-- wasn't quite clear enough. Perhaps this is.
Like I said a couple of months ago, as far as investing goes, I'm long in pitchforks, torches, tar and feathers.
-- wasn't quite clear enough. Perhaps this is.
Like I said a couple of months ago, as far as investing goes, I'm long in pitchforks, torches, tar and feathers....the plan is to have the President submit reconciliation legislation to be posted on the internet this weekend. The legislation will be crafted in a manner so that it can be passed using special reconciliation procedures created solely to enact laws to reduce the deficit as part of the annual budget. The next step is for the President to conduct his half day bipartisan summit at the Blair House on February 25th. With that faux-bipartisan stunt over with, the President will be free to pass legislation in a partisan manner that tosses aside the regular rules of business in the Senate...
Yet again, the Obama Administration has tossed aside transparency and has crafted this legislation behind closed doors. Not even all Congressional Democrats have been looped into this secret proposal...
...when unemployment numbers started proving to be much, much tougher and it started becoming more clear that the stimulus package hadn't worked properly, they just kept plowing ahead on health care. And this isn't a communications problem. This is a reality problem. And I think they just made some grave miscalculations and as it became more clear that they had screwed up, they just kept doubling down their bet.
And so I think, no, this is one of the biggest miscalculations that we've seen in modern political history.
...The thing that I think a lot of Democratic strategists are really concerned about is that some of these districts are going to be gone for a generation or more. I mean, they're not coming back. They're ones that had somehow managed to hang on in Democratic hands even after the Democratic Party fell out of favor in a lot of the South. But once they slip away, I'm not sure they're coming back.
Wellpoint's rate hikes are the direct result of the Golden State's insurance regulations—the kind that Democrats want to impose on all 50 states. Under federal Cobra rules, the unemployed are allowed to keep their job-related health benefits for 18 to 36 months. California then goes further and bars Anthem from dropping these customers even after they have exhausted Cobra. California also caps what Anthem can charge these post-Cobra customers.
[Gee, who woulda thunk that price controls don't work?]
...This explains why Anthem lost $58 million in California on its post-Cobra customers in 2009. If WellPoint didn't raise premiums amid these losses, it would soon be under assault from its shareholders, if not out of business.

What would be more telling is the millions of jobs the Democrats have provably destroyed: threatening businesses large and small with new Cap-n'-Trade energy taxes; penalties for too little or too much health insurance coverage; and forced unionization via "Card Check".Call it preemptive, inevitable, cynical or reluctant, but this week’s announcement by Louisville, Ky.-based Humana Inc. that it will reduce its workforce... is also a reflection of reality.
Multiple realities, actually, including the prospect of some kind of U.S. healthcare reform, the continuing escalation of healthcare costs, the ability of technology and IT services to enable automation and reduce costs, changing demographics, and continued high unemployment...
...In a separate press release, Aite Group senior analyst Kunal Pandya pointed out that these cuts and additions may be part of a strategy to prepare the company for future changes brought on by healthcare reform.... Aite Group believes that when healthcare reform is enacted, early movers in focusing on elements that will be proposed by healthcare reform, like Humana, will find themselves positioned to benefit in the long-term.”
Clearly, Humana is trying to position itself for whatever the future might bring, in terms of regulation, competition and demographic changes. The “cautionary statement” text –- typically mind-numbing boilerplate –- that closed the February 17 press release illustrated this. For example:
“Humana's business activities are subject to substantial government regulation. New laws or regulations, or changes in existing laws or regulations or their manner of application, could increase the company's cost of doing business and could materially affect its business, profitability and financial condition. In addition, as a government contractor, the company is exposed to additional risks that could adversely affect its business or its willingness to participate in government health care programs.”
Mrs. Mikulski seriously fractured her right ankle last fall just prior to Edward M. Kennedy's death. Due to the severity of the fracture, she had to have open reduction surgery, that included the insertion of pins, as well as the use of special surgical boots, during recovery. She had tried to arrive in time for Mr. Kennedy's funeral but was turned away.
Her recovery has been exceptionally slow and she is evidently still in a great deal of pain. Reportedly, she has told her physician that she does not desire to seek reelection. Additionally, friends and family have been saying in the near future she will announce her retirement. Because of the very slow recovery, she has been forced to use a wheelchair, a walker or a cane in order to get around.
One of her complaints is that the health insurance that is provided for Congress is "poor" with high deductibles and "limitations" on coverage. My contact tells me that she told an aide that she should have inserted in the ObamaCare bill an amendment to improve Congressional health insurance!
Mrs. Mikulski was first elected to the Senate in 1986, and thus is a very senior member of the Democratic caucus. Despite this seniority, she has never been offered any important chairmanships or leadership positions. Born on July 20, 1936, she is 74 years old, come July...it is perhaps fitting that she has choose this year to retire...
Now criticism of the Republicans might be warranted if, say, a single one of their ideas was truly on the table. But, as so often happens with this particular administration, truth is in extremely short supply. Because what the Democrats want the Republicans to discuss -- and then swallow -- is their original, Rube Goldberg-esque health care bill.White House press secretary Robert Gibbs responded by saying that Obama has sought Republican input since early last year, and the president remains interested in hearing ideas that the GOP believe will advance the cause of health care reform... But he appeared to give little ground on the idea that Obama might abandon the months of work that produced Democratic bills that passed the House and the Senate late last year.
MacGruber!
Making life-saving inventions out of household materials...
MacGruber!
The guy's a frikkin' genius...
MacGruber!
V/O: The Secret Headquarters of Obama Advisers David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel
MacGruber, we almost have the health care bill sewed up! Finally, after decades of trying...
...We just have to play it safe for another week or so, until Martha Coakley takes
.
Don't worry, Annie! I've got a great plan that is guaran-damn-teed to save Coakley's campaign!
What the hell are you smoking, MacGruber? All we have to do is not make any mistakes --
Shut up, Jesse! We've got no time to lose... get Chuckie Schumer on the line!
We'll have Schumer label Scott Brown "a far right tea-bagger"!!
One word from Chuckie and it'll seal us a 60-seat maj--
******KERBLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!******
MacGruber!One year on, with the magic gone, BHO finds himself with very little margin for error, and some dumb things from the glory days luxuries he can no longer afford.
To name a few:
• Justice Official Clears Bush Lawyers in Torture Memo Probe
• White House to look for other places to hold 9/11 terror trial
• Obama faces dwindling options in his effort to close Gitmo
On deck for rubbish removal:
• ObamaCare
• Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab
But there's still a lot of junk weighing The Wan down:
• Iran
• Iraq
• Afghanistan
• Unemployment
• Two-state solutions
• Terrorism (man-caused disasters)
• Congenital leftwing weltanschauung
• David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel
• November 2, 2010
You and your combover are destined for the scrapheap of Socialist history. 'Moderate' my a**."... you've got kids or you've got grandkids -- they need to make sure that they've got the same security that Medicare provides seniors." President Obama, speech at the Organizing for America National Health Care Forum, August 2009
"... at the pace we're on right now, Medicare is going to run out of money in eight years." President Obama, same speech.Public Health Program Costs: Predicted vs. Actual
Ultimate Fighting Championship heavyweight champion and former WWE superstar Brock Lesnar has slammed the Canadian health care system, referring to it as being like a Third World country, in a press conference announcing his return from diverticulitis Wednesday... Lesnar had felt unwell for some time when he was struck down in a hunting lodge... three hours from the nearest medical facility [in] Brandon, Manitoba...
"I love Canada," said Lesnar. "Some of the best people and best hunting in the world, but I wasn't in the right facility... They couldn't do nothing for me... It was like I was in a Third World country, I just looked at my wife and she saved my life and I had to get out of there."
Lesnar's wife, former WWE wrestler Sable, took the 6-3, 285-pound giant away from the medical facility in "excruciating pain" and "drove 100 mph" across the border to Bismarck, North Dakota [where the] "doctor there saved my career and saved my life."...Lesnar refused to disclose whether the Canadian facility that he felt was inadequate was a major city hospital or a rural outpost, but claimed that the care he received in the United States, and later at the prestigious Mayo Clinic, was far superior and thus was evidence that the U.S. health care system is the best in the world.
Lesnar, who has his own health insurance but also benefits from coverage paid for by the UFC, said "I'm just stating the facts; I love Canada, I own property in Canada but if I had to choose between getting care in Canada or the United States, I'd choose the United States... I hate to bash them but, I'm not one to get into the political side of things but our health care system is a little radical — we have the best doctors in the world. Our system does need some restructuring but I don't believe a total reform is the answer."
Diverticulitis is a condition that happens when diverticulosis forms on the outside of the colon and becomes inflamed. In Lesnar's case, his intestine became perforated, which had meant his system was being slowly poisoned from within.
Lesnar said he hadn't felt well for a month and, while relaxing in his lodge, "it just climaxed and the perforation happened. I woke up in shock, in a cold sweat. I didn't know where I was and realized I had to seek medical help... I was out in the boondocks up there, so it was about three hours from what I thought would be a good medical facility..."The controversial champion, who calls himself a "conservative Republican," used his experience to launch a tirade against U.S. health care reform efforts by President Barack Obama.
"The only reason I'm mentioning this, I'm mentioning it to the United States of America because President Obama is looking for health care reform and I don't want it ... I'm speaking on behalf of Americans, I'm speaking on behalf of our doctors in the United States that don't want this to happen and neither do I... coming from the Mayo Clinic, some of the best doctors in the world, people come from across the world to be at this clinic ... we have the best hospital in the world at the Mayo Clinic."
With a lede that will soon prove timeless, General E.J. Dionne of The Washington Post just penned the Democrat equivalent of the Gettysburg Address.There is no question that Democrats have looked weak in responding to the Massachusetts election.
The notion that they would just shelve health care after all they have put into it... paints a portrait of a party that, to say the least, lacks persistence and conviction. But there is a good reason behind all the confusion.
? Ehm, no. Dionne is on a different page.The core problem is that the House Democrats no longer trust the Senate Democrats... That’s why there is resistance in the House to the most straightforward solution, which is for the House to pass the Senate health-care bill and send it to the president, and then to use the reconciliation process (which requires only 51 votes in the Senate) to pass the changes in the bill that House and Senate negotiators have agreed to -- or, at least, as many of those changes as is procedurally possible. They can’t get all the changes into law that way, but they could get a lot of them.
So here’s an idea, I have been told reliably, that leaders of both Houses are considering: The House would pass a version of the reconciliation bill containing the various amendments and send it to the Senate. The Senate would change it slightly (in ways that the House agreed to), which would require the House to vote on it again. Only after it got the revised reconciliation bill would the House take up the Senate bill. The House could then pass both bills and send both to the president. Problem solved, health-care passes, and we move on.
...are frickin' toast. Stick a fork in their backs, because they. Are. Done.Not all the difficulties with this scenario have been worked through, and it is not a slam dunk.
For one thing, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi faces a revolt on her left against passing the Senate bill without changes. Some may still have to be persuaded to make sure it gets the votes it needs. There are also some House Democrats from moderate-to-conservative districts who are wary, after Massachusetts, of voting for a health-care bill, period. And there are a lot of procedural issues that need to be ironed out.
Nonetheless, for those (and I’m one of them) who believe in health-care reform -- and who think the Democrats would be committing suicide if they gave up on health care now -- it’s heartening to hear that serious people are making serious efforts to get a health bill through. In a pinch, I think that enacting the Senate bill into law without changes is far preferable to passing nothing... Can they do it? The answer to that question depends in part on leadership from President Obama. Can he do it?
Politicians in Washington keep telling us that it is the financial system that needs regulation.
What Washington won't tell you is that the greatest risk to our economic system lies not with Wall Street. It lies with the federal government's catastrophic debt -- and the wounded U.S. dollar -- inflicted upon us by the very same politicians scapegoating the financial services industry.
About half of the federal budget must be paid for by borrowing money from foreigners, primarily from China. This behavior has frightened global investors and severely weakened the dollar.
Last June, the Congressional Budget Office warned that the "federal budget is on an unsustainable path -- meaning that federal debt will continue to grow much faster than the economy... [and] Rising costs for health care and the aging of the U.S. population will cause federal spending to increase rapidly..."
"... Large budget deficits [will lead] to more borrowing from abroad and less domestic investment, which in turn would depress income growth... The accumulation of debt would seriously harm the economy. [Or] if spending grew as projected and taxes were raised in tandem, tax rates would have to reach levels never seen in the United States [95%]."
Yet the same federal bureaucrats who decry the financial system are themselves addicted to spending far beyond their means. But why would they care? They will be long gone by the time their bills will come due.
Dichotomy: outside the U.S., the "biggest story in the world economy is the continuing fall of the U.S. dollar" (Wall Street Journal); while inside the U.S., the mainstream media gleefully markets the proposition that that Congress' "Baucus Bill" is cost-neutral.
Even before the health care bill becomes law, $9.3 trillion of new deficit spending was added to the national debt. The Baucus Bill supposedly gets its cost neutrality by slashing Medicare ($400 billion) and raising taxes on health care insurance premiums (another $400 billion).
But the mainstream media forgot to tell you that even the CBO doesn't trust its own numbers! The head of the CBO wrote Baucus, telling him that -- if Congress failed to cut Medicare (highly likely, given seniors' voting habits) -- the new entitlement would add catastrophic new debt to the federal budget.
But even if the numbers were real, the illogical thinking is shocking. President Obama told us that passing health care reform was central to a healthy economy. The Democrats proclaim victory with supposed deficit neutrality while our current "unsustainable" deficit grows like a devastating form of cancer.
Instead of just starting with cuts to Medicare and adding insurance taxes -- thereby cutting the 10-year deficit by $1 trillion (including interest) -- the Democrats are attempting to nationalize 20% of the economy as a payoff to the SEIU bosses who contributed $27 million to Obama's 2008 campaign.
Helping a few million uninsured people get access to health insurance is a noble goal, but not at the expense of permanently destroying the United States economy. Adding entitlement programs while we can barely crawl out of the current deficit hole is suicidal behavior....House Democrats are planning to use the budget-reconciliation process in order to pass Obamacare. “They’re meeting with each other this weekend to pursue it,” says Ryan. “I’ve spoken with many Democrats and the message is this: They’re not ready to give up. They’ve waited their entire adult lives for this moment and they aren’t ready to let 100,000 pesky votes in Massachusetts get in the way of fulfilling their destiny. They’ll look at every option and spend the next four or five days figuring it out.”
If the Democrats pass a health-care bill through reconciliation, it means they would need only 51 votes in the Senate for final passage. To start the process, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) would need to bring a new health-care bill to the House budget committee with reconciliation instructions, with the Senate doing the same. “They’d have to go back to the beginning of the process,” says Ryan. “They’d need to affix reconciliation instructions to a new bill.” Doing so, he says, wouldn’t be too hard. “There’s nothing we can do to stop this from a technical standpoint, since all they need is a simple majority vote and our ratio on the committee is terrible. What [Republicans] can do on the budget committee is pass resolutions for the Rules committee to insist on certain changes in the bill and create a ‘vote-a-rama’ atmosphere.”
If reconciliation happens, Ryan predicts that the Democrats will still have a hard time pulling it off. “There are Blue Dog Democrats out there who are more survivalist than ideologues. One or two switches could be a game changer. The question is whether Democrats will continue to follow Pelosi off the cliff. After Massachusetts, the Democrats are quickly realizing that even if the president comes in to stump, and you get all the union support you need, it’s still not enough to get you elected.”
Though reeling from a political body blow, House Democrats rejected the quickest fix to their health care dilemma Thursday and signaled that any agreement on President Barack Obama’s signature issue will come slowly, if at all... Democrats’ hopes of settling on a strategy by the weekend seemed to fade, as lawmakers struggled to comprehend the drawbacks of every option...
Some lawmakers said it will take time for congressional Democrats, who huddled repeatedly Thursday, to realize how limited their options are. “People are at various levels of the seven stages of grief,” said Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y.
Can you hear the earth rumbling underfoot? A change is coming, and it will do away with 'Change you can believe in,' and leave more than change in your pocket. A lot of people in this country are fed up with the course the Democrat-controlled Legislature was plotting and the past few elections have sent a shot across the bow of Liberals and their 'Progressive Agenda.'The victory of Scott Brown in Massachusetts last night was the latest warning of the coming Republican tsunami that will wash out the Marxists for the next generation in both Houses of Congress. I'm calling for a change of leadership in the House and Senate and the immediate realization that President Obama is a one-termer, a sort of Carter Presidency redux. Before you rain on my parade and say that the Democrat agenda is still in the works -- and some of it can be forced through in the next ten days -- be advised that above even their Communist plans for this country the Democrats love power. And to keep any kind of power they need to be reelected periodically.
Having failed to set up the National Health Care Consortium that would serve as a revolving door through which failed politicians would recycle back onto bureaucratic payrolls (and control about a sixth of the economy), the Democrats are forced to stay in power the old fashioned way; by running for reelection. Their plans for a 'United Socialist American Republic' have once again been thwarted by an electorate that refused to sustain the momentum of the government's rush toward a totalitarian state. It seem that most Americans are not sweet on the idea of paying for illegal aliens to go to American schools and doctors. One need only examine the de facto bankruptcy of California to realize the inevitable results of government-run health care and overly generous welfare programs.We have a country that is solidly center-right in its political bent. The Obama election was an understandable aberration in that it was based upon a suddenly ailing economy and a vitriolic press exacerbating the problems. With a bad recession, the party in power always gets tossed out. Simple as that. The lessons some took from the election were that the country had swung permanently left and that a European style of socialism was now possible because most people had realized that they were responsible for their fellow citizens' needs. From there it was a short hop to health care being a Constitutional right. And then to a proposed wealth transfer -- using Cap-and-Trade -- to countries with failed economies over guilt for our success as an industrialized nation. To me it makes little sense but then I'm not a rabidly liberal member of the normally socialist press, am I?
Well, the voters have spoken a third time and it resonates on a national level. With a Scott Brown Senate win in Massachusetts, Chris Christie and Bob McDonnell in the Governor's races in New Jersey and Virginia respectively, the country is forewarned of an unmistakable shift from a silent tolerance of the liberalism in Washington to repudiation of all things socialist and maybe even an overcompensation to the right in the coming November elections.There is an epidemic of Democrat cold sweat breaking out nationwide and it can only mean a shift to the right politically if there is even a hope of reelection for some of these characters. And while the White House downplays a growing list of election losses and the press decries the electorate as superstitious and stupid for 'clinging the their guns and bibles', the mainstream Democrats are quietly retooling their platform to focus on jobs and the economy. Health care, Cap-and-Trade and the 'Card Check' travesty are crosses to be now carried only by liberals who intend to fall on their swords in November.
I am also noting a curious behavior only engaged in by Democrats and the commentators who subsist on the party swill: they destroy their losers. It started last week with a report that Barney Frank blamed the Senate loss on Ms. Coakely; this being at a campaign rally days before the election. Commentators are also falling back on the tired, lame explanation that the Democrats didn't get their message out effectively enough and didn't frame the issues. This couldn't be further from the truth: the Democrats and liberal press have not only framed the debate but declared it "settled" on numerous subjects when it served their purposes. Others blame 'angry voters' or fear-mongering as reasons the Democrats lost. Suffice it to say that we'll never hear from the losing contestants again. No one blacklists like the Democrats. Maybe they will become commentators who resurface during election cycles, but not any in the foreseeable future.
I am interested to see who will press harder to further the liberal agenda before all the air is let out of the balloon, so to speak. I think its over for all but a vestigial health care bill that tinkers with the existing system in some trivial way so the administration can declare a Pyrrhic victory. Even that will require major negotiations with Republicans and the Democrats are currently loathe to stoop to that level.The Democrats' influence is going to go into decline and a new conservative mood will permeate government. A couple of things will force Washington's hand. First, we are all aware that the borrowing engaged in by the Obama Administration has nearly bankrupted the country and that our lender nations are already making noises about the wisdom of our expenditures. Let China pass on one bond auction and we'll see how 'prosperous' we are. It will cause a depression in about five minutes. That's because all credit is extended on the assumption of eventual payback with interest and China refusing to buy our notes will signal a loss of confidence in our credit-worthiness. A collapse of the markets would soon follow. Think 1929; then 1931.
Second, even if we are able to make payments indefinitely, of which I'm not entirely convinced, the interest alone will consuming so much of the budget that spending growth is out of the question. We simply have to cut back on spending, and in some cases it will be rather draconian.
Whether it be by Republican or Democrat leadership, we were due to lower spending as a condition of economic survival. And I know that the Democrats wanted to destroy the economy so they could remake it in Stalin's own image but we would probably go into a kind of 'economic receivership' before that happened. Even if it did, the Government of China is not a bottomless source of funding. Spending cuts were on the horizon by necessity. And simply raising taxes to fund projects results in less revenue as people and companies progressively shield income from scrutiny.
I want to see how Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid react in the coming weeks to the election results and change in mood of the elected officials across the country. No longer can they ignore public opinion or turn a blind eye to the coming elections. But I really want to know if they will continue to ram through some type of nationalization of the health care system (and probably fail in the process) or back off and suddenly change their focus to the economy. The wise thing to do would be to regroup and wait out a few election cycles; but I feel the temptation is too great not to try to get the assorted bills to the White House and sacrifice both House majorities to do so. After all, this is what the Leftists in Congress have salivating over for a generation. If they can't pass health care, Cap-and-Trade and Card Check now, they will die before the Democrats again have the needed majorities to do so. So they have ten days: lets see what they do.
Alternately, we have to live now with the fallout of letting a spendthrift government control our collective destiny. Somebody's got to pay down this debt. And that falls to us. For all revenue derived by the government comes from the American people. Even if we could stop the growth of Government, and we are not even close to doing that yet, we have to pay interest on some 12.3 trillion dollars and somehow pay that down. We pay it down by borrowing less. I'm not advocating for a total cessation of borrowing because that would cause a governmental shutdown as we ran out of money to pay our bills -- but we need to cut spending drastically. And again, that's where the Democrats come in.There will be a fight for the heart and soul of the Democrat party during the coming months. Moderate Democrats, who know all too well the mood of the country, will try to 'mainstream' the platform of the party to the center and stress the economy and jobs. They know that the old maxim, 'its the economy, stupid,' dominates politics during periods of high unemployment. Trying to avoid the problem would result in their bodies getting thrown under the bus at election time. Alternately, the far left liberals, who should be known as Communists were the truth-in-advertising laws enforced, know this is the last gasp for another generation. It really is the last time the sixties radical washouts will have almost total control of the levers of power, and it looks like they have about ten days left. After that they know they will have diminishing influence on policy and have to engage in public discourse to change attitudes. And they are never good at that sort of thing when serious issues dominate the discussion. Who cares about global warming, climate Change or whatever they are calling the climactic disaster du jour -- when funding college tuition or unemployment is the major topic of conversation at the dinner table?
Liberals who spout off about the poor in Africa miss the point when our children may not get to go to college. They sound like whining children to an under- or unemployed steel worker. Who really cares about the coming climate disaster when your company is downsizing because they couldn't sell enough product to justify their payroll? Some moderate Democrats understand the lessons the Republicans learned when they took a good flogging last year in the election: a voter's family comes first. It comes first over the political aims of either party; all politics are local and the issue becomes personal during a recession.
The Democrats have to sort out what manner of party they are, now that their agenda has been completely rejected by the voters. And this is only a prelude to November. True socialist believers will continue to demand a Euro-American model, knowing they are doomed to failure. Moderate Democrats will have to distance themselves from the party in the short term while they battle behind the scenes for control. Republicans will gradually meander more to the right as they seek to differentiate themselves from Democrats who have just 'found religion.' This will be enjoyable to watch, especially as the Communist News Network and the Liberal Mass media grow more dour as the election approaches. Their Party is over, at least as they know it.
But we have to do something to rescue our economy from a possible disaster: this hyper-spending must stop. We must return to a work ethic that stresses enthusiastic effort and not manipulation of some other person's productivity. A re-adoption of self-reliance and can-do spirit in the vein of Ronald Reagan is in order. And I know just the ticket to stir up some good ole' American controversy: Sarah Palin and Scott Brown. Who more to humble the 'Entitlement Party' then two self-made successes?
Let the Democrats dwell on that for a while.
Victor The Contractor