Ace found this video of progressive leftists leftsplaining why they hate conservative speakers and how all white supremacists support Trump. It’s about as coherent (and with as many f-words) as you would expect.
Do we all agree that, notwithstanding his penchant for distant murder-by-disembodied-aerial-vehicle, not-as-surgical-as-you’d-wish-it-were, drone strikes (what I like to call a “passive-aggressive” military policy), the president’s favored foreign policy is a preference for ‘soft power’? Which is to say, don’t you think the Obama Administration’s approach to the world is to rely more on influence than on coercion? I think he (and Secretary of State John Kerry too) would say so himself. He’d much prefer (well, either of them would, I suppose) to rely on what he considers (ahem) his extraordinarily outsized powers of charm and persuasion to win over other heads of state, rather than the inelegant and clumsy use of force to dictate his way when it comes to what other countries do.
Contrast that with his approach to the issues with America’s healthcare system.
Although I disagree with the premise (a topic for another post altogether), President Obama and the Leftist technocrats with whom he finds common cause believe in the scheme of health “insurance” and feel the third-party payment system is good because healthcare (which for some reason they feel is synonymous with health insurance) is “different” and thus not to be entrusted to market forces…then again, the things in life that should be influenced by market forces is pretty limited anyway.
Anyway. From their perspective, the answer has always been that not enough of the ‘young invincibles’ were bought into the cockamamie scheme and thus not participating, pushing the cost up due to what’s called ‘adverse selection’. Not enough people willing to pay more into a system and voluntarily get less out means that the whole thing collapses under the weight of those who are taking more than they’re putting in. It’s not even economics…it’s basic physics.
Their answer to this was (and is) that more people need to abandon their own better judgment and personal motivations and jump right in. But how to achieve that?
Well, with a super-majority in the Senate and an overwhelming majority in the House in 2009 those who know better than you pushed through the ACA without a single Republican vote in either chamber. For your own good, they forced an unpopular (at the time, and downright detested now) gigantic overhaul of an enormous chunk of our economy. Let’s call that “hard power”.
Of course, we see what hath the ACA wrought: With higher premiums than before for young and healthy individuals, those needed to save the sinking ship are now even less inclined to climb aboard. So now the very solution to the problem (as the health-insurance-scheme supporters see it) is even farther out of grasp.
This struck me as ironic because now the president and his lickspittle sycophants in the press/Leftist Hollywood/sports/entertainment/etc. are reduced to begging, pleading, brow-beating, heavy-handedly imploring every 20-something to please, please, please sign up for health “insurance” through the exchange, lest the signature program of your benighted leader fall to pieces and all we’ve worked for (WE!, not me, this is about YOU and how important all that work YOU! did on the campaign for…well, yes, me, but anyway…YOU! did to get…well, yes, me, but anyway…elected so I could serve YOU, because after all, YOU are the ones YOU’VE been waiting for, and thank goodness I came along to make YOU feel special about needing ME…oh, I mean ‘me’, but anyway….) tragically succumb to the machinations of the awful powers of cynicism and the Koch brothers and Rush Limbaugh and the War on Women, and…okay, where was I going with this? Oh, right. Please sign up for health insurance and talk about it in your pajamas with your friends at your kegger parties…
The president is in an all-out campaign to get the least-likely people to sign up for health “insurance” to…sign up for health “insurance”. But if he’d done that when he was popular (and his ACA handn’t ironically increased the price of it), couldn’t he have avoided all this?
Consider: when he was elected, Barack Obama had an incredible amount of popularity and political capital (before his inauguration, his approval rating was 79%). With that, he had the power to influence and persuade. Let’s call that “soft power”. What’s ironic is that, had he chosen to use his soft power (and been successful), he may have been able to convince a ton of the 20-something sheep who voted for CHANGE! and HOPE! to actually do things (even things against their own better interest) through the influence of this “soft power”. Who knows? It may have actually kept the system afloat.
*(No, The system still would have eventually collapsed, of course, because the problem wasn’t ever that young people weren’t buying “insurance”, rather the dis-incentive for consumers to shop for, and for providers to offer prices commensurate with their actual value…well, you know how that story goes…)
This suave and persuasive dude who had just sailed into the Oval Office because he was too cool for the room and was able to exercise the lost art of subtlety was loved by damned-near everybody in the Country. He believed in The System. He realized (believed) that the problem with it was that not enough people were active participants in it. His solution? Heavy-handedly and by force, to coerce everybody into doing what he wanted them to do.
Way to go, Cowboy!
-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from The Ranch)
…but not in the way you think. No, this isn’t some tirade about how the societal fabric is being torn apart and/or sullied at the hands of libertines and druggies. That’s all a bit corny for me.
It’s because the “socially liberal” people keep electing big-government high-taxing economic illiterates.
I’m often bemused (and, when in a good mood, amused) when I read someone’s online profile’s self-description of his political affiliation as “Socially liberal, Fiscally conservative.”
Really? I wonder which of his Janus characteristics weighed heavier when choosing between McCain and Obama in 2008.
Clearly there is no doubt that the fiscal conservatism took a backseat. After all, the guy who promised that energy prices “would necessarily skyrocket” and professed his desire IN PLAIN ENGLISH to “spread the wealth around” and when confronted by the economic reality that lower tax rates result in higher revenues (and vice-versa), admitted that his philosophy on taxes was more about “fairness” than bringing in revenues necessary to run the government (albeit a HUGE government he’d like to have) was—is—not a “fiscal conservative”.
Well, here’s something we saw coming:
Seems people are confused as to when they get their free ObamaCare. McClatchy report that there’s a lot of complication in the Stalinization of Health Care act of 2010. What a surprise.
While companies are lamenting that the legislation is going to cost them billions of dollars, and their employees hundreds of thousands of jobs, health care customers are likewise vexed by the new regime.
Now, in all fairness, the enactment of any
hostile takeover large new program by the federal government would have many moving parts and lead to lots of questions. But this little part stands out:
…much of the guidance will depend on Department of Health and Human Services regulations that are still being developed.
Yes, that’s leviathon regulation. And we don’t even yet know how it’s going to flesh out.
Brings to mind two very memorable quotes from two very memorable ladies:
-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from TML)
As President Obama signs the reconciliation portion of the Stalinization of Health Care Act of 2010 into law this morning*, comes word from an AP analysis that young people will be getting the shaft as the new regime of mandates spreads their wealth around to their older, less-healthy fellow citizens.
Of course, we told you so.
Now, while the report caveats that the study “did not factor in tax credits to help offset the increase,” it’s little consolation. What we have now is the choice between the bad of young people having to bankroll their parents and grandparents or the even worse of the entire Nation having to bankroll thier bankrolling. So would you rather young broke people or young dependent people?
President Obama won 66% of the youth vote. I suppose he hopes he can keep them ignorant of his socialist tendencies and plans to finance his utopia on thier backs. Let’s hope, for America’s sake, they’re smarter than that.
*Thought you’d get a kick out of this: Watching the ceremony with the sound off, the useless notes beneath President Obama next to the FoxNews logo read: “OBAMA: TODAY MARKS HISTORICAL MILESTONE” Funny that I misread this on first glance as “MILLSTONE”?
-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from TML)
Well, It is Done.
President Obama signed his Stalinization of Health Care Act of 2010 to thunderous applause this morning, and in so doing, subjugated our Nation to third-world socialist state status for the ensuing future (unless, of course, we take it back).
Happy Dependence Day.
Oh, and hope you don’t have any problems that ever need cutting edge medical technology. Byron York lines out just one of many medical device companies who will, thanks to this historic legislation, basically be run out of business. Yay, progress!
Zoll is the nation’s leading manufacturer of heart defibrillators, which save thousands of heart attack victims each year
“We believe that the tax will cost us somewhere between $5 million and $10 million a year,” says Richard Packer, Zoll’s chairman and chief executive officer. “Our profit in 2009 was $9.5 million.”
Fortunately, however, thanks to Obamacare, we’ll all have equal access to the defibrillators that will not exist in the future.
-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from TML)
Yesterday we saw history made as the largest take-over by the United States government of a private industry was narrowly passed by the House of Representatives and will soon be signed by the president in the face of an overwhelming opposition from the population of the Nation and zero support from the opposing party whatsoever.
I wrote in my post right after that fateful vote that it was time for America to choose which sort of moment that was to signify. As I slept on it (and wished I hadn’t given up alcohol for Lent) last night, I started thinking about what we do next. And here’s what I’ve come up with:
Last spring we told them “No” at Tea Parties. They responded by calling us all racists.
Last summer we told them “No” at town hall meetings. They responded by calling us un-American.
Last fall, we told them “No” in voting booths in New Jersey and Virginia. And in January in Massachusetts of all places. Their response was not to reconsider their positions in the face of their clear unpopularity, but rather to redouble their efforts to find a way around us and our wishes.
And now it has come to this. We can no longer say, They’re not hearing us; we’ve been loud. We can no longer say, They’re not listening to us; we’ve been clear. The only conclusion we can come to is that they knowingly defied us, and this cannot stand. They must all be removed.
The time has come for action.
It is time now to remove these people from their offices. Every Congressman and Senator who voted in support of the Stalinization of Health Care Act of 2010 MUST lose his or her seat this November 2d. It is imparative for the survival of our Nation.
This is not about malice. It’s not about vengence. It’s not about “teaching them a lesson.” It is simply about caring for our Union. It is the (metaphoric, mind you) watering of the tree of Liberty. [Read more…]
On June 3, 2008, history was made when the party that once defended slavery and stood in the way of equal rights for black Americans gave Barack Obama enough delegates to make him their nominee for President of the United States.
Never one to pass an opportunity to aggrandize himself, the completely unqualified, dearthly experienced Senator of all of four years from arguably the most corrupt political cesspool in our Nation’s history declared that that was, among other biblical things, “the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal”.
Rightly (in both senses of the word), he was castigated, but naturally and true to his form, he remained unrelenting in his own beatified view of himself.
Five months later, almost to the day, he was elected our 44th President. And we’ve had many moments since.
Just moments ago, I watched in despair on C-SPAN as the nominally representative body of our most democratic house of Congress openly and actively spited the will of the overwhelming majority of its constituents by passing a bill that will, in effect, federalize and seize control of over 15% of our economy.
Apparently on Tuesday, we can expect President Obama (likely to little fanfare, owing to his acknowledgment that what he is doing is so anathema to the will of those from whom he derives his current position, not to mention the Constitution to which he swore his defense) will sign this insult to liberty into law.
That, my friends, will be a moment to remember.
It will be the moment that our representative form of government will have ceased to exist. It will be the moment that those who deign to represent us in our Legislative and Executive Branches have chosen their own will over that which is clearly ours.
It will be the moment our Nation, whose Founders viewed legitimate government as “deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” is now unquestionably ruled by a political class who exercises its power in spite of the governed.
It will be the moment we look back on, ten, twenty, forty years from now, when, in hundreds of trillions of dollars in debt, facing tens of trillions of dollars of costs due to this social experiment, we think: What the hell happened to America, anyway?
It will be the moment when, for the first time in our Nation’s history, the knowing and purposeful execution of innocent unborn human life was bankrolled by taxpayer dollars, a move, according to a November 2008 Zogby poll, opposed by 71% of Americans.
It can be the moment our so-called “representatives” in government finally begin to hear from us.
It can be the moment they look back on in less than 8 months and see as the galvanizing moment when Americans decided to take back their Nation from them.
It can be the Rick Santelli moment times 100.
It can be the moment that people who have been involved in Tea Parties and town hall meetings begin to take real action by RUNNING FOR OFFICE to replace these scoundrels who currently entrench themselves in the ivory halls of OUR government.
It can be the moment that those who were elected by We The People begin to FEAR the People and what we will do to them come November 2, 2010.
It can be the moment we look back on in ten, twenty, forty years, and reflect on a new birth of American Independence and self-reliance. A new birth of a Nation governed by people who hold true to the ideals of our Founders that our government return to “deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
It can be the beginning of the end of the “long train of abuses and usurpations” of our current unrepresentative elected officials, and the day Americans once again dedicated themselves to the prospect that “it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
What say you, America?
-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from TML)
So much for Obama’s Apology Tour and bowing before world leaders. Americans aren’t buying it. He has become Jimmy Carter II. (PS – This is JAMES CARVILLE’s polling firm.)
A new Democracy Corps-Third Way survey provides a wake-up call for President Obama, his party, and progressives on national security.
The national mood continues to sour, with the share who see the country headed in the wrong direction moving up 4 points since mid-January, up to 62 percent, the highest mark in a year. The survey also shows concerns about the economy continuing to grow. And even though the Republican brand remains badly damaged, with no improvement in favorable ratings for their party, the GOP continues to gain ground in a named congressional ballot, with the Democratic House candidate now narrowly lagging by 47 to 44 percent. The movement away from Democrats is especially strong among independents, and independent women in particular.
Whereas a majority of the public approves of the job President Obama is doing in most aspects of national security, a 51 to 44 percent majority of likely voters disapproves of his efforts on the “prosecution and interrogation of terrorism suspects.”
[W]e see that the public once again has real and rising doubts about the Democrats’ handling of national security issues, as compared to their faith in Republicans. This security gap, which has roots stretching back to Vietnam, was as wide as 29 points earlier in the decade. The deficit began to close in 2006, with the Bush administration’s catastrophic mismanagement of Iraq and other national security challenges. As public hopes about the Obama presidency rose and peaked, the gap all but vanished. Last May, Democracy Corps found Democrats essentially tied with Republicans (41 to 43 percent) on the question of which party would do a better job on national security.
But now the gap shows signs of re-opening, with Democrats trailing by 17 points, 33 to 50 percent on which party likely voters think would do the better job on national security. The erosion since May is especially strong among women, and among independents, who now favor Republicans on this question by a 56 to 20 percent margin.
Hey, I hate to say this. But we told you so. Welcome back to reality, America. Let’s hope our majority perception of Obama Democrats’ security weakness doesn’t translate into a real threat being ignored by Holder & Gestapo Janet. The nation is truly run by September 10th’ers.
An incredible outcome of the most recent CNN poll, released today. The headline will likely be that President Obama’s approval rating may have hit its floor, stuck at 49%. Also of some note, the generic Democrat/Republican leaning is still a bit to the right (within the margin of error), so not much news there, either. People don’t like Congress, but despise Republicans a little bit less than Democrats. Small consolation, and in any case, yadda yadda.
But check this out:
“Do you think Barack Obama deserves to be reelected, or not?”
Think this’ll lead on CNN this evening? I guess we’ll see.
-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from TML)
UPDATE: As I’d have imagined, the online story over at CNN.com in paragraph 11 out of a 13 paragraph story, makes a passing reference to this shocking number. Dare I torture myself by watching The Situation Room to see if it makes it on the air?
UP-UPDATE: Never let it be said that I’m not fair: Wolf mentioned this result as the second one from the poll in his reading of the story just now at the top of the hour. David Gergen even went into deapth with it. Credit where it’s due, and I’m grateful I don’t have to watch the whole show now!