reagan. Give Obama just two years with a liberal Congress, and he will wreak havoc on the economy that either cannot be undone, or will not be. Who in Congress would have the courage to roll back the minimum raise? Who in Congress would risk a career taking away health care benefits? And so on. Once it's in, it's in.
You are on the phone. You just got the total for your order, and it looks like it's not the bargain that was advertised. It's time to put your credit card back in your wallet and hang up, and sigh in relief that you weren't suckered into the scam.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Oh, Puke!
Random thoughts about "The Infomercial".
His first testimonial is the woman complaining about how costs are going up and up…. A basic understanding of economics tells us that Obama’s policies are inflationary. He won’t do her any good.
Take a risk and start a business – a society that honors work? Hah!
Notice he’s redefining “rich” to $200,000 from $250,000.
He gives with one hand and takes away with the other. He speaks of a tax break for businesses creating jobs. Am I the only one who wonders if it will outweigh the increased costs his policies will place on business – further increasing minimum wage? More unionization? Insurance mandates? Higher taxes in general? Why do I doubt his tax break will come close to the burdens he’ll place on small business?
Will it outweigh union demands?
Loans to small business? What the?!?!?! That’s what banks are for.
What commitment does this country have to its people beyond opportunity and freedom – we are promised the right to pursue happiness, not that we’ll get it? We have a commitment to ensure equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.
You should not be able to find a job that pays a living wage unless you have the skills worthy of a living wage. And who is he to define living wage anyway? The vast differential in cost of living across the country argues against any federally mandated “living wage”.
“What we need are big solutions.” Big spending is certainly what he has in mind.
I’m really sorry about the old folks who refinanced their house to pay for insurance, but did they not think about planning for insurance before deciding to retire? What were they thinking?
He’s going to help the auto industry produce more fuel-efficient vehicles? What the hell does he know about designing cars?
Call on every American to conserve energy… Here come the thermostat police.
His “line by line” promise to cut the budget does not reassure me, not with the millions in earmarks he’s put in for during his short tenure as Senator.
He knows damn well that we can’t pull out of Iraq precipitously – don’t pretend we’re going to realize saving from Iraq right away.
You don’t care about big companies, oil, insurance, etc – they can take care of themselves. Indeed. They’ll leave. They’ll fold, and they’ll leave government to pick up the tab.
He was shaped by his father’s absence – look at whom he sought out as mentors and father figures. Yikes!
Now is not the time for small plans – doesn’t that scare anyone?
Community service…. Radicalizing our youth with the likes of United Allies what you have in mind?
Hospitals are already putting records in electronic format, improving processes and paperwork, etc. – They’ll get there without Obama sticking his nose in.
The lower insurance cost estimate was pulled out of his …
You’ll keep own doctors and insurance until they fold up.
No one without preexisting conditions will be able to pay less for a policy that doesn’t cover what they don’t need.
I am my brother’s keeper, sure. I’ll handle it. The Feds can butt out.
Talk to your black separatist education program-promoting buddy of yours about how “united” we should be as a country.
He reached across the aisle to keep loose nukes out of the hands of terrorists – gee, that’s pretty controversial. Way to buck your party, Senator
Manufacturing was destroyed in part by the unions who own Obama.
Why do I think of the banana boat song whenever Obama says “Taliban”? Something about the way he pronounces it.
He will not bring bipartisanship – any decent conservative will fight him tooth and nail, I guarantee it.
He is not telling us what you think and where you stand – he will not fess up to your communist and radical relationships and attitudes
Reward work, create jobs, create prosperity, provide healthcare benefits, invest in renewable energy – by voting for McCain.
I want to puke every time he talks about unity. I will fight against socialism, and I hope others join me.
His first testimonial is the woman complaining about how costs are going up and up…. A basic understanding of economics tells us that Obama’s policies are inflationary. He won’t do her any good.
Take a risk and start a business – a society that honors work? Hah!
Notice he’s redefining “rich” to $200,000 from $250,000.
He gives with one hand and takes away with the other. He speaks of a tax break for businesses creating jobs. Am I the only one who wonders if it will outweigh the increased costs his policies will place on business – further increasing minimum wage? More unionization? Insurance mandates? Higher taxes in general? Why do I doubt his tax break will come close to the burdens he’ll place on small business?
Will it outweigh union demands?
Loans to small business? What the?!?!?! That’s what banks are for.
What commitment does this country have to its people beyond opportunity and freedom – we are promised the right to pursue happiness, not that we’ll get it? We have a commitment to ensure equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.
You should not be able to find a job that pays a living wage unless you have the skills worthy of a living wage. And who is he to define living wage anyway? The vast differential in cost of living across the country argues against any federally mandated “living wage”.
“What we need are big solutions.” Big spending is certainly what he has in mind.
I’m really sorry about the old folks who refinanced their house to pay for insurance, but did they not think about planning for insurance before deciding to retire? What were they thinking?
He’s going to help the auto industry produce more fuel-efficient vehicles? What the hell does he know about designing cars?
Call on every American to conserve energy… Here come the thermostat police.
His “line by line” promise to cut the budget does not reassure me, not with the millions in earmarks he’s put in for during his short tenure as Senator.
He knows damn well that we can’t pull out of Iraq precipitously – don’t pretend we’re going to realize saving from Iraq right away.
You don’t care about big companies, oil, insurance, etc – they can take care of themselves. Indeed. They’ll leave. They’ll fold, and they’ll leave government to pick up the tab.
He was shaped by his father’s absence – look at whom he sought out as mentors and father figures. Yikes!
Now is not the time for small plans – doesn’t that scare anyone?
Community service…. Radicalizing our youth with the likes of United Allies what you have in mind?
Hospitals are already putting records in electronic format, improving processes and paperwork, etc. – They’ll get there without Obama sticking his nose in.
The lower insurance cost estimate was pulled out of his …
You’ll keep own doctors and insurance until they fold up.
No one without preexisting conditions will be able to pay less for a policy that doesn’t cover what they don’t need.
I am my brother’s keeper, sure. I’ll handle it. The Feds can butt out.
Talk to your black separatist education program-promoting buddy of yours about how “united” we should be as a country.
He reached across the aisle to keep loose nukes out of the hands of terrorists – gee, that’s pretty controversial. Way to buck your party, Senator
Manufacturing was destroyed in part by the unions who own Obama.
Why do I think of the banana boat song whenever Obama says “Taliban”? Something about the way he pronounces it.
He will not bring bipartisanship – any decent conservative will fight him tooth and nail, I guarantee it.
He is not telling us what you think and where you stand – he will not fess up to your communist and radical relationships and attitudes
Reward work, create jobs, create prosperity, provide healthcare benefits, invest in renewable energy – by voting for McCain.
I want to puke every time he talks about unity. I will fight against socialism, and I hope others join me.
Orwell Would Be Proud
Posted at Conservative Badlands 10/28/08
Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. – George Orwell
It takes more than a little doublethink to wrap the mind around Obama and his ideas.
First, there is Hope. The centerpiece of the Obama campaign. Yet, what do his policies tell his public? The American Dream is dead, if it ever was real. Even before I knew that the title “The Audacity of Hope” was inspired by a Jeremiah Wright sermon, I found it troubling in and of itself.
Hope is not “audacious”. Hope is a natural by-product of a free society. If you believe in America, you cannot help but hope, for you see the endless opportunity we all have in this country. Obama himself has achieved much for such a humble beginning, yet he is not a leader that holds himself out as an example of what anyone can accomplish. Instead, he has devoted his life to grievance-mongering, to convincing everyone they are a victim, that the system is rigged, that success is not for everyone. Obama peddles defeatism, so that the people look only to the government for rescue, not to their own talents. It’s Mourning In America, folks.
Consider the purely doublethinkingly named “Fairness” Doctrine. The liberal bias in most media is more than obvious - it is scandalous. But somehow, it is fair to selectively choose the medium on which you wish to force “equal time”, and not coincidentally, it is the only medium dominated by conservative thought.
I guess “fairness” to the left means never being asked a question you don’t think like.
And the the Employee “Free Choice” Act. Employees are now “free” to be coerced into “choosing” unionization. Obama claims he’s not beholden to any special interests, but the unions own him.
Privacy and free choice apparently only apply to 14 year olds getting abortions without telling their parents. But I digress.
Minimum wage. Obama wants to increase the government mandated minimum wage beyond what is already in the works. But no amount of government interference in the market will ever raise the true minimum wage, because the real minimum wage is zero. No job, zero wages. Blindly increasing the government mandated minimum wage will only result in more people earning nothing. Which bring to mind another quote from Orwell – “So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot.”
Obama is either economically illiterate, or he is willing to throw the poorest of the poor, the least skilled and employable, under the bus in the name of fairness. Or, are his promises just a means of securing power? Hmmmm?
”They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship.”- George Orwell.
Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. – George Orwell
It takes more than a little doublethink to wrap the mind around Obama and his ideas.
First, there is Hope. The centerpiece of the Obama campaign. Yet, what do his policies tell his public? The American Dream is dead, if it ever was real. Even before I knew that the title “The Audacity of Hope” was inspired by a Jeremiah Wright sermon, I found it troubling in and of itself.
Hope is not “audacious”. Hope is a natural by-product of a free society. If you believe in America, you cannot help but hope, for you see the endless opportunity we all have in this country. Obama himself has achieved much for such a humble beginning, yet he is not a leader that holds himself out as an example of what anyone can accomplish. Instead, he has devoted his life to grievance-mongering, to convincing everyone they are a victim, that the system is rigged, that success is not for everyone. Obama peddles defeatism, so that the people look only to the government for rescue, not to their own talents. It’s Mourning In America, folks.
Consider the purely doublethinkingly named “Fairness” Doctrine. The liberal bias in most media is more than obvious - it is scandalous. But somehow, it is fair to selectively choose the medium on which you wish to force “equal time”, and not coincidentally, it is the only medium dominated by conservative thought.
I guess “fairness” to the left means never being asked a question you don’t think like.
And the the Employee “Free Choice” Act. Employees are now “free” to be coerced into “choosing” unionization. Obama claims he’s not beholden to any special interests, but the unions own him.
Privacy and free choice apparently only apply to 14 year olds getting abortions without telling their parents. But I digress.
Minimum wage. Obama wants to increase the government mandated minimum wage beyond what is already in the works. But no amount of government interference in the market will ever raise the true minimum wage, because the real minimum wage is zero. No job, zero wages. Blindly increasing the government mandated minimum wage will only result in more people earning nothing. Which bring to mind another quote from Orwell – “So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot.”
Obama is either economically illiterate, or he is willing to throw the poorest of the poor, the least skilled and employable, under the bus in the name of fairness. Or, are his promises just a means of securing power? Hmmmm?
”They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship.”- George Orwell.
Monday, October 27, 2008
I Want To Hear From Conservatives Who Support Obama - Talk To Me!
I'm just a regular American citizen, admittedly on the conservative side, and this headlong rush to elect Obama is mystifying to me.
It's not that I don't grasp liberalism - I may not agree, but I "get" it. It's the conservatives supporting Obama that have me flummoxed. I sincerely invite you to tell me why.
I think the discussion is important, and on my part, I promise to be civil about it. That doesn't mean I won't tell you why I think he's wrong for the country, but I'm not inviting you here to flog you mercilessly. I want to hear your reasons.
I want to know why you don't think his associations and alliances matter. I want to know why his record on abortion doesn't bother you. I want to know how, if you are a fiscal conservative, you're voting for a candidate who plans massive increases in entitlements and has had no problem getting pork and earmarks for his state.
I want to know what eclipses the legitimate concerns most conservatives have about him. I don't see it. I'm not a pundit, I'm not an expert on politics - I just don't understand, and it frustrates me.
If you're liberal, I get why he sounds so good to you. It's not that you're not welcome here, but I really want to hear from people who supposedly share my principles.
Anyone? Please comment.
It's not that I don't grasp liberalism - I may not agree, but I "get" it. It's the conservatives supporting Obama that have me flummoxed. I sincerely invite you to tell me why.
I think the discussion is important, and on my part, I promise to be civil about it. That doesn't mean I won't tell you why I think he's wrong for the country, but I'm not inviting you here to flog you mercilessly. I want to hear your reasons.
I want to know why you don't think his associations and alliances matter. I want to know why his record on abortion doesn't bother you. I want to know how, if you are a fiscal conservative, you're voting for a candidate who plans massive increases in entitlements and has had no problem getting pork and earmarks for his state.
I want to know what eclipses the legitimate concerns most conservatives have about him. I don't see it. I'm not a pundit, I'm not an expert on politics - I just don't understand, and it frustrates me.
If you're liberal, I get why he sounds so good to you. It's not that you're not welcome here, but I really want to hear from people who supposedly share my principles.
Anyone? Please comment.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Splitting My Time
I'll be posting some here, some at Conservative Badlands.
I'll try to note here when I have posted there.
I'll try to note here when I have posted there.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
I Was Getting Around to My Fantasy Football Lineups When...
How Do You Spell Political Correctness? NFL.
League says no to Haslett’s win-based contract
By R.B. FALLSTROM, AP Sports Writer 1 hour, 59 minutes ago
ST. LOUIS (AP)—The NFL denied the St. Louis Rams’ attempt to rework a contract with coach Jim Haslett that would ensure him a job beyond this season if he won six games because of a requirement that minority candidates be interviewed for head coaching vacancies.
Just tell me what the league thinks they're accomplishing here? The Lions went through the same BS a few years back when everyone knew Mariucci would be the hire.
As I recall, it was difficult to get minority coaches to even interview for that job because they knew it was a charade. Or maybe it was difficult to get anyone to interview because it was the Lions... but I digress.
Pretty soon the team that plays in DC will be the Washington R-words.
League says no to Haslett’s win-based contract
By R.B. FALLSTROM, AP Sports Writer 1 hour, 59 minutes ago
ST. LOUIS (AP)—The NFL denied the St. Louis Rams’ attempt to rework a contract with coach Jim Haslett that would ensure him a job beyond this season if he won six games because of a requirement that minority candidates be interviewed for head coaching vacancies.
Just tell me what the league thinks they're accomplishing here? The Lions went through the same BS a few years back when everyone knew Mariucci would be the hire.
As I recall, it was difficult to get minority coaches to even interview for that job because they knew it was a charade. Or maybe it was difficult to get anyone to interview because it was the Lions... but I digress.
Pretty soon the team that plays in DC will be the Washington R-words.
Great Videos
PG-13 Language Warning - Penn & Teller critique Obama debate performance.
Ted Nugent On The Economy And The Election
Ted Nugent On The Economy And The Election
Simple Advice This Election
Here's a startlingly anomalous political blog post. I won't mention a candidate's name even once.
Times are tough all around. We’re watching unemployment grow while our 401(k)’s shrink. We’ve got a temporary respite from insanely high gas prices, but can’t trust they won’t shoot up again. Most of us aren’t economists or financiers, so we don’t know which way to turn with what little investments we have left. We’re angry about the bailout. We feel betrayed by our government.
Red state, blue state, Democrat, Republican, right, left. Doesn’t matter. Set aside the labels for a few minutes. We need to think about what is best for our country.
Do you have a job? Is there someone higher up in the company – preferably the owner, if it’s a small business – that you trust? Someone who won’t pull any punches or sugarcoat issues? If so, count your blessings, and if you haven’t voted yet, ask for a couple of minutes for a private conversation.
Don’t ask how they’re voting. Don’t mention the election.
Tell them you’re concerned about this economy. Ask them where they see the company in a year or two. You may be reassured that your job is safe. If so, does that mean others aren’t? Ask. If things don’t look good down the road, ask why not.
You trust this person. If they bring up this election, listen.
Imagine millions of other Americans asking the same question of their bosses, and getting the same answer. What does that mean for your family, your community - even the whole country?
Then imagine millions of Americans not asking . . .
If you think everyone should be having this conversation, encourage your friends and family to get the same scoop where they work. We all want what’s best for this country. We all want informed and thoughtful voters, don’t we?
Lawyers are taught to never ask a question unless you already know the answer. I’m not a lawyer, and I didn’t even stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I think I know how a lot of those conversations will go – if they happen.
As promised, I didn't mention any candidate by name.
Times are tough all around. We’re watching unemployment grow while our 401(k)’s shrink. We’ve got a temporary respite from insanely high gas prices, but can’t trust they won’t shoot up again. Most of us aren’t economists or financiers, so we don’t know which way to turn with what little investments we have left. We’re angry about the bailout. We feel betrayed by our government.
Red state, blue state, Democrat, Republican, right, left. Doesn’t matter. Set aside the labels for a few minutes. We need to think about what is best for our country.
Do you have a job? Is there someone higher up in the company – preferably the owner, if it’s a small business – that you trust? Someone who won’t pull any punches or sugarcoat issues? If so, count your blessings, and if you haven’t voted yet, ask for a couple of minutes for a private conversation.
Don’t ask how they’re voting. Don’t mention the election.
Tell them you’re concerned about this economy. Ask them where they see the company in a year or two. You may be reassured that your job is safe. If so, does that mean others aren’t? Ask. If things don’t look good down the road, ask why not.
You trust this person. If they bring up this election, listen.
Imagine millions of other Americans asking the same question of their bosses, and getting the same answer. What does that mean for your family, your community - even the whole country?
Then imagine millions of Americans not asking . . .
If you think everyone should be having this conversation, encourage your friends and family to get the same scoop where they work. We all want what’s best for this country. We all want informed and thoughtful voters, don’t we?
Lawyers are taught to never ask a question unless you already know the answer. I’m not a lawyer, and I didn’t even stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I think I know how a lot of those conversations will go – if they happen.
As promised, I didn't mention any candidate by name.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Taking "Community Organizing" to the National Level
When Obama takes the stage for his victory speech, will he thank Saul "The Red" Alinsky? Probably not, but he should.
For the unfamiliar, Alinsky's "Rules For Radicals" is the bible of community organizing. Alinsky's ultimate goal was the overthrow of the capitalist system - to take power from the "Haves" and give it to the "Have-Nots". Obama has learned the principles, taught them to others, and he and the left have successfully taken Alinsky's tactics to the national level.
Look at America today. The subprime and foreclosure crisis. Wildly fluctuating oil prices. The meltdown on Wall Street. All gasoline to long smoldering embers. People with grievances against the system have increased exponentially due to the economic crises we're facing. And with the anger is a loss of confidence in the American economy and its institutions - not just the people running things, but the entire system. And according to Alinsky, a country is "ripe for revolution" when “the masses of our people have reached the point of disillusionment with past ways and values. They don’t know what will work but they do know that the prevailing system is self-defeating, frustrating, and hopeless They won’t act for change but won’t strongly oppose those who do.”
Whether by chance or design, circumstances converged to create chaos, just when there happens to be a candidate poised to exploit it. Obama has been given the perfect opportunity to complete a stealth socialist revolution, and he and the Democrats are capitalizing on it.
Consider a few examples of the tactics described in "Rules for Radicals", and their real life application - by no means an all-inclusive list.
"The threat is usually greater than the thing itself." When listening to Obama speak, it'd be a good drinking game to have a shot whenever Obama references the Great Depression. On second thought - forget I said that. I'd hate to be responsible for a slew of alcohol related deaths. Reagan was "Morning in America" - Obama is "Mourning in America".
"Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules." Consider what ACORN is doing with the thousands of fraudulent voter registrations in multiple states. The rule is they must turn in every voter registration, even if potentially fraudulent. They're just following the rules, and in the process, creating chaos in the election system.
"If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside." Right now, voter registration fraud is a negative. But these irregularities are likely to result in increased vigilance by election personnel. This scrutiny will ultimately be characterized as voter suppression, lawsuits will be filed, and ACORN will have its martyrs.
"Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have." Obama parades masses of supporters whenever possible, from renting a stadium for his convention speech, gathering 100,000 in St. Louis, or now planning a victory party a million strong in Chicago. What else is this but a display of his power, an essential element to creating fear in his opponents? What if against all odds, it doesn't turn out to be a victory party - what will those million people do then?
"Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it". George Bush, anyone? If there is any clearer example of this tactic, I don't know what it is. The left has maintained a steady drumbeat of accusations against George Bush, but let's get real. In my estimation, Bush is a decent man - not much of a limited government conservative, by any means - but one who wanted to do right by his country. Our soldiers are not dying in Iraq on the whim of a madman bent on world domination. We didn't go into Iraq for oil. Bush didn't lie - he based his decision on faulty intelligence, shared by many other world leaders. 9/11 was not an inside job. The present economic crisis has its roots in events prior to the Bush administration. (Ask a liberal sometime exactly what Bush is supposed to have deregulated that made this crisis inevitable - but don't hold your breath waiting for an answer.) I may disagree with him on policy, but I don't think he's the personification of evil incarnate. But Bush is the target, no question. An easy target - having commenced with an unpopular war and bungled its execution - and he has been effectively "frozen". Hence, the never-ending efforts to tie McCain to Bush. There hasn't been a comparable effort to tie McCain to anyone else. Obama has a panoply of questionable alliances, but the power of attacks is diffused by the numbers. Tying Obama to a Congress even more unpopular than Bush, is again less effective, as the target is an institution - and of course, one with which McCain has a longer tenure.
This isn't to say there haven't been elements of Alinsky's tactics used by the Republicans, but in no way as effectively as Obama and his camp. Rove's got nothing on Obama. Barack's a pro and he's been at it for a long time.
Will understanding how Obama won (assuming he does) give us the key to find a way to take our country back? I don't have an answer for that, but I hope I've provided some food for thought.
(And if McCain ekes out an unlikely win, I'll take my crow with Chardonnay, please.)
For the unfamiliar, Alinsky's "Rules For Radicals" is the bible of community organizing. Alinsky's ultimate goal was the overthrow of the capitalist system - to take power from the "Haves" and give it to the "Have-Nots". Obama has learned the principles, taught them to others, and he and the left have successfully taken Alinsky's tactics to the national level.
Look at America today. The subprime and foreclosure crisis. Wildly fluctuating oil prices. The meltdown on Wall Street. All gasoline to long smoldering embers. People with grievances against the system have increased exponentially due to the economic crises we're facing. And with the anger is a loss of confidence in the American economy and its institutions - not just the people running things, but the entire system. And according to Alinsky, a country is "ripe for revolution" when “the masses of our people have reached the point of disillusionment with past ways and values. They don’t know what will work but they do know that the prevailing system is self-defeating, frustrating, and hopeless They won’t act for change but won’t strongly oppose those who do.”
Whether by chance or design, circumstances converged to create chaos, just when there happens to be a candidate poised to exploit it. Obama has been given the perfect opportunity to complete a stealth socialist revolution, and he and the Democrats are capitalizing on it.
Consider a few examples of the tactics described in "Rules for Radicals", and their real life application - by no means an all-inclusive list.
"The threat is usually greater than the thing itself." When listening to Obama speak, it'd be a good drinking game to have a shot whenever Obama references the Great Depression. On second thought - forget I said that. I'd hate to be responsible for a slew of alcohol related deaths. Reagan was "Morning in America" - Obama is "Mourning in America".
"Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules." Consider what ACORN is doing with the thousands of fraudulent voter registrations in multiple states. The rule is they must turn in every voter registration, even if potentially fraudulent. They're just following the rules, and in the process, creating chaos in the election system.
"If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside." Right now, voter registration fraud is a negative. But these irregularities are likely to result in increased vigilance by election personnel. This scrutiny will ultimately be characterized as voter suppression, lawsuits will be filed, and ACORN will have its martyrs.
"Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have." Obama parades masses of supporters whenever possible, from renting a stadium for his convention speech, gathering 100,000 in St. Louis, or now planning a victory party a million strong in Chicago. What else is this but a display of his power, an essential element to creating fear in his opponents? What if against all odds, it doesn't turn out to be a victory party - what will those million people do then?
"Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it". George Bush, anyone? If there is any clearer example of this tactic, I don't know what it is. The left has maintained a steady drumbeat of accusations against George Bush, but let's get real. In my estimation, Bush is a decent man - not much of a limited government conservative, by any means - but one who wanted to do right by his country. Our soldiers are not dying in Iraq on the whim of a madman bent on world domination. We didn't go into Iraq for oil. Bush didn't lie - he based his decision on faulty intelligence, shared by many other world leaders. 9/11 was not an inside job. The present economic crisis has its roots in events prior to the Bush administration. (Ask a liberal sometime exactly what Bush is supposed to have deregulated that made this crisis inevitable - but don't hold your breath waiting for an answer.) I may disagree with him on policy, but I don't think he's the personification of evil incarnate. But Bush is the target, no question. An easy target - having commenced with an unpopular war and bungled its execution - and he has been effectively "frozen". Hence, the never-ending efforts to tie McCain to Bush. There hasn't been a comparable effort to tie McCain to anyone else. Obama has a panoply of questionable alliances, but the power of attacks is diffused by the numbers. Tying Obama to a Congress even more unpopular than Bush, is again less effective, as the target is an institution - and of course, one with which McCain has a longer tenure.
This isn't to say there haven't been elements of Alinsky's tactics used by the Republicans, but in no way as effectively as Obama and his camp. Rove's got nothing on Obama. Barack's a pro and he's been at it for a long time.
Will understanding how Obama won (assuming he does) give us the key to find a way to take our country back? I don't have an answer for that, but I hope I've provided some food for thought.
(And if McCain ekes out an unlikely win, I'll take my crow with Chardonnay, please.)
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Who matters, who doesn't?
Just one citizen's take on Obama's alleged alliances and associations, and whether they're important or not.
Franklin Raines
A Washington Post article quoted Raines saying he was receiving calls from the Obama campaign. Once it became a campaign issue, Obama denied it. In this case, I can easily see Raines as just a disgraced former executive exaggerating his influence, puffing up his importance. I suspect calls were made. His immediate predecessor at Scammie Mae, Jim Johnson, was associated with Obama's campaign. Johnson could have deferred to the more recent experience of Raines and suggested the call (or calls). Ultimately though, based on the flimsy evidence, McCain played overplayed his hand on this issue.
Bill Ayers
Should we care about a washed up old terrorist? Yes.
With Ayers history and radical views, it was at best poor judgment and/or ignorance on Obama's part to let Ayers have any part in his state senate campaign. At worst, Ayers was promoting Obama's campaign because he recognized a kindred spirit. While we can't judge candidates entirely by the people who merely endorse them, it is fair to judge candidates by the people they seek out for support.
Plus there were some very questionable "reforms" promoted and funded by the Annenberg Challenge and the Woods Foundation. The educational press and the campaign dismiss them as perfectly mainstream. But have we not seen, time and time again, educational doctrine that conflicts with our values?
ACORN
Make up your mind, Senator Obama.
On one page of your own website, it says "I've been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career. Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work.”
Elsewhere on the site:
Fact: Barack was never an ACORN community organizer.
Fact: ACORN never hired Obama as a trainer, organizer, or any type of employee.
Fact: ACORN was not part of Project Vote, the successful voter registration drive Barack ran in 1992.
ACORN "smack dab in the middle of it but "not part of". Obama aligns himself with ACORN and their goals on one page of his own website. On another, he throws them under the bus. Does this remind anyone of ....
Reverend Wright
Crop Circles. Missing socks in the dryer. Area 51. Those multiplying wire hangers in my closet. McCain's dismissal of Wright as an issue in this campaign. All mysteries we may never be able to explain.
Since McCain won't do it, allow me.
Twenty years.
Twenty years.
Twenty years.
Reverend Wright paints America as an ugly, racist, evil society, bent on oppressing minorities at every turn. He has made vile and fantastically paranoid accusations against our government. For twenty years, Obama sat in the pews. Damn right I care that Obama soaked in Wright's hatred and divisiveness on a regular basis for twenty years.
I simply cannot fathom how the despicable rhetoric spewed by Wright is compatible with being a spiritual mentor and advisor to a future President of the United States. But Obama left Wright's church, you say? No amount of eloquence summoned up by Obama now erases twenty years of absorbing the hate and bile.
Did I mention Obama and Wright go back twenty years?
Others?
I don’t know enough yet about some of the other names tossed around. I’m working on learning what I can. But for those who don’t have the time, I strongly suggest at least keeping up on the Investor’s Business Daily editorials. I opened my blog asking everyone to read these and pass it on, and I think it bears repeating. We really need to think about what we’re getting into with Obama. I happen to be an unabashed free-market loving fiscal conservative, but even if you are not – maybe you just always vote for the Democrat – think long and hard before pulling the lever next to the D this year. Please.
Besides - trust me on this - with McCain, you’re pretty close to getting a Democrat anyhow. He wasn’t my choice in the caucus this year. Not my second choice… Not even my third. I liked him better than Huckabee though. McCain has driven us conservatives up a wall for the last few years – Try him, you’ll probably like him.
Franklin Raines
A Washington Post article quoted Raines saying he was receiving calls from the Obama campaign. Once it became a campaign issue, Obama denied it. In this case, I can easily see Raines as just a disgraced former executive exaggerating his influence, puffing up his importance. I suspect calls were made. His immediate predecessor at Scammie Mae, Jim Johnson, was associated with Obama's campaign. Johnson could have deferred to the more recent experience of Raines and suggested the call (or calls). Ultimately though, based on the flimsy evidence, McCain played overplayed his hand on this issue.
Bill Ayers
Should we care about a washed up old terrorist? Yes.
With Ayers history and radical views, it was at best poor judgment and/or ignorance on Obama's part to let Ayers have any part in his state senate campaign. At worst, Ayers was promoting Obama's campaign because he recognized a kindred spirit. While we can't judge candidates entirely by the people who merely endorse them, it is fair to judge candidates by the people they seek out for support.
Plus there were some very questionable "reforms" promoted and funded by the Annenberg Challenge and the Woods Foundation. The educational press and the campaign dismiss them as perfectly mainstream. But have we not seen, time and time again, educational doctrine that conflicts with our values?
ACORN
Make up your mind, Senator Obama.
On one page of your own website, it says "I've been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career. Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work.”
Elsewhere on the site:
Fact: Barack was never an ACORN community organizer.
Fact: ACORN never hired Obama as a trainer, organizer, or any type of employee.
Fact: ACORN was not part of Project Vote, the successful voter registration drive Barack ran in 1992.
ACORN "smack dab in the middle of it but "not part of". Obama aligns himself with ACORN and their goals on one page of his own website. On another, he throws them under the bus. Does this remind anyone of ....
Reverend Wright
Crop Circles. Missing socks in the dryer. Area 51. Those multiplying wire hangers in my closet. McCain's dismissal of Wright as an issue in this campaign. All mysteries we may never be able to explain.
Since McCain won't do it, allow me.
Twenty years.
Twenty years.
Twenty years.
Reverend Wright paints America as an ugly, racist, evil society, bent on oppressing minorities at every turn. He has made vile and fantastically paranoid accusations against our government. For twenty years, Obama sat in the pews. Damn right I care that Obama soaked in Wright's hatred and divisiveness on a regular basis for twenty years.
I simply cannot fathom how the despicable rhetoric spewed by Wright is compatible with being a spiritual mentor and advisor to a future President of the United States. But Obama left Wright's church, you say? No amount of eloquence summoned up by Obama now erases twenty years of absorbing the hate and bile.
Did I mention Obama and Wright go back twenty years?
Others?
I don’t know enough yet about some of the other names tossed around. I’m working on learning what I can. But for those who don’t have the time, I strongly suggest at least keeping up on the Investor’s Business Daily editorials. I opened my blog asking everyone to read these and pass it on, and I think it bears repeating. We really need to think about what we’re getting into with Obama. I happen to be an unabashed free-market loving fiscal conservative, but even if you are not – maybe you just always vote for the Democrat – think long and hard before pulling the lever next to the D this year. Please.
Besides - trust me on this - with McCain, you’re pretty close to getting a Democrat anyhow. He wasn’t my choice in the caucus this year. Not my second choice… Not even my third. I liked him better than Huckabee though. McCain has driven us conservatives up a wall for the last few years – Try him, you’ll probably like him.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Positively Clintonian Parsing
On one page of Obama's website, association with ACORN is a smear to be fought.
Fact: Barack was never an ACORN community organizer.
Fact: ACORN never hired Obama as a trainer, organizer, or any type of employee.
Fact: ACORN was not part of Project Vote, the successful voter registration drive Barack ran in 1992.
Yet, elsewhere on BarackObama.com... Senator Obama said, "I've been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career. Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work.”
"Part of" and "smack dab in the middle of" are two entirely different things, don't you understand?
I suppose accusing Obama of being "hired" by ACORN is vicious and dishonest beyond words, when the truth is, he was just a volunteer. I suppose when you're a dedicated radical... pardon me, community organizer... the real shame is in taking a paycheck from those noble people at ACORN. They could be using that money for toner and ink so they can copy some more phony voter registrations.
Are we such patsies for Obama that he's not even trying to hide the lies?
Fact: Barack was never an ACORN community organizer.
Fact: ACORN never hired Obama as a trainer, organizer, or any type of employee.
Fact: ACORN was not part of Project Vote, the successful voter registration drive Barack ran in 1992.
Yet, elsewhere on BarackObama.com... Senator Obama said, "I've been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career. Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work.”
"Part of" and "smack dab in the middle of" are two entirely different things, don't you understand?
I suppose accusing Obama of being "hired" by ACORN is vicious and dishonest beyond words, when the truth is, he was just a volunteer. I suppose when you're a dedicated radical... pardon me, community organizer... the real shame is in taking a paycheck from those noble people at ACORN. They could be using that money for toner and ink so they can copy some more phony voter registrations.
Are we such patsies for Obama that he's not even trying to hide the lies?
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
I Don't Need Or Want A Nanny!
Have Americans lost all confidence in our own ability to make a good life for ourselves? Do we believe we're doomed to a lifetime of minimum wage under the thumb of callous employers? Are we too irresponsible to wait to have children until we can care for them ourselves? Have we completely lost our work ethic and independent spirit? Is the American Dream so dead that we need to be rescued from America itself?
If so, Obama is here to save you. I'm sure it won't be long until he sends surrogates to tuck you in every night.
Me? I hope we're stronger, smarter, and too independent to buy what Obama is selling. I hope we tell Obama on November 4th, "Thanks, but no thanks, I'll build my own life."
He plans to have the IRS provide a pre-filled tax forms to verify, sign and return. Why bother? Taxes will be simpler anyway - If you have it, he'll want it.
Instead of telling people that you should read the fine print before you make what is probably the biggest investment of your life, "Obama and Biden will create a Homeowner Obligation Made Explicit (HOME) score..." And it won't stop with mortgages, they plan to "establish a five-star rating system so that every consumer knows the risk involved in every credit card." What would we do without these two? Those evil bankers expect us to read and understand our paperwork! Shame on them!
Your rent is due tomorrow, you don't get paid for 3 days, and the late fee is $50. You would gladly pay ten dollars to borrow enough to pay your rent. But don't worry, you're protected. "Obama and Biden will extend a 36 percent interest cap to all Americans." But since your credit is down the tubes, there won't be anyone one to lend you money, not even at 36%. Guess you're stuck with the late fee. I'm no proponent of using payday loans, but if you are really stuck, it should be your choice. But maybe they'll succeed in strong-arming the local banks and credit unions "to provide affordable short-term and small-dollar loans." Why not? I guess we own them now.
Obama and Biden will expand the Family And Medical Leave Act to cover businesses with 25 or more employees, to include elder care, participate in school actitivies and for employees to address domestic violence. They also support guaranteeing workers seven paid sick days per year. You need to be protected from those mean bosses who never give you time off when you need it. We can't let business owners and employees decide for themselves what is fair.
The Advanced Manufacturing Fund Obama proposes is "based on the Michigan 21st Century Jobs Fund, a state-level initiative that has awarded over $125 million to Michigan businesses ..." Yeah, how's that going for you, Michiganders? Economy thriving? Jobs aplenty? Or did your state government piss away over $125 million dollars? I saw those commercials with Jeff Daniels. I guess that was cool. But I'll still pass on moving there.
They want to increase the Child and Dependent Care tax credit. That's nice in theory, but we should have learned our lesson with the expenses of higher education. The more government subsidized it, the faster costs have escalated.
Obama and Biden will also create a prison-to-work incentive program and reduce barriers to employment. Yay!
They want to raise the minimum wage to $9.50 an Hour by 2011. I have a four letter word for Joe Biden. J-O-B-S. This'll kill 'em.
And it won't even stop at the border. Obama wants to "use trade agreements to spread good labor and environmental standards around the world". Hey, Superman, you've got enough on your hands coddling the American people.
I have always felt privileged to live in the greatest nation on earth. I always thought this was a land of opportunity. I always felt that the number of people who couldn't have a successful and rewarding life without government assistance was very limited. Was I wrong?
If so, Obama is here to save you. I'm sure it won't be long until he sends surrogates to tuck you in every night.
Me? I hope we're stronger, smarter, and too independent to buy what Obama is selling. I hope we tell Obama on November 4th, "Thanks, but no thanks, I'll build my own life."
He plans to have the IRS provide a pre-filled tax forms to verify, sign and return. Why bother? Taxes will be simpler anyway - If you have it, he'll want it.
Instead of telling people that you should read the fine print before you make what is probably the biggest investment of your life, "Obama and Biden will create a Homeowner Obligation Made Explicit (HOME) score..." And it won't stop with mortgages, they plan to "establish a five-star rating system so that every consumer knows the risk involved in every credit card." What would we do without these two? Those evil bankers expect us to read and understand our paperwork! Shame on them!
Your rent is due tomorrow, you don't get paid for 3 days, and the late fee is $50. You would gladly pay ten dollars to borrow enough to pay your rent. But don't worry, you're protected. "Obama and Biden will extend a 36 percent interest cap to all Americans." But since your credit is down the tubes, there won't be anyone one to lend you money, not even at 36%. Guess you're stuck with the late fee. I'm no proponent of using payday loans, but if you are really stuck, it should be your choice. But maybe they'll succeed in strong-arming the local banks and credit unions "to provide affordable short-term and small-dollar loans." Why not? I guess we own them now.
Obama and Biden will expand the Family And Medical Leave Act to cover businesses with 25 or more employees, to include elder care, participate in school actitivies and for employees to address domestic violence. They also support guaranteeing workers seven paid sick days per year. You need to be protected from those mean bosses who never give you time off when you need it. We can't let business owners and employees decide for themselves what is fair.
The Advanced Manufacturing Fund Obama proposes is "based on the Michigan 21st Century Jobs Fund, a state-level initiative that has awarded over $125 million to Michigan businesses ..." Yeah, how's that going for you, Michiganders? Economy thriving? Jobs aplenty? Or did your state government piss away over $125 million dollars? I saw those commercials with Jeff Daniels. I guess that was cool. But I'll still pass on moving there.
They want to increase the Child and Dependent Care tax credit. That's nice in theory, but we should have learned our lesson with the expenses of higher education. The more government subsidized it, the faster costs have escalated.
Obama and Biden will also create a prison-to-work incentive program and reduce barriers to employment. Yay!
They want to raise the minimum wage to $9.50 an Hour by 2011. I have a four letter word for Joe Biden. J-O-B-S. This'll kill 'em.
And it won't even stop at the border. Obama wants to "use trade agreements to spread good labor and environmental standards around the world". Hey, Superman, you've got enough on your hands coddling the American people.
I have always felt privileged to live in the greatest nation on earth. I always thought this was a land of opportunity. I always felt that the number of people who couldn't have a successful and rewarding life without government assistance was very limited. Was I wrong?
Monday, October 20, 2008
Digging Deeper Into Healthcare
Obama's healthcare plan sounds so benign on the surface. You keep your doctors, you keep your insurance with your employer, but if you need help buying insurance, we're there for you. But after looking over the details of his plan, I feel a little sick. His plan effectively puts an end to free market solutions in healthcare.
Obama's proposed National Health Insurance Exchange will eliminate our choices. Every company joining the Exchange will be required to offer comprehensive, kitchen-sink policies.
Why is this a problem? Don't we all want great coverage?
This kind of policy, covering routine expenditures at lower out of pocket costs, has created an enormous disconnect in consumers minds between cost and value. Virtually no one with insurance knows or cares what their doctor is charging anymore - their only concern is their co-pay. "What do I care? Insurance covers it." This has contributed to increasing medical costs. They charge so much because they can. Insurance companies have the motive and ability to get costs down, but that only works for their customers, not the uninsured. The uninsured, should they be so unfortunate to have any assets or income beyond the poverty level, are on the hook for substantially more than what an insurance company would cover as "reasonable and customary" contracted costs.
Obama's mandated gold-plated policies will further distort the marketplace and contribute to further increases in costs. We don't need medical coverage for our hangnails, and we certainly don't need the Federal government subsidizing it. But the Exchange "will require that all the plans offered are at least as generous as the new public plan." Every company will have to cover pre-existing conditions, mental health, maternity and preventive care.
If we, as consumers and taxpayers, have choices, maybe we won't want to pay for the kitchen sink. Maybe we'd rather take our chances with a higher deductible, and handle our routine medical issues out-of-pocket. That would certainly reconnect us as individuals to the value of medical services relative to costs. But we won't have those options. Plus, innovations like convenient, cost-effective, retail clinics - where you see a nurse for minor matters instead of waiting for hours and paying more to see a doctor - will fall by the wayside. Our ever-competent, ever-wise Federal government has everything handled. Why does that not comfort me?
Obama will have more than a little to say about how healthcare providers and insurance companies run their business.
In markets that don't meet standards for "competition", the Obama's plan will dictate what insurance companies can spend on administration or keep in profit. And everywhere, insurance companies may only charge Federally approved "fair and stable" premiums.
While all insurance companies may not be required to participate in the Exchange, not having Comrade Obama’s approval will hurt them in the marketplace. They won’t realistically be able to compete against federally subsidized care.
Obama's plan imposes new reporting and regulatory requirements on providers, including standards on "diversity" and "culturally effective" care, and "holding [providers] accountable for any differences found" in care provided to "disparate" patients.
Obama will prevent insurers from "overcharging" physicians for malpractice insurance.
Government telling business what to sell and how much to charge and how much they can profit, all the while mandating cultural sensitivity for their disparate customers? And that's only the beginning.
It takes some serious doublethink to get your mind around what Obama says is "allowing flexibility for state health reform plans." States can "continue to experiment, provided they meet the minimum standards of the national plan." States rights? Anyone? Hello? Is Obama using the Constitution for anything other than toilet paper?
More doublethink is needed to get around expanding eligibility for the Medicaid and SCHIP programs, yet ensuring "these programs continue to serve their critical safety net function". Wait a second. If it's truly a safety net, eligibility should be limited. Expand too far, and it's not a safety net, it's an entitlement.
Obama's plan would reimburse some small employer health plans for a portion of catastrophic costs, but only if they guarantee such savings are used to reduce the cost of workers' premiums.
And it wouldn't be an Obama program if it didn't have a sliding scale of tax credits, so that the "rich" are left holding the bag.
Contrast this with the relative simplicity of McCain’s plan, McCain would provide a tax credit of $2,500 to individuals or $5,000 for families, as long as you can prove you're covered. It doesn't matter whether the plan is privately purchased or received through an employer. A partial offset to the tax credit is ending the Federal income tax exclusion for the employee on employer provided insurance. But despite Obama's phony lamentations to the contrary, McCain’s plan proves to be a net tax cut to most people.
Currently, people in higher tax brackets benefit more from the health insurance tax exclusion. If you're in the 15% bracket, and your employer pays for a $5,000 health insurance policy for you, it's worth $750 to you. The 28% bracket? It's worth $1,400, and so on. Assuming your employer keeps your plan when McCain's tax credit went into effect, if you're in the lower bracket, your net tax change is a reduction of 4,250. The 28% bracket - $3,600. While the net benefit of the plan is progressive in nature, everyone is eligible for the credit.
While Obama throws around the claim that his plan provides three times the amount of tax relief to middle-class families, the studies he cites exclude the effect of their health care plans. Mighty convenient to leave hundreds of billions of McCain’s tax credits out of the equation, Senator Obama. Do you think that skewed the numbers just a little?
Obama also tries to paint McCain’s plan as the end of employer-based coverage. Realistically, few employers will drop insurance coverage without increasing base pay, not if they want to retain good employees. And, is increased portability as a result of less linkage to the employers necessarily a bad thing?
McCain’s plan with regard to the difficult to insure, people with pre-existing conditions, is to work with Governors on guaranteed coverage, not command how it will be done nationwide.
McCain is at least leaving us with more choices in the market, even if those choices will be heavily subsidized. McCain’s plan is no conservative dream, but Obama’s healthcare takeover is waking-in-a-cold-sweat screaming night terrors.
Obama's proposed National Health Insurance Exchange will eliminate our choices. Every company joining the Exchange will be required to offer comprehensive, kitchen-sink policies.
Why is this a problem? Don't we all want great coverage?
This kind of policy, covering routine expenditures at lower out of pocket costs, has created an enormous disconnect in consumers minds between cost and value. Virtually no one with insurance knows or cares what their doctor is charging anymore - their only concern is their co-pay. "What do I care? Insurance covers it." This has contributed to increasing medical costs. They charge so much because they can. Insurance companies have the motive and ability to get costs down, but that only works for their customers, not the uninsured. The uninsured, should they be so unfortunate to have any assets or income beyond the poverty level, are on the hook for substantially more than what an insurance company would cover as "reasonable and customary" contracted costs.
Obama's mandated gold-plated policies will further distort the marketplace and contribute to further increases in costs. We don't need medical coverage for our hangnails, and we certainly don't need the Federal government subsidizing it. But the Exchange "will require that all the plans offered are at least as generous as the new public plan." Every company will have to cover pre-existing conditions, mental health, maternity and preventive care.
If we, as consumers and taxpayers, have choices, maybe we won't want to pay for the kitchen sink. Maybe we'd rather take our chances with a higher deductible, and handle our routine medical issues out-of-pocket. That would certainly reconnect us as individuals to the value of medical services relative to costs. But we won't have those options. Plus, innovations like convenient, cost-effective, retail clinics - where you see a nurse for minor matters instead of waiting for hours and paying more to see a doctor - will fall by the wayside. Our ever-competent, ever-wise Federal government has everything handled. Why does that not comfort me?
Obama will have more than a little to say about how healthcare providers and insurance companies run their business.
In markets that don't meet standards for "competition", the Obama's plan will dictate what insurance companies can spend on administration or keep in profit. And everywhere, insurance companies may only charge Federally approved "fair and stable" premiums.
While all insurance companies may not be required to participate in the Exchange, not having Comrade Obama’s approval will hurt them in the marketplace. They won’t realistically be able to compete against federally subsidized care.
Obama's plan imposes new reporting and regulatory requirements on providers, including standards on "diversity" and "culturally effective" care, and "holding [providers] accountable for any differences found" in care provided to "disparate" patients.
Obama will prevent insurers from "overcharging" physicians for malpractice insurance.
Government telling business what to sell and how much to charge and how much they can profit, all the while mandating cultural sensitivity for their disparate customers? And that's only the beginning.
It takes some serious doublethink to get your mind around what Obama says is "allowing flexibility for state health reform plans." States can "continue to experiment, provided they meet the minimum standards of the national plan." States rights? Anyone? Hello? Is Obama using the Constitution for anything other than toilet paper?
More doublethink is needed to get around expanding eligibility for the Medicaid and SCHIP programs, yet ensuring "these programs continue to serve their critical safety net function". Wait a second. If it's truly a safety net, eligibility should be limited. Expand too far, and it's not a safety net, it's an entitlement.
Obama's plan would reimburse some small employer health plans for a portion of catastrophic costs, but only if they guarantee such savings are used to reduce the cost of workers' premiums.
And it wouldn't be an Obama program if it didn't have a sliding scale of tax credits, so that the "rich" are left holding the bag.
Contrast this with the relative simplicity of McCain’s plan, McCain would provide a tax credit of $2,500 to individuals or $5,000 for families, as long as you can prove you're covered. It doesn't matter whether the plan is privately purchased or received through an employer. A partial offset to the tax credit is ending the Federal income tax exclusion for the employee on employer provided insurance. But despite Obama's phony lamentations to the contrary, McCain’s plan proves to be a net tax cut to most people.
Currently, people in higher tax brackets benefit more from the health insurance tax exclusion. If you're in the 15% bracket, and your employer pays for a $5,000 health insurance policy for you, it's worth $750 to you. The 28% bracket? It's worth $1,400, and so on. Assuming your employer keeps your plan when McCain's tax credit went into effect, if you're in the lower bracket, your net tax change is a reduction of 4,250. The 28% bracket - $3,600. While the net benefit of the plan is progressive in nature, everyone is eligible for the credit.
While Obama throws around the claim that his plan provides three times the amount of tax relief to middle-class families, the studies he cites exclude the effect of their health care plans. Mighty convenient to leave hundreds of billions of McCain’s tax credits out of the equation, Senator Obama. Do you think that skewed the numbers just a little?
Obama also tries to paint McCain’s plan as the end of employer-based coverage. Realistically, few employers will drop insurance coverage without increasing base pay, not if they want to retain good employees. And, is increased portability as a result of less linkage to the employers necessarily a bad thing?
McCain’s plan with regard to the difficult to insure, people with pre-existing conditions, is to work with Governors on guaranteed coverage, not command how it will be done nationwide.
McCain is at least leaving us with more choices in the market, even if those choices will be heavily subsidized. McCain’s plan is no conservative dream, but Obama’s healthcare takeover is waking-in-a-cold-sweat screaming night terrors.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
No, Really, You Can't
Obama crowds chanting “Yes, we can” is positively Orwellian. What Obama’s platform really tells the American people is “No, you can’t”.
No, you can’t handle your own healthcare decisions properly. The Feds can do it better.
No, private enterprise can’t develop renewable energy solutions on its own. The Feds need to subsidize it.
No, states can’t balance their budgets anymore. The Feds are here to rescue you from your irresponsible fiscal policies.
No, Americans can’t overcome prejudice and discrimination. The Feds will make you.
No, employees can’t be trusted with secret ballots in union elections. You can’t do the right thing unless you have a union representative looking over your shoulder.
No, American communications companies can’t provide broadband for all by themselves. The Feds can better determine how our wireless facilities are best utilized.
No, employers can’t pay their employees a fair wage. The Feds will decide for you what an unskilled, inexperienced worker should be paid.
No, you can’t possibly comprehend credit card disclosures or the terms of a home mortgage. You’re too stupid. The Feds are there to make sure it gets dumbed down for you.
No, employers can’t fairly consider employee requests for time off. The Feds are there to make sure you get the time for anything the Feds consider fair.
No, you can’t provide appropriate pre-school and other learning opportunities for your child. The Feds have to help you.
No, states and local school districts can’t solve their own problems. No, the Feds know best, from hundreds or thousands of miles away, their bureaucrats can solve the problems in your child’s classroom.
No, you can’t provide for retirement on your own. The Feds are there to make you do it.
I don’t think Obama gives the American people and American business nearly the credit they deserve.
No, you can’t handle your own healthcare decisions properly. The Feds can do it better.
No, private enterprise can’t develop renewable energy solutions on its own. The Feds need to subsidize it.
No, states can’t balance their budgets anymore. The Feds are here to rescue you from your irresponsible fiscal policies.
No, Americans can’t overcome prejudice and discrimination. The Feds will make you.
No, employees can’t be trusted with secret ballots in union elections. You can’t do the right thing unless you have a union representative looking over your shoulder.
No, American communications companies can’t provide broadband for all by themselves. The Feds can better determine how our wireless facilities are best utilized.
No, employers can’t pay their employees a fair wage. The Feds will decide for you what an unskilled, inexperienced worker should be paid.
No, you can’t possibly comprehend credit card disclosures or the terms of a home mortgage. You’re too stupid. The Feds are there to make sure it gets dumbed down for you.
No, employers can’t fairly consider employee requests for time off. The Feds are there to make sure you get the time for anything the Feds consider fair.
No, you can’t provide appropriate pre-school and other learning opportunities for your child. The Feds have to help you.
No, states and local school districts can’t solve their own problems. No, the Feds know best, from hundreds or thousands of miles away, their bureaucrats can solve the problems in your child’s classroom.
No, you can’t provide for retirement on your own. The Feds are there to make you do it.
I don’t think Obama gives the American people and American business nearly the credit they deserve.
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Debate Catharsis
My intentions here are two-fold. One, if I do some ranting here, I am less likely to throw a brick at the TV screen. Two, speaking to a larger audience than just talking back to the TV - it's kind of like expecting a football team to hear me screaming "block that kick" from a thousand miles away.
There is value in going back to the written transcript, and thinking about what the candidates were really saying.
[Obama] I want to end the tax breaks for companies that are shipping jobs overseas...
Am I the only one who ever wonders just what tax breaks he's referring to? I've never heard of an outsourcing tax credit or anything else I'd consider a tax break for shipping jobs overseas.
[Obama] What I've said is I want to provide a tax cut for 95 percent of working Americans, 95 percent.
The faulty math in this assertion doesn't say much for Obama's Harvard education, not when almost a third of tax filers pay no income tax at all. You can't cut something that doesn't exist. You can't refund something that hasn't been paid. What Obama will do is increase taxes on the top 5% and use a substantial portion of the proceeds to send checks to people who don't pay any income taxes at all. It's not a tax cut, it's income redistribution. He's playing Robin Hood and trying to obscure it by calling it tax cuts.
[Obama] So, look, nobody likes taxes. I would prefer that none of us had to pay taxes, including myself. But ultimately, we've got to pay for the core investments that make this economy strong and somebody's got to do it.
Newsflash, Senator Government. Government "investments" are not what make the economy strong. American businesses are our economic strength.
[McCain] I oppose subsidies for ethanol because I thought it distorted the market and created inflation; Senator Obama supported those subsidies.
Glory glory hallelujah! Thank you, Senator McCain. Ethanol is a fraud - it not only ends up producing more greenhouse gas than gasoline, it has caused a spike in prices that has had a huge impact on the poor, and especially starving people overseas.
[McCain] Senator Obama, I am not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago.
About time! Why they couldn't think of this for the first debate is beyond me.
[McCain] But it's very clear that I have disagreed with the Bush administration. I have disagreed with leaders of my own party. I've got the scars to prove it.
Whether it be bringing climate change to the floor of the Senate for the first time. Whether it be opposition to spending and earmarks, whether it be the issue of torture, whether it be the conduct of the war in Iraq, which I vigorously opposed. Whether it be on fighting the pharmaceutical companies on Medicare prescription drugs, importation. Whether it be fighting for an HMO patient's bill of rights. Whether it be the establishment of the 9/11 Commission.
I have a long record of reform and fighting through on the floor of the United States Senate.
I wish this were a campaign commercial.
[McCain] Every time there's been an out-of-bounds remark made by a Republican, no matter where they are, I have repudiated them. I hope that Senator Obama will repudiate those remarks that were made by Congressman John Lewis, very unfair and totally inappropriate.
That he has, pissing off lots of conservatives in the process. He inexplicably will not call out the Democrats on many of their outrageous claims. His comments about Lewis were a rare exception.
[Obama] And 100 percent, John, of your ads -- 100 percent of them have been negative.
[McCain] It's not true.
[Obama] It absolutely is true.
No matter how many times you say it, it still isn't true. For a period of one week, almost all of McCain's ads were negative, but he has done positive ads as well. And as part of having more money to spend overall, Obama has outspent McCain on negative ads.
[Obama] But when people suggest that I pal around with terrorists, then we're not talking about issues.
It's a legitimate issue to me. It's less the terrorism forty years ago than the anti-capitalist, black separatist school "reform" you worked with Ayers on, though.
[Obama] Let me tell you who I associate with. On economic policy, I associate with Warren Buffett and former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker. If I'm interested in figuring out my foreign policy, I associate myself with my running mate, Joe Biden or with Dick Lugar, the Republican ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, or General Jim Jones, the former supreme allied commander of NATO.
Those are the people, Democrats and Republicans, who have shaped my ideas and who will be surrounding me in the White House. And I think the fact that this has become such an important part of your campaign, Senator McCain, says more about your campaign than it says about me.
Those aren't really the people "who shaped your ideas", Senator. Why don't you mention the communist Frank Marshall Davis, Saul "The Red" Alinsky, the Marxist professors you sought out in college, or Reverend Wright? Isn't the title of your second book evidence that Wright has indeed "shaped your ideas"?
And what it says about McCain is that he also sees the significance of your anti-capitalist radical worldview and what it means to America if elected.
[Obama] Just yesterday, I was in Toledo shaking some hands in a line. Two women, both of them probably in their mid- to late-50s, had just been laid off of their plant. Neither of them have health insurance.
And they were desperate for some way of getting coverage, because, understandably, they're worried that, if they get sick, they could go bankrupt.
It's called COBRA, Senator. Sometimes I don't think Obama could get a clue if he slathered himself in clue musk and danced naked in a field of horny clues in the middle of clue mating season.
[Obama] If you don't have health insurance, then what we're going to do is to provide you the option of buying into the same kind of federal pool that both Senator McCain and I enjoy as federal employees, which will give you high-quality care, choice of doctors, at lower costs, because so many people are part of this insured group.
Are you going to subsidize this insurance the way it is for Federal employees? Doesn't that throw a wrench in the free market, tempting people to give up private plans and run to the subsidized government plan?
[Obama]We're going to make sure that insurance companies can't discriminate on the basis of pre-existing conditions. We'll negotiate with the drug companies for the cheapest available price on drugs.
We are going to invest in information technology to eliminate bureaucracy and make the system more efficient.
And we are going to make sure that we manage chronic illnesses, like diabetes and heart disease, that cost a huge amount, but could be prevented. We've got to put more money into preventive care.
This will cost some money on the front end, but over the long term this is the only way that not only are we going to make families healthy, but it's also how we're going to save the federal budget, because we can't afford these escalating costs.
We, we, we, Kemosabe? Read his comments carefully. It sounds like a government takeover of healthcare is indeed in the works, no matter how much he denies it now.
[Obama] I exempt small businesses from having to pay into a kitty. But large businesses that can afford it, we've got a choice. Either they provide health insurance to their employees or somebody has to.
Right now, what happens is those employees get dumped into either the Medicaid system, which taxpayers pick up, or they're going to the emergency room for uncompensated care, which everybody picks up in their premiums.
There he goes again, with the "because they can afford it" business.
And he left out a third option, which doesn't surprise me. Democrats often forget about personal responsibility - i.e. responsible people who buy their own health insurance if their employer doesn't offer it.
I could go on. But I'm sure you've had enough for now.
There is value in going back to the written transcript, and thinking about what the candidates were really saying.
[Obama] I want to end the tax breaks for companies that are shipping jobs overseas...
Am I the only one who ever wonders just what tax breaks he's referring to? I've never heard of an outsourcing tax credit or anything else I'd consider a tax break for shipping jobs overseas.
[Obama] What I've said is I want to provide a tax cut for 95 percent of working Americans, 95 percent.
The faulty math in this assertion doesn't say much for Obama's Harvard education, not when almost a third of tax filers pay no income tax at all. You can't cut something that doesn't exist. You can't refund something that hasn't been paid. What Obama will do is increase taxes on the top 5% and use a substantial portion of the proceeds to send checks to people who don't pay any income taxes at all. It's not a tax cut, it's income redistribution. He's playing Robin Hood and trying to obscure it by calling it tax cuts.
[Obama] So, look, nobody likes taxes. I would prefer that none of us had to pay taxes, including myself. But ultimately, we've got to pay for the core investments that make this economy strong and somebody's got to do it.
Newsflash, Senator Government. Government "investments" are not what make the economy strong. American businesses are our economic strength.
[McCain] I oppose subsidies for ethanol because I thought it distorted the market and created inflation; Senator Obama supported those subsidies.
Glory glory hallelujah! Thank you, Senator McCain. Ethanol is a fraud - it not only ends up producing more greenhouse gas than gasoline, it has caused a spike in prices that has had a huge impact on the poor, and especially starving people overseas.
[McCain] Senator Obama, I am not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago.
About time! Why they couldn't think of this for the first debate is beyond me.
[McCain] But it's very clear that I have disagreed with the Bush administration. I have disagreed with leaders of my own party. I've got the scars to prove it.
Whether it be bringing climate change to the floor of the Senate for the first time. Whether it be opposition to spending and earmarks, whether it be the issue of torture, whether it be the conduct of the war in Iraq, which I vigorously opposed. Whether it be on fighting the pharmaceutical companies on Medicare prescription drugs, importation. Whether it be fighting for an HMO patient's bill of rights. Whether it be the establishment of the 9/11 Commission.
I have a long record of reform and fighting through on the floor of the United States Senate.
I wish this were a campaign commercial.
[McCain] Every time there's been an out-of-bounds remark made by a Republican, no matter where they are, I have repudiated them. I hope that Senator Obama will repudiate those remarks that were made by Congressman John Lewis, very unfair and totally inappropriate.
That he has, pissing off lots of conservatives in the process. He inexplicably will not call out the Democrats on many of their outrageous claims. His comments about Lewis were a rare exception.
[Obama] And 100 percent, John, of your ads -- 100 percent of them have been negative.
[McCain] It's not true.
[Obama] It absolutely is true.
No matter how many times you say it, it still isn't true. For a period of one week, almost all of McCain's ads were negative, but he has done positive ads as well. And as part of having more money to spend overall, Obama has outspent McCain on negative ads.
[Obama] But when people suggest that I pal around with terrorists, then we're not talking about issues.
It's a legitimate issue to me. It's less the terrorism forty years ago than the anti-capitalist, black separatist school "reform" you worked with Ayers on, though.
[Obama] Let me tell you who I associate with. On economic policy, I associate with Warren Buffett and former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker. If I'm interested in figuring out my foreign policy, I associate myself with my running mate, Joe Biden or with Dick Lugar, the Republican ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, or General Jim Jones, the former supreme allied commander of NATO.
Those are the people, Democrats and Republicans, who have shaped my ideas and who will be surrounding me in the White House. And I think the fact that this has become such an important part of your campaign, Senator McCain, says more about your campaign than it says about me.
Those aren't really the people "who shaped your ideas", Senator. Why don't you mention the communist Frank Marshall Davis, Saul "The Red" Alinsky, the Marxist professors you sought out in college, or Reverend Wright? Isn't the title of your second book evidence that Wright has indeed "shaped your ideas"?
And what it says about McCain is that he also sees the significance of your anti-capitalist radical worldview and what it means to America if elected.
[Obama] Just yesterday, I was in Toledo shaking some hands in a line. Two women, both of them probably in their mid- to late-50s, had just been laid off of their plant. Neither of them have health insurance.
And they were desperate for some way of getting coverage, because, understandably, they're worried that, if they get sick, they could go bankrupt.
It's called COBRA, Senator. Sometimes I don't think Obama could get a clue if he slathered himself in clue musk and danced naked in a field of horny clues in the middle of clue mating season.
[Obama] If you don't have health insurance, then what we're going to do is to provide you the option of buying into the same kind of federal pool that both Senator McCain and I enjoy as federal employees, which will give you high-quality care, choice of doctors, at lower costs, because so many people are part of this insured group.
Are you going to subsidize this insurance the way it is for Federal employees? Doesn't that throw a wrench in the free market, tempting people to give up private plans and run to the subsidized government plan?
[Obama]We're going to make sure that insurance companies can't discriminate on the basis of pre-existing conditions. We'll negotiate with the drug companies for the cheapest available price on drugs.
We are going to invest in information technology to eliminate bureaucracy and make the system more efficient.
And we are going to make sure that we manage chronic illnesses, like diabetes and heart disease, that cost a huge amount, but could be prevented. We've got to put more money into preventive care.
This will cost some money on the front end, but over the long term this is the only way that not only are we going to make families healthy, but it's also how we're going to save the federal budget, because we can't afford these escalating costs.
We, we, we, Kemosabe? Read his comments carefully. It sounds like a government takeover of healthcare is indeed in the works, no matter how much he denies it now.
[Obama] I exempt small businesses from having to pay into a kitty. But large businesses that can afford it, we've got a choice. Either they provide health insurance to their employees or somebody has to.
Right now, what happens is those employees get dumped into either the Medicaid system, which taxpayers pick up, or they're going to the emergency room for uncompensated care, which everybody picks up in their premiums.
There he goes again, with the "because they can afford it" business.
And he left out a third option, which doesn't surprise me. Democrats often forget about personal responsibility - i.e. responsible people who buy their own health insurance if their employer doesn't offer it.
I could go on. But I'm sure you've had enough for now.
Adding my voice
Up until the election, I hope to provide links and well-reasoned arguments to deter people from voting for Obama. After the election, I may be drinking heavily.
I'll begin with this series at Investor's Business Daily:
The Audacity of Socialism
While there are most certainly hyperbolic elements to these editorials, I think the facts contained bear serious consideration.
I'm perfectly open and forthcoming about who and what shapes my political worldview, and I think Obama has been less than honest. And no wonder.
I'll begin with this series at Investor's Business Daily:
The Audacity of Socialism
While there are most certainly hyperbolic elements to these editorials, I think the facts contained bear serious consideration.
I'm perfectly open and forthcoming about who and what shapes my political worldview, and I think Obama has been less than honest. And no wonder.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
