Gay Patriot Header Image

Dance, Puppets, Dance!

Posted by V the K at 8:17 am - June 27, 2017.
Filed under: Gay PC Silliness

Mindlessly doing the bidding of their Democrat Party Masters, Gay Activists stage a “Queer Dance Party” in front of Mitch McConnell’s house to protest the Senate Republican Health Care Bill that actually expands and protects Obamacare and doesn’t really repeal or replace much of anything. [OK, technically it repeals the Individual Mandate and some of the taxes but leaves the essential structure in place.]

Can you think of forms of protest more stupid than “Queer Dance Parties?” I’m kind of scratching my head over that one.

Also, the NEA is giving $20,000 in taxpayer dollars to finance a musical about a lesbian illegal immigrant. I’m disappointed PDT hasn’t put a stop to this kind of idiotic waste.

Share

18 Comments

  1. Look at all the white people displaying their privilege.

    I didn’t see one Muslim. Funny that.

    Comment by TnnsNe1 — June 27, 2017 @ 8:21 am - June 27, 2017

  2. Stupid forms of protest?
    How about ritual self-emulation. Too incendiary?
    Seppuku. Too messy?

    …Lots of loud screeching, followed by enthusiastic poo-flinging?

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — June 27, 2017 @ 8:35 am - June 27, 2017

  3. the Republican Health Care Bill that actually expands and protects Obamacare and doesn’t repeal or replace anything.

    True in some sense:

    It would make the income limit for receiving subsidies 350 percent of the federal poverty line … … eliminate taxes enacted under the Affordable Care Act to pay for insurance subsidies. Those include taxes on income over $200,000, some investments, prescription medications and indoor tanning … a large tax cut for the wealthy … make subsidies based on age, rather than income, effectively giving a tax break to wealthy older people …

    But, what about these others:

    … would end [“essential benefits” ] requirement [in 2020], allowing states to set their own standards …

    … insurers could impose lifetime caps on non-essential services. For example, if a state waived the rule that plans have to cover prescription drugs, an insurer could choose to not cover expensive cancer drugs on its plans, or impose a cap on the amount it’s willing to spend on drugs per patient …

    … also eliminate[s] the mandate for most employers to provide coverage for full-time employees …

    … would allow insurers to charge seniors up to five times as much, which would lead to much higher premiums for the elderly and likely lower premiums for young people …

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — June 27, 2017 @ 8:38 am - June 27, 2017

  4. CCP, what is wrong with repealing everything about Obamacare, hook, line, and sinker* and then working on ways–ideally at the state level–to help those whom the mostly free market system fails?

    There are two huge problems in my mind with the premise of Obamcare: first is that the federal government is mandating these things (where is that in the Constitution?) and the second is that a cabal of people in Washington can well direct medical plans for an entire population with thousands if not millions of individual situations.

    While there were problems with the old system, it was closer to actuarialy sound and had the virtue of not being forced into a government system.

    *I would allow those already on Medicare to stay there, although no more can be added through the expansion mechanism.

    Comment by TheQuietMan — June 27, 2017 @ 9:08 am - June 27, 2017

  5. Hi TheQuietMan, I was responding to V the K stating that the bill doesn’t repeal/replace anything, only expands/protects. From the way I’m reading it, it’s true and it’s not true. So, I’m asking V the K what he means by that blanket statement. I find it confusing.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — June 27, 2017 @ 9:25 am - June 27, 2017

  6. OK, fine, I was taking some license and have amended the post accordingly. The fact is, the things that are really driving up the cost of health care… the mandates for pre-existing conditions and the vast expansion of bureaucracy… are retained under the Republican bill. The promised Medicaid Cuts are supposed to happen in 10 years… which means they will never happen.

    The Republican bill expands Obamacare by directly subsidizing Big Insurance companies, which is something Republicans protested was illegal under Obamacare.

    Section 106 of the bill creates two separate “stability funds,” one giving payments directly to insurers to “stabilize” state insurance markets, and the second giving money to states to improve their insurance markets or health care systems. The insurer stability fund contains $50 billion—$15 billion for each of calendar years 2018 and 2019, and $10 billion for each of calendar years 2020 and 2021. The fund for state innovation contains $62 billion, covering calendar years 2019 through 2026.

    Comment by V the K — June 27, 2017 @ 9:38 am - June 27, 2017

  7. Thanks, V the K.

    So, if the mandates for pre-existing conditions are cut, what should all of those people do? And the F/T employees currently receiving employer-insurance who will love it? And, the lower middle-class elderly whose health costs will rise? Or the people with expensive diseases, whose coverage will be capped? Or people who live in states which won’t cover their mental health condition? Etc.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — June 27, 2017 @ 9:48 am - June 27, 2017

  8. FWIW: Billionaire Warren Buffett (who will always have his own private health care services) is on-board with a Government-Run, VA-style single payer system. As we have seen with the preliminary estimates of California’s proposed Single Payer system, the cost would be double the state’s entire annual expenditures.

    Ask a leftist, if we must have a minimum wage law, does it not follow that there should be a ‘Maximum Wealth’ law? Why should any individual or family be allowed to have more than a billion or so in wealth, when that money could be used for the ‘Common Good?’ We could begin by confiscating the excess wealth of Warren Buffett, Mark Cuban, Bill Gates, David Geffen, and Tom Steyer to help pay for all the leftist social good advocated by those multi-billionaires.

    Wasn’t it Barack Obama who said, “At some point, I think you’ve made enough money.” I wonder if he said that while cruising the South Pacific on David Geffen’s Ultra-Yacht.

    Comment by V the K — June 27, 2017 @ 9:50 am - June 27, 2017

  9. I’d entertain debating a ‘Maximum Wealth’ law. I haven’t thought about all the ethical elements and the infringement on “individual rights.” However, after a billion or two, it does seem like a ridiculous amount of money. But, whatever. I doubt Buffet and Co. would ever propose such a thing. But, their networths are pretty “gross,” to turn a German term on its head (haha).

    Anyway, I’m more interested in what you think about #7 questions.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — June 27, 2017 @ 9:58 am - June 27, 2017

  10. Maine used to have (before ACA) a rather fair system regarding pre-existing and lifetime caps. If you did not have more than a 3 month lapse of insurance in the last 18 months, you could not be turned down for a pre-existing condition and the policy you enrolled into could not have a lifetime cap.

    In 2007, when my employer agreed to cover 100% of the cost of health insurance for my husband and I, then my DP, our policy cost was $684 per month with a $1,000/$2000 deductible (lots of preventative procedures were covered). No lifetime cap. Fast forward – Our 2017 cost is $1,144 per month with a $4,600/$6,200 deductible.

    Cost has just about doubled. Deductible has more than quadrupled. But at least now we have OB/GYN coverage, drug treatment coverage and a slew of other covered services.procedures that we will never need.

    One thing that always seems to be missing from these federal mandates is allowing companies to sell policies across state lines. Anyone know why? Multi state corporations get them. Multi state unions get them. Why not everyone else?

    Doesn’t it make sense to have several nationwide risk pools instead of 400 risk pools based on nothing other than geographic location?

    Comment by TnnsNe1 — June 27, 2017 @ 10:05 am - June 27, 2017

  11. “And, the lower middle-class elderly whose health costs will rise?”

    You are confusing health care costs with insurance costs. As we can see since the ACA was implemented, government mandated insurance has made health care costs rise not decrease.

    “And the F/T employees currently receiving employer-insurance who will love (sic) it?”

    In the days of full employment, any employer who doesn’t offer a plan will find it very difficult to find employees.

    Comment by TnnsNe1 — June 27, 2017 @ 10:10 am - June 27, 2017

  12. Thanks for that, TnnsNe1.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — June 27, 2017 @ 10:13 am - June 27, 2017

  13. @ 6 The difference is that the current subsidies are not covered under Obamacare and were the previous admin’s papering over the hole. The current bill (which I oppose) fills that hole.

    @ 10 I don’t know why for certain. I do know when I worked insurance the big thing about company plans ‘across state lines’ was that the laws applied (normally) to the state the policy was issued. This led to things such as policies issued in FL required massage therapy to be covered, but if your policy was written in CT and you lived in FL, then it wasn’t required to pay for it. Some states (the people’s republic of California) got around that by legislating that the plans had to cover in or out of state. I assume if individual policies were sold across state lines, certain states (oh, Hi California) likely would see fewer policy options sold there,

    Comment by The_Livewire — June 27, 2017 @ 10:35 am - June 27, 2017

  14. The health care debate loses me because I frankly don’t see what business the Government has telling anyone what their insurance plan must cover.

    Comment by V the K — June 27, 2017 @ 12:06 pm - June 27, 2017

  15. Interesting article in NRO today on the whole gay pride thing.
    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/449006/gay-pride-movement-parades-marriage-corporations-left-progressive-movement-identity

    Comment by John F in Indy — June 27, 2017 @ 12:08 pm - June 27, 2017

  16. Why does the gay community need to protest for health-care? Do gay people need special heath care that straight people dont?

    Gay man: “doc, I just don’t feel as flamboyant as I used to.”

    Doctor: “take two mimosas and rub some glitter on any drab spots and if by morning you don’t feel like dancing in the street wearing nothing but a banana hammock, we’ll admit you overnight for a Babs movie marathon.”

    Comment by J- — June 27, 2017 @ 12:30 pm - June 27, 2017

  17. So, they way to change people’s minds and hearts is to act obnoxiously in front of them.

    Got it.

    Comment by Craig Smith — June 27, 2017 @ 2:14 pm - June 27, 2017

  18. VtK, what we have now is no longer insurance.

    Insurance — any insurance, be it home, life, health, car, liability — is a financial shock absorber, nothing more. You should expect to pay more to the insurance company in premiums that you receive in benefits. Otherwise, the insurance company loses money and eventually goes out of business.

    What we have now is a government mandated social program, where everyone is charged for coverage that only a few can benefit, such as gender-reassignment surgery and maintenance, pre-natal care, etc.

    And yes, I am all for not funding viagra for men. It’s not medically necessary.

    Comment by Craig Smith — June 27, 2017 @ 2:20 pm - June 27, 2017

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.