Say it ain’t so, Joe

If you read nothing else from this blog, please hear this: Check things out for yourself and don’t rely on the media to give you the truth. Here is another example of an Obama administration “clarification,” this time from the vice president.

Shortly after winning the presidency, Obama said the economy needed a large and quick boost to get it going.  The buzz word used was “jolt.”

“The most important thing to recognize is that we have a consensus, which is pretty rare, between conservative economists and liberal economists, that we need a big stimulus package that will jolt the economy back into shape…”

Biden echoed this in March, when he said that “the Recovery Act, as we call it, provides a necessary jolt to our economy to implement what we refer as ’shovel-ready’ projects.”

He reiterated in June that the stimulus was “an initial big jolt to give the economy a real head start.”

Now that it is obvious that his boss’s plan did not do that, Biden is quickly backtracking. 

“The care with which we are carrying out the provisions of the Recovery Act has led some people to ask whether we are moving too slowly. But the act was intended to provide steady support for our economy over an extended period — not a jolt that would last only a few months.”

Um, right…it was supposed to be a jolt and then it wasn’t.  I got it.  John Kerry could be proud of a statement like that.

Lest you miss that, in the call for the stimulus and shortly after, the rationale was all about speed; a large and sudden impact.  Otherwise they never would have used the word “jolt.” 

Webster’s defines jolt as: “to cause to move with a sudden jerky motion,” “to give a knock or blow to; specifically to jar with a quick or hard blow,” “to interfere with roughly, abruptly, and disconcertingly,” “to move with a sudden jerky motion.”  Do any of these definitions make you think of something slow and methodical?  Of course not.

Biden and the democrats who pushed for this plan have been caught.  And instead of admitting things haven’t worked like they thought or hoped they would, the white house is saying the stimulus is working “exactly as we had anticipated.”  And unless you’re keeping up with things on your own, you may not know that it is not, nor that tunes are being changed so many octaves.

Remember when the media constantly peppered Bush with “Why don’t you admit you were wrong?” questions?  Don’t expect them to do the same here.

Conservatives said repeatedly this “stimulus” not only wouldn’t work but would make things worse…and it has.  Now, to try to avoid scrutiny, the administration is changing “what it meant.”  The media will not report this, nor point out the conflicting statements.  You’ve got to check it out for yourself.


Playing With Words

Thanks to Ed Morrissey for the inspiration for this one.  Remember Obama’s promise during the campaign for no raising of taxes on the middle class?  He campaigned as a conservative on that point.  Cutting taxes for middle class families is part of an economic boost we could use about now.  Great plan isn’t it?  Remember when George Bush did that?  Chances are you don’t because the mainstream media joined with the political line of the left, relentlessly bemoaning “tax cuts for the rich.”  But everyone paying taxes got a tax cut.  I remember mine and it being a welcome relief.  Those who paid more in taxes naturally saved more.  No matter.  Obama said many times that not only would he not raise taxes on the middle class, he would cut them. 

“I will cut taxes – cut taxes – for 95 percent of all working families, because, in an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle class.”

He has kept part of his word, in lowering taxes slightly in the short term, but then there’s what he said this week.  And pay close attention to his words.

“The one commitment that I’ve been clear about is I don’t want that final one-third of the cost of health care to be completely shouldered on the backs of middle class families who are already struggling in a difficult economy.

And so, if I see a proposal that is primarily funded through taxing middle class families, I’m going to be opposed to that because I think there are better ideas to do it.”

Last month, the president’s campaign manager, David Axelrod, hinted that the administration is considering taxing health benefits for, among others, middle class Americans.  As Morrissey points out:

“He doesn’t want the burden “completely shouldered” by the middle class, but that leaves a lot of room as to how much they will pay in higher taxes and fees for it. Finally, Obama says he would “be opposed” to such an approach, but never says that he would veto it if it hit his desk.”

These are the slick words of a showman politician.  Unless you pay close attention to them, you can be taken by surprise.  More and more people are paying attention to his words, especially as it relates to healthcare.  Like his promise that you can keep your insurance plan if you like it and that government will never take it away, nor force you into a public plan if you change jobs, even though the legislation says the opposite.

I will contend in more detail over the next weeks that our president is not who many thought he was.  In the meantime, continue checking things out for yourself.  You may be surprised what you learn.

No disagreeing allowed

Those studying the president’s healtchare bill and sounding alarms over what’s in it are being met with accusations aplenty.  I love a good, sound debate.  It’s good for the mind, both for critical thinking skills and for gaining knowledge.  But you can usually tell when one side begins to gain the upper hand…when the other begins name calling.

From Rush Limbaugh’s show today – a good breakdown of a white house post on twitter:

This tweet from the White House last night, “Health care reform opponents scale up attacks, playing politics w/ our lives & livelihood. Fight back.” Now, there are no health care reform “opponents.” Health care reform opponents scale up attacks? There are no reform opponents. We all have reform ideas. There are just those who disagree with Obama’s 1,000-page plan that Obama admits he hasn’t even read. See, we’re not allowed to disagree. We’re now “health care reform opponents scaling up attacks.” We just disagree with this debacle. So the president of the United States starts off by smearing those who have different ideas. So much for post-partisan! So much for hope and change. So much for a new era.

…Next he says those that oppose his reforms are “scaling up their attacks,” like pointing out the CBO that says this plan Obama hasn’t read is a disaster? Are they part of the group that’s attacking him? When Obama says “attacks,” he means bringing up facts after studying his deeply flawed plan that he says he hasn’t read. Then he says those opponents of his plan who have read the plan are playing politics. Obama is ramming a plan to socialize medicine into law at light speed with no one even reading the bill, except the people who have read it who are pointing out what’s in it and then he demonizes those who have read it and think it’s a bad idea by saying they are playing politics!”

“Throw away your thiking cap and agree with me.  If you don’t, you’re playing politics and are part of an attack machine.”  This is getting bizarre.

Ignorance or dishonesty?

Last week we learned that the House of Representatives version of the healthcare bill will outlaw private medical insurance.  Here is the quote from page 16 of the bill in Investor’s Business Daily:

“Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day [the legislation becomes law]”

If and when this becomes law, you will no longer be able to enroll in a new private insurance plan.  If your current plan changes, you will be kicked out (by the government), and if you lose your job or leave your job to start your own business, you will be forced to take the public “option.”  This is in direct opposition to what president Obama has been claiming all along. 

“No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people.  If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period.  If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.”

When confronted with the actual bill by a blogger on a conference call this week, Mr. Obama said he hadn’t heard of it.

“You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about.”

He then said very boldly and directly that he would not sign a bill that did that.

“I have committed myself consistently to a very simple proposition: If you have health insurance, and you like it, and you have a doctor that you like, then you can keep it, period.  And I won’t sign a bill that somehow would make it tougher for people to keep their health insurance.”

This is unmistakable.  Obama is saying clearly and definitively that he would not sign a bill that does what the House bill says.  He is then saying he could not sign the House bill as it is currently written.  To not know that the very bill he is urgently pressing Congress to pass does exactly what he says it will not is at the very least embarrassing.  It ought to be frightening.  So should something he said today.  Unbelievably, our president said:

“Under each of these bills…You won’t lose your healthcare if you change jobs, if you lose your job, or if you start a business…We’ve agreed that our health reform bill will promote choice…Americans will be able to compare the price and quality of different plans, and pick the plan that they want.  If you like your current plan, you will be able to keep it.”

That is not what the bills currently being constructed say.  It is the opposite.  Either our president is terribly misinformed or he is openly lying to us.  In either case, American citizens ought to speak up and right now.

Ads anyone?

I don’t usually like television ads designed by political parties.  This one is better than average simply because it uses direct quotes. 

A seemingly typical tactic of a politician whose plan hasn’t worked is to begin changing what he or she “meant” after the fact.  If I, for example, say this plan of mine will create or save millions of jobs, and will begin doing so immediately, and after four months we’ve actually lost jobs, I can say something like: “Well, what I meant was that it will work over the next two years.”  Sound familiar at all?

If the stimulus “is working exactly as we had anticipated” or working “as intended,”  there is no need to say that it wasn’t designed to work so quickly.  The need to “clarify” should only arise is if things are not happening as the administration said they would.  And they are not.

President Obama can feel comfortable saying these things because he knows the press will not call him on it.  His solution to the problem of an economic slowdown outlines the difference between conservatives and liberals.  Conservatives say cut the budget and cut taxes.  Have the government spend less and let people keep more of their own money so they can spend it and get the economy going strongly again.  Liberals tend to say spend more and raise taxes (on the rich of course).  I think this is a great example of the way this latter plan doesn’t work.  After the 1987 stock market crash, president Reagan did next to nothing, and I have little doubt that is why we don’t talk about that crash today.  After the 2008 problems, Obama said the government should take an aggressive role in “fixing” the problem.  And we can see how well his fix is working.  And while the president tries to change what he meant, it’s pretty obvious to me and a lot of other people that these kinds of solutions don’t work.  They can’t work, because in a time where the country is trillions of dollars in debt, you don’t go even further into debt to try to solve the problem.  That’s like trying to dig your way out of a hole by continuing to dig in the same direction that got you into the hole.

But perhaps this statement illustrates the administration’s philosophy quite nicely. 

“And folks look, AARP knows and the people with me here today know, the president knows, and I know, that the status quo is simply not acceptable,” vice president Joe Biden said July 16.  “It’s totally unacceptable.  And it’s completely unsustainable.  Even if we wanted to keep it the way we have it now.  It can’t do it financially…We’re going to go bankrupt as a nation,…Now, people when I say that look at me and say, ‘What are you talking about, Joe?  You’re telling me we have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt?’  The answer is yes, that’s what I’m telling you.”

Hope.  Change.  New kind of logic.  Actually it’s not new; it just keeps circulating under new catch phrases.

Expiration Dates Update…

I was wrong.  Shortly after posting “Expiration Dates” I found that there is, in fact, definitive language in the bill the House of Representatives is drafting that says you will not be able to purchase private insurance once the public “option” becomes law.  This is an excerpt from the Investor’s Business Daily article that shows one of the horrors of the socialized medicine operation.

Right there on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal. 

When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee.  It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of “Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage,” the “Limitation On New Enrollment” section of the bill clearly states:

“Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day” of the year the legislation becomes law.

So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won’t be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.

From the beginning, opponents of the public option plan have warned that if the government gets into the business of offering subsidized health insurance coverage, the private insurance market will wither. Drawn by a public option that will be 30% to 40% cheaper than their current premiums because taxpayers will be funding it, employers will gladly scrap their private plans and go with Washington’s coverage.

The nonpartisan Lewin Group estimated in April that 120 million or more Americans could lose their group coverage at work and end up in such a program. That would leave private carriers with 50 million or fewer customers. This could cause the market to, as Lewin Vice President John Sheils put it, “fizzle out altogether.”

What wasn’t known until now is that the bill itself will kill the market for private individual coverage by not letting any new policies be written after the public option becomes law.

May I remind you of the promise, that long ago “expired”:

“[W]e will keep this promise to the American people…If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period.  No one will take it away, no matter what.”

Wake up America, you are losing your country.