Gay Patriot Header Image

The Orwellian Universe of Mr. Obama

In a previous post, I linked Mickey Kaus’s observation, “If an ‘astroturfing’ campaign gets real people to show up at events stating their real views, isn’t it … community organizing?”  Now that conservatives are organizing communities of concerned citizens in much the same manner Barack Obama did when once a recent transplant to the Windy City, well, the Democrats (and their allies in the MSM) just can’t fathom the notion of their ideological adversaries expressing their grievances in much as they have done for the better part of the last eight years.

“The activist Left,” as Michlle Malkin puts it, “can’t stand competition.”  It’s as if one may only legitimately agitate against Republicans, “corporate interests,” the military, Western nations and the allies and defenders of said groups.  And the object of their protest must be the end to a robust US defense policy and an increase in the size and scope of government at all levels, with appropriate tax increases on productive individuals coupled with a concomitant redistribution of wealth to favored classes and ideologies.

When the President “summons his army” to fight for his proposed health care reform, this is a legitimate, “grassroots” expression of popular will, but when citizens (some working with conservative groups) send out e-mails to their fellows urging them to rally in public against that health care reform, that is astroturf, ginned up by corporate special interests.

The man, who tells us he’s trying to “break pattern in Washington where everybody is always looking for somebody else to blame,” constantly blaming his predecessor (and that predecessor’s political party) for the wrongs he must clean up.  (Indeed, in the same speech that he contends, “All we do is just then bicker and point fingers,” he points fingers.)  The man who claims he seeks a bipartisan approach to policy-making, listening to all sides, tells the other side to shut up.

But, that’s contradictory statements show Obama only warming up his Orwellian approach. It’s when he tries to say his policies have prevented an even higher deficit that he uses words to mean their exact opposite, attempting to change reality with his rhetoric:

So now you’ve got folks on the other side of the aisle pointing at the federal budget and somehow trying to put that at our feet. Well, let’s look at the history. When I walked in, we had a $1.3 trillion deficit. That was gift-wrapped and waiting for me when I walked in the Oval Office. (Laughter.) Without my policies we’d have an even higher deficit going forward. The one exception is the recovery package that we had to do in order to get this economy moving again. (Applause.)

Um, Mr. President, when you walked into the Oval Office, you had just left the United States Senate where you voted for the $700 billion dollar TARP bailout which helped the deficit reach that level.  For the two years prior to your executive service, you were a member of the majority party in the United States Congress which according to the Constitution (with which you, a former Constitutional Law Professor, are supposedly expert) has the power of the purse.  Said party voted to increase federal outlays at a faster rate than did the preceding spendthrift Republican Congress.

And then you say that without your policies, “we’d have an even higher deficit” when accounting for that so-called “stimulus” and the vast increases in federal spending you proposed in your budget.  Not to mention the cost to the taxpayers of your health care overhaul.

Mr. President, do you believe that by the magic of your rhetoric, the power of your prose, you can change reality?

(H/t for excerpts for Obama speech:  Pundit & Pundette.)

Share

56 Comments

  1. You’ve been reported as a thought criminal via Flag@Whitehouse.gov.

    Have a Nice Day! :D

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — August 9, 2009 @ 5:27 am - August 9, 2009

  2. He doesn’t believe he can change reality. He believes we haven’t been paying attention. Sadly, in many cases, he’s right.

    Comment by Fescue — August 9, 2009 @ 8:08 am - August 9, 2009

  3. Whatever happened to “I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you’re not patriotic. We need to stand up and say we’re Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration.”

    (I love throwing that one back in the fat smug faces of the left.)

    Comment by V the K — August 9, 2009 @ 8:27 am - August 9, 2009

  4. #3 you don’t think for a second that these repub lynch mobs (Re Todd Atkin’s word not mine) going to these town halls actually want to debate anything do you?
    Of course not, they want to go yell, make insane charges (death panel), get on TV and disrupt the meeting.

    I would say anyone can debate. But acting like a lynch mob is not debateing. Hell, even GPW has requested that you guys tone it down…

    [Don’t be selective in quoting me, gillie, I have also said you should tone it down. –Dan]

    So feel free, come to meetings with ideas on how to reform our broken health care system.
    Or even announce them here, I would be interested.
    But don’t yell and scream and act like primates.

    Comment by gillie — August 9, 2009 @ 9:29 am - August 9, 2009

  5. the Democrats (and their allies in the MSM) just can’t fathom the notion of their ideological adversaries expressing their grievances in much as they have done for the better part of the last eight years.

    Oh, they can fathom it. They know enough to be scared sh*tless of it. They understand it 100% and are practicing basic smear tactics to try and neutralize it.

    A propos of both the Orwell theme here and Bruce’s ‘fishy’ letter to the White House, here is my letter to the White House – which I sent to flag@whitehouse.gov:

    This is to report some “fishy” “disinformation” being spread about health care. I’ve been telling people the truth, namely:

    – Government is the cause of our health care becoming so expensive, these last several decades.
    – To make health care affordable again for all Americans, we must do the exact opposite of what President Obama proposes, eliminating all government programs and interference in the health care sector.
    – President Obama’s plans will cost far more than he is telling, and will bankrupt a nation that is already straining under his unprecedented $1.8 trillion deficits.
    – President Obama’s earlier (pre-2009) speeches reveal his ultimate wishes for health care, which is government takeover and rationing.
    – Belief in the salvific power of Big Government is the heart of fascism, and President Obama and his supporters show so much of it that it’s creepy.

    I say all that as a citizen concerned about the terrible course on which President Obama has set this country. With your call for concerned citizens to be reported who spread such “fishy” “disinformation” (i.e., truth), you have proven me correct on my last point above. In your sick minds, I would be a “fishy” citizen who should be added to your list of citizens who should be monitored. So add me. Sincerely,

    Feel free to modify and re-use, everyone!

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 10:00 am - August 9, 2009

  6. “eliminating all government programs and interference in the health care sector”

    This is the right’s solution? So hospitals could turn away the unhealthy who can’t pay? Medicare is gone?
    If you make health insurance totally private, they will simply uninsure the sick and only insure the healthy. Since insurance is based on employment, if you don’t have a job, you better not have a heart attack because they will throw you out the door!

    So the right complains about a “Death Panel” but then their solution is death to the poor, health care for the people with jobs only.

    Its now obvious to me why the conservatives repubs are not offering solutions to our broken health care system, they have no ideas.

    Comment by gillie — August 9, 2009 @ 10:57 am - August 9, 2009

  7. This is the right’s solution? So hospitals could turn away the unhealthy who can’t pay? Medicare is gone?

    Correct.

    In reality, of course, hospitals wouldn’t turn anyone away – And you have just implicitly admitted that they already don’t; i.e., you have just implicitly admitted that even without any of your Dear Leader’s “reforms”, no American is turned away from hospital care. Thank you.

    As for Medicare, it is THE PRIME CAUSE of the astronomical rise in health care costs these last several decades. Abolishing it would be an enormous leap forward in restoring market forces in health care and hence, making it extremely affordable once again.

    If you make health insurance totally private, they will simply uninsure the sick and only insure the healthy

    That is completely and totally dubmass comment. gillie, you obviously have NO understanding of markets whatever. If we had free markets in health care – which we do NOT – there would be reasonable policies even for the sickest people, that they could afford or not, at their own choice.

    DUMBASS. Sorry, but I had to say it. One part of my job on this Earth is to tell it like it is.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 11:09 am - August 9, 2009

  8. Oh, and P.S. – For the fiftieth time, I am not a conservative. I was a Democrat for over 15 years, before common sense started sinking in; now I am an Independent. I am too much of a social libertarian and radical-for-capitalism for the taste of many conservatives.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 11:10 am - August 9, 2009

  9. P.P.S. On the off-chance that you would like to acquire some rudimentary, elemental understanding of markets and economics, gillie, Amazon has a book for you:
    http://www.amazon.com/Economics-One-Lesson-Shortest-Understand/dp/0517548232

    It is not hard to read. But if you prefer cartoon books, gillie, here is an even easier book on rudimentary economics:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGQKXvX9ei8

    You will like the cartoons. But you must be sure to go on to read parts 2 and 3.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 11:15 am - August 9, 2009

  10. “there would be reasonable policies even for the sickest people, that they could afford or not, at their own choice.”
    So if you are in construction, break your back, can’t work, can’t pay your bills you think the for profit insurance company is going to keep paying the bill, or at the very least do everything possible to deny claims? Or if you make minimum wage, have a medical problem and your premiums are higher than your weekly take home, you think someone is going to insure that person? Or you have 3 kids, daycare is too expensive so one person stays home with the other working – the premiums are so expensive and the family has to choose between insurance or food/shelter.

    You are either naïve or just closing your eyes to the realties of the world we live in. Either way its obvious you put no thought into this.

    (further I see you completely dodged the issue of how seniors get insurance – I don’t blame you!)

    Comment by gillie — August 9, 2009 @ 11:40 am - August 9, 2009

  11. ILC Not to pile on here but the “heart of fascism” is not the desire for “Big Government.” Its fanatical nationalism. Without fanatical nationalism there can be no fascism. Desire for government programs can be lots of other types of gov systems, but without the nationalistic elements, their can be no fascism.

    The above is pretty much undeniable – Unless of course you are simply trying make up new definitions for established English words!

    Comment by gillie — August 9, 2009 @ 11:41 am - August 9, 2009

  12. 2006: “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.”
    2009: “Shutting the Hell Up is the highest form of patriotism.”

    Comment by V the K — August 9, 2009 @ 11:46 am - August 9, 2009

  13. *yawn* source, gillie?

    “But don’t yell and scream and act like primates liberals.”
    Fixed.

    Comment by The_Livewire — August 9, 2009 @ 11:49 am - August 9, 2009

  14. the “heart of fascism” is not the desire for “Big Government.” Its fanatical nationalism

    No, you’re wrong. The heart of fascism is: worship of State power. Worship of the State. I mean, Hitler literally wanted to make Nazism a formal religious replacement for Christianity, in Germany.

    Now, in America, making a formal religion of your Dear Leader won’t fly – yet. But we have had these people who have made quasi-religious posters of the Dear Leader as a “lightworker” or what have you. That is fascism. That is the fascist impulse. And your own views, gillie, in seeing Big Government as the thing that is going to save us and as the answer to everything, is also an expression of the fascist impulse.

    Fascism is a phenomenon of the Left and underlies much of liberalism. Amazon has a book on that for you too, gillie:
    http://www.amazon.com/Liberal-Fascism-American-Mussolini-Politics/dp/0385511841

    Nationalism is a secondary element of fascism. Worship of the State as the answer to everything, is the primary element. Nationalism distinguishes fascism from communism, which officially claimed to be internationalist (though in practice it never was). But worship of State power is fundamental to both, showing how much they are in fact alike, or minor variations of the same thing.

    So if you are in construction, break your back, can’t work, can’t pay your bills you think the for profit insurance company is going to keep paying the bill, or at the very least do everything possible to deny claims?

    Of course, gillie. It is called, INSURANCE. If you buy the policy before the damage, the insurance company has promised to cover you and, in a free market situation where it is allowed to devise reasonable policies and charge you appropriately for them, it will. That’s what insurance is. That’s how insurance works.

    I see you completely dodged the issue of how seniors get insurance

    Not at all. Here is what I said about it, gillie:

    If we had free markets in health care – which we do NOT – there would be reasonable policies even for the sickest people, that they could afford or not, at their own choice.

    You simply chose not to comprehend my point. DUMBASS.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 11:54 am - August 9, 2009

  15. “…but when citizens (some working with conservative groups) send out e-mails to their fellows urging them to rally in public against that health care reform, that is astroturf, ginned up by corporate special interests.”

    Not necessarily. Not by definition.
    But if it actually does come about through the efforts of national organizations (headed by discredited, corrupt players), then yes, it is astroturf ginned up by special interests.

    “…constantly blaming his predecessor (and that predecessor’s political party) for the wrongs he must clean up.”

    The problem he identified is the situation where people try to blame others for THEIR OWN SINS, or for situations that they are responsible for creating.
    You are not seriously trying to argue that the recession, that started in late 2007 is Obama’s fault, are you? Of the melt-down of the financial system that began four months before his inauguration – you dont think he is responsible for that, do you?

    Sorry, but it is simply a FACT that there was an enormous mess left on his desk on the morning of Jan. 21. It is blatantly true that these are problems that he is forced to clean up, though caused by others. Unfortunatly, it is necessary for him to make this point because utterly dishonest Republicans try to pretend that, since he is now president, they are utterly blameless for anything.

    [Um, where do Republicans say we are blameless? As to that “mess on his desk,” well, didn’t he use that mess as a means to win election. “Effectively, he said I want to clean up that mess. You should elect me to clean it up because I’m uniquely qualified to do so.” And now, at least as to the deficit mentioned above, he’s made it worse, much worse, while claiming he’s made it better. –Dan]

    I think you are really disrespecting Orwell’s memory with this hack job.

    Comment by Tano — August 9, 2009 @ 11:57 am - August 9, 2009

  16. P.S. The sickest people would also be helped by charity – something that conservatives are great at, that I believe in strongly, and that will become ever more affordable and practical as medical costs drop like a rock, once Medicare is abolished and free markets in health care are restored.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 11:58 am - August 9, 2009

  17. Some Economics 101 on Medicare and Medicaid. They have driven up medical costs in two huge ways:

    - Medicare and Medicaid are subsidies. Subsidies cause over-consumption, driving up prices. That’s well-known, to economists. They tell you in Econ 101 (or they should have).

    - Medicare and Medicaid are price controls. That is, through the construction and administration of the programs, the government blocks the operation of market price mechanisms. Over time, that prevents an industry from evolving and improving. It forces stagnation. Think of it like a process of calcification, or hardening of the arteries.

    Now gillie’s Dear Teleprompter proposes more of both, as the “solution” to the problems created by these earlier “solutions”. That is the method of the Left: First administer poison as food, then tell people that more poison is the only antidote. Nucking futs!

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 12:15 pm - August 9, 2009

  18. #14 ILC –
    “Nationalism is a secondary element of fascism “
    WTF, Fanatical nationalism = Fascism. Done. This is established.
    Do you think Hitler got into power because he promised state control of the economy? No. Lots of his political opponents were promising the same economic policies of Hitler. What set him apart is he used extreme jingoism and formatted hatred and fear based on nationalistic tendencies. That is how he acheived “love of the state” (but its not love of state but love of the homeland)

    God. What is with the right wing’s desire to simply make things up?!??!?!?!

    Further:
    Two proofs that you are simply not credible when it comes to the health care debate:
    You think a for profit company is going to insure an 80 year old person with no job.
    You suggest that charity is a viable option for people with no means to get health care.

    Geez…
    Why can’t you just admit that you are wrong and in some cases there is no free market solution? Its an obvious truth. Yet you just can’t pull your head out of your ideological clouds and look at the real world.

    Comment by gillie — August 9, 2009 @ 12:19 pm - August 9, 2009

  19. By the way:
    RE your “dumbass” namecalling. I would say “I am rubber you are glue what you say to me bounces back on you”

    Comment by giillie — August 9, 2009 @ 12:21 pm - August 9, 2009

  20. “But don’t yell and scream and act like primates liberals.”

    Technically, humans *are* primates.

    The left’s grasp of taxonomy is as tight as their grasp of basic economics or thermodynamics.

    Question for Tardo: A. What political party controlled the House and Senate that produced the budgets in 2007, 2008, and 2009? B. What happened to deficits in the budgets produced by the Congress in those years?

    Comment by V the K — August 9, 2009 @ 12:22 pm - August 9, 2009

  21. ILC –
    RE your childish name calling:

    I am rubber you are glue, what you say bounces back on you

    Comment by gillie — August 9, 2009 @ 12:22 pm - August 9, 2009

  22. I need to correct something:

    Fascism is a phenomenon of the Left and underlies much of *left*-liberalism

    I usually remember to type “left-liberalism”, when I mean “left-liberalism”. True liberalism – or classical liberalism, the belief in individual liberty – was the ideology of our Founding Fathers, is my ideology, and is the mortal enemy of fascism – the thing that all stripes of totalitarians most hate and want to destroy.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 12:23 pm - August 9, 2009

  23. ILC -
    RE your childish name calling:

    I am rubber you are glue, what you say bounces back on you

    And, you have now just called me a name, “childish”. In a post pretending to be better than me, you practice the worst of what you accuse me of. DUMBASS. LOL :-)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 12:25 pm - August 9, 2009

  24. no.
    I called your actions childish
    Which it in fact IS.
    Right?
    You seem to have a complete inability to never admidt you are wrong?
    Why is that?

    Comment by gill44mn — August 9, 2009 @ 12:28 pm - August 9, 2009

  25. As for my previous question, do non-dumbasses have an opinion as to whether Tardo will…

    A. Answer my questions honestly.
    B. Evade a direct answer and blame Bush for the deficit spending Obama and Democrats voted for.
    C. Lie outright
    D. Ignore them, as he usually does when awkward questions are posed.

    Takin’ all bets!

    Comment by V the K — August 9, 2009 @ 12:29 pm - August 9, 2009

  26. no
    I called your actions childish
    big difference doncha think?
    which IS another obvious fact you seem to miss.

    hmmm…a pattern?

    Comment by gillie — August 9, 2009 @ 12:30 pm - August 9, 2009

  27. And now you’re so upset and bent out of shape, gillie, that you’re even posting incoherent-but-nearly-identical comments from 2 separate accounts.

    DUMBASS.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 12:46 pm - August 9, 2009

  28. I called your actions childish
    big difference doncha think?

    Nope. I very obviously don’t think that.

    DUMBASS.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 12:47 pm - August 9, 2009

  29. Do you think Hitler got into power because he promised state control of the economy? No.

    Oh, yes! Yes he did!

    He called is program National Socialism, gillie. His leading theoretician told people, “Basically, National Socialism is no different from Marxism.” I repeat: Hitler called it National *****SOCIALISM*****.

    DUMBASS.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 12:50 pm - August 9, 2009

  30. Typo, sorry, “he called *his* program National Socialism”.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 12:51 pm - August 9, 2009

  31. You think a for profit company is going to insure an 80 year old person with no job.
    You suggest that charity is a viable option for people with no means to get health care.

    As I said:

    1) If Medicare and Medicaid were abolished, medical costs in this country would drop like a rock.

    2) In a free market, there is always someone will to provide a good or service that somebody else is willing and able to pay for. That is the nature and essence of free markets. Only when free markets are interfered with, by GOVERNMENT, do they fail.

    3) In a free market, insurance companies would have every incentive to keep their customers happy – i.e., to offer useful products and services, to honor their contracts, etc. It is only in a GOVERNMENT-REGULATED market, with its high regulatory barriers-to-entry, that companies operate under warped incentives, becoming decrepit and immoral and yet somehow never going out of business like they should.

    “Regulatory barriers-to-entry” – Big concept, I know – Consider it another one of those Econ 101 things you are missing out on, gillie.

    4) If all else fails, with medical costs having dropped like a rock at point (1), charity will easily cover it.

    DUMBASS.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 1:01 pm - August 9, 2009

  32. P.S. And not only charity, but one or more of the following, whichever may apply: friends, family, personal savings, and churches.

    DUMBASS.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 1:02 pm - August 9, 2009

  33. I just had an insight.

    I’ve listed six ways anyone who is in trouble would be able to get their medical costs covered, in a free market: Good insurance at reasonable rates, charity, friends, family, personal savings, and churches.

    Meanwhile, gillie, like all fascists, proposes to “solve” the problem (actually worsening it – driving medical costs to the moon) by government force. Government is force.

    My insight is this: gillie wants to FORCE other people to take care of him. He doesn’t want to fund his own medical care. And he doesn’t want to have to be good enough to other people, e.g. his family, that they would spontaneously WANT to help him.

    gillie, let me toss a wild guess out there: you’re not on great terms with your family?

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 1:07 pm - August 9, 2009

  34. I for one would appreciate enforcement of community standards, if indeed there are any. Thanks.

    Comment by Ignatius — August 9, 2009 @ 1:12 pm - August 9, 2009

  35. Iggy, gillie has worked very very hard to earn the title of DUMBASS. How dare you take it away from him!

    Comment by V the K — August 9, 2009 @ 1:16 pm - August 9, 2009

  36. For the record, I believe I am following community standards. That is, I believe Bruce recently approved use of the term DUMBASS for two commentors, torrentprime and gillie.

    If I misunderstood or am otherwise mistaken, my intent certainly is to comply 100% with whatever the community standards are.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 1:18 pm - August 9, 2009

  37. If gillie can live up to community standard by posting cogent, rational arguments for his stated positions instead of spouting nonsense leftist talking points and insulting his betters … we will revoke his title of DUMBASS. Agreed?

    Comment by V the K — August 9, 2009 @ 1:23 pm - August 9, 2009

  38. I for one would appreciate enforcement of community standards

    Except of course, Iggy, on occasions when it has been you violating them. ;-)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 1:25 pm - August 9, 2009

  39. V: Yes. Agreed. Just like I would turn around and support Obama 100% if, say, he implemented a balanced budget and a hard currency standard. I mean it. I absolutely would. But he will never be testing me on it.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 1:26 pm - August 9, 2009

  40. I just consulted GPW on the DUMBASS question. GPW, with your forgiveness, here is an excerpt from your remarks:

    [...]

    First of all, I do think you went too far and shouldn’t call him names. Second, he does ask for it, so I sympathize with you. Had I had as much coffee today as I did yesterday, I might have not been restrained as I have.

    Try to refrain from such language in the future and realize that he makes himself look foolish by his childish antics…

    I will take that to heart going-forward. That is, I will omit DUMBASS, however appropriate it may be morally or semantically, from my future remarks to gillie.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 1:36 pm - August 9, 2009

  41. I would turn around and support Obama 100% if, say, he implemented a balanced budget and a hard currency standard.

    Reading that, it just occurred to me, I’m a reverse concern troll.

    I was a self-described Bush-Hater. I opposed 75% of his policies… Amnesty, spending, Harriet Miers. And I wanted to punch him in the face for the imprisonment of Ramos and Compean.

    But after six months of Obama, Shrub is looking pretty good. Those $200 Billion deficits look like chicken feed. And I didn’t have to put up with these bullshit “Beer Summit” PR gimmicks, either.

    Comment by V the K — August 9, 2009 @ 1:41 pm - August 9, 2009

  42. V, I’m not sure what “reverse concern troll” is. But yeah, I disagreed with most of what Bush did domestically… and I would take Bush’s $100 to $400B deficits over the Dear Teleprompter’s $1800B deficits, any day.

    The problem with Bush was, he was a Republican so there was no effective “conservative alternative”. (He had conservative opposition on many things, but the American public viewed it as party infighting, rather than as a fundamental alternative available at the polling booth.)

    In that regard, the Dear Teleprompter has brought me hope. He has adopted and intensified all of Bush’s worst domestic policies. And, he has a “D” after his name. So, hopefully and God willing, come 2012 there will be a liberty-loving, conservative, “fundamental alternative” to Obama at the polling booth, that a saddened and wiser nation will go for.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 1:54 pm - August 9, 2009

  43. It looks like a “concern troll” is this:
    http://trollcats.com/2009/08/concern-troll-trollcat/

    Is a “reverse concern troll” this?
    http://trollcats.com/2009/06/reverse-troll-trollcat-attacking-troll-trollcat/

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 1:58 pm - August 9, 2009

  44. You think a for profit company is going to insure an 80 year old person with no job.

    Why wouldn’t they, gillie?

    After all, you leftists claim you can run Medicare with a 2% total overhead cost. Senior citizens must be the cheapest people around to ensure — unless, of course, you’re lying about Medicare’s costs and just hiding the money elsewhere in the Federal budget.

    Meanwhile, let’s once again show what the Obama Party’s plan for the elderly and those with serious diseases is:

    One patient in Oregon got a letter that made this all too clear, when in the same letter rejecting her request for life-extending chemotherapy, Oregon offered her “physician-aid-in-dying”.

    Oh, and what saved her life? Private industry, which got her her medication at reduced cost. Not the Obama Party. Obama wanted her off the books and he wanted her dead.

    The reason why is pretty obvious as well; gillie and the rest of the leftists who post here often talk about how they hope old people die off because older people tend to vote more conservatively. Leftists like gillie and Tano are banking on that happening, so it should be no surprise that they favor assisted suicide for the elderly and those with serious diseases; they think it will shift the electorate in their favor.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — August 9, 2009 @ 8:01 pm - August 9, 2009

  45. (sits on hands, chuckling)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 9, 2009 @ 8:04 pm - August 9, 2009

  46. Amazingly, at least for gillie, private enterprise is working to balance honouring their commitments and maintaining costs through such things as Retiree Heath Access plans as insurance companies prefer to insure larger groups to defray costs. People in the Obama administration think it’s better to let them die.

    But hey, encouraging doctors to help people plan to die is just fine with them…

    Comment by The_Livewire — August 9, 2009 @ 9:34 pm - August 9, 2009

  47. Your discourse is incredibly insightful. I am a 52-yr old, “straight” mom, and am so glad to have found this site. And for the sake of any “liberals” who monitor your site, let me add that I am a deeply faithful Christian who believes in the value of every human being regardless of sex, race, creed, nationality, or sexual orientation. We need a book called, “The Arrogance of Academia”…I am not an academic, but please will one of you scholarly ones please tackle this subject? Peace to all….

    Comment by TampaGoalieMom — August 10, 2009 @ 7:28 am - August 10, 2009

  48. @V the K: 12.2006: “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.”
    2009: “Shutting the Hell Up is the highest form of patriotism.”

    That’s the kind of change O. intended to bring all along, from; vilifying conservatives is your patriotic duty, to … shut the hell up, do what you’re told, or you’re a racist Nazi-sympathizer (and we’re keepin’ a list of youse).

    Only, it’s NOT change, it’s STILL: Vilify Conservatives. Same old song and dance.

    Comment by DoorHold — August 10, 2009 @ 11:13 am - August 10, 2009

  49. Howdy, TampaGoalieMome. I’m in Lakeland. Good to see you here.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — August 10, 2009 @ 12:48 pm - August 10, 2009

  50. Follow-up on DUMBASS. I consulted Bruce as well, and he indicated that my understanding of the GP community standards was more or less correct.

    That leaves me with a decision. As included in my previous pledge to GPW, I definitely will omit to give gillie his DUMBASS title in GPW’s future threads, no matter how justified it is. But when the thread is governed by Bruce, the door may be open (in terms of GP community standards) to letting gillie have his DUMBASS title. Just thinking out loud. Hmm.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 10, 2009 @ 2:08 pm - August 10, 2009

  51. “Vilify Conservatives. Same old song and dance.”

    Oh door, you’ve come close to breaking my heart, I cannot stop my tears for the poor conservative always being picked on. It’s called reaping what you have sown. Conservatives have been pouring bile on their “enemies” for decades now and when they get a little back it’s the end of the world. You asked for it, deal with it.

    Comment by a different Dave — August 10, 2009 @ 3:17 pm - August 10, 2009

  52. [you conservatives] reaping what you have sown.

    No, ADD; but in a few more years, you left-liberals will be. You already are, in fact. (Seen Obama’s plummeting poll numbers lately? The town hall protests are just the beginning.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 10, 2009 @ 3:56 pm - August 10, 2009

  53. P.S. ADD, you’ve reminded me why I usually ignore you. When I saw the byline I thought, “Oh I haven’t read him in a long time. Let’s see how he’s doing.” And it wasn’t worth it.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 10, 2009 @ 4:40 pm - August 10, 2009

  54. #51 – “Conservatives have been pouring bile on their “enemies” for decades now.”

    Cite specific examples; otherwise I call BS.

    As I usually do with your posts.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — August 10, 2009 @ 7:55 pm - August 10, 2009

  55. No matter what you hear about the “reform”, there will always be people who abuse the system e.g. Workers’ Compensation, Third Party Motor Accident Insurance. Genuinely injured people usually end up getting a raw deal whilst the cheats manage to get away with large amounts of money.

    I bring this up because this forms a part of out of hand medical costs, and in your country it is more the propensity to litigate on the slightest thing that has seen medical costs start to skyrocket with decisions being made that might not always be the best option (Please bear with me as I try to make the point).

    I have had first hand experience with the changes of legislation in Australia relating to both motor accident third party insurance and workers’ compensation. In New Zealand the patient gets covered for life and in my daughter in law’s case that is good because it means that she can get her new prosthetic leg for free but she has to go back to New Zealand to get her prothesis. In Australia you used to be able to sue the other party and then they brought in no fault compensation which was abused by the cheats, then they limited the payout and then they started spying on everyone as though all are cheating the system.

    We are supposed to be assured of having a safe working environment and it used to be that you could still sue the employer for pain due to the injury etc. etc. However, they changed the legislation so that genuinely injured people had to fight to get compensation in the form of medical treatment.

    When bureaucrats take over they will do everything to either not accept a claim of injury in the first place or attempt to cut short on payments for medical etc. such that they leave the patient in the lurch and yes that was my experience with the system.

    Your Obamacare has the potential of being a bureaucratic nightmare in a similar vein with the bureaucrats making medical and other decisions based upon reports where they will pounce upon words so that they do not have to continue to cover a person’s treatment.

    There are good reasons to consider what is being proposed as something that should not be implemented.

    Comment by thestraightaussie — August 11, 2009 @ 5:27 am - August 11, 2009

  56. When bureaucrats take over

    That’s just it. What makes a bureaucrat ‘a bureaucrat’? When they have confidence that they wield government force, and you don’t; that you are beholden to them, and not they to you.

    What confuses people is when that kind of dynamic creeps into enterprises that are supposedly private, for-profit, ‘there’ to serve and delight customers. Private companies become bureaucratic when the government regulates their industry, making it difficult and expensive to create new companies. People don’t realize it, but that is what government regulations do – and why lazy rich people so often support government regulations: they serve to block new competition. They make it harder and harder for new competitors to appear; therefore, harder and harder for old competitors to fail. When a company must virtually go lunatic before it can fail, it has the backing of government force… and its bureaucrats become as lazy and dysfunctional as government’s. And that is the situation we are in today, in the U.S. The Obamacrats have discovered the secret to nationalizing the whole economy: they don’t have to nationalize directly, rather, they simply guarantee that companies which are their “friends” have the full backing of the government and cannot possibly go out of business, no matter how corrupt or dysfunctional those companies may be.

    I am thinking here especially of General Motors and Goldman-Sachs.

    Government “help” and bailouts aren’t capitalism; they destroy capitalism.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 11, 2009 @ 11:32 am - August 11, 2009

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.