Obama to Propose Limits on Insurance Rates
WASHINGTON -- President Obama is making a fresh attempt to rescue his health care overhaul by proposing a measure that would allow the government to deny or roll back egregious insurance premium increases that infuriate consumers.
Coming just days before a White House health care summit with congressional leaders of both parties, Obama's new legislative proposal, which will be unveiled later Monday, likely represents the president's last chance to salvage his signature issue.
A White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity because details have not yet been officially released, said the insurance rate proposal would give the federal Health and Human Services Department -- in conjunction with state authorities -- the power to deny substantial premium increases, limit them, or demand rebates for consumers. [Click to read more]
The average insurance company makes a measely 4% profit. That's about the worst return of any type of company! This proposal of Obama's will drive insurance companies out of business and directly into government hands, just the way Il Duce* Obama wants.
*For those of you in Rio Linda, Il Duce was the nickname of Mussolini, the leader of the Fascist Party of Italy, an ally of Nazi Germany. Fascism is a socialist form of government where all businesses are controlled by the government. They also seek to silence the opposition by setting controls on the media, demonizing all other views, and totally ignoring input from any other political parties. Sound familiar?
Monday, February 22, 2010
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
$1.1 Trillion in New Taxes? Come on, Mr. President!
Obama Budget Seeks $1.1 Trillion in Tax Hikes
WASHINGTON -- While President Barack Obama is proposing to cut some taxes for companies that hire workers, his budget would raise a host of other taxes on businesses and wealthy individuals.
The budget proposal released Monday would extend Obama's signature Making Work Pay tax credit -- $400 for individuals, $800 for a couple filing jointly -- through 2011. But it would also impose nearly $1 trillion in higher taxes on couples making more than $250,000 and individuals making more than $200,000 by not renewing tax cuts enacted under former President George W. Bush. Obama would extend Bush-era tax cuts for families and individuals making less. [Click to read story]
Imposing more taxes on "wealthy" couples will mean:
(1) Less investment in businesses. Therefore, more unemployment.
(2) Not hiring as many housekeepers, drivers, lawns people. Therefore, more unemployment.
(3) Not spending as much for goods. Therefore, more unemployment.
On the other hand, with all these new taxes, the government can afford to put more people on unemployment and welfare.
Sounds like a great idea all the way around!
WASHINGTON -- While President Barack Obama is proposing to cut some taxes for companies that hire workers, his budget would raise a host of other taxes on businesses and wealthy individuals.
The budget proposal released Monday would extend Obama's signature Making Work Pay tax credit -- $400 for individuals, $800 for a couple filing jointly -- through 2011. But it would also impose nearly $1 trillion in higher taxes on couples making more than $250,000 and individuals making more than $200,000 by not renewing tax cuts enacted under former President George W. Bush. Obama would extend Bush-era tax cuts for families and individuals making less. [Click to read story]
Imposing more taxes on "wealthy" couples will mean:
(1) Less investment in businesses. Therefore, more unemployment.
(2) Not hiring as many housekeepers, drivers, lawns people. Therefore, more unemployment.
(3) Not spending as much for goods. Therefore, more unemployment.
On the other hand, with all these new taxes, the government can afford to put more people on unemployment and welfare.
Sounds like a great idea all the way around!
Thursday, January 28, 2010
State of the Obamanation & More on Climategate
OBAMA SPANKS THE SUPREME COURT
Obama once again showed his disdain for the Constitution by spanking the Supreme Court in his first State of the Union. The Court had overturned several unconstitutional laws that have been around for quite a while, as well as parts of the McCain-Feingold act.
This was not the forum to disagree about campaign finance reform. A press conference or weekly radio address would have been much more appropriate. Besides, how much of Obama's money came from foreign interests? We may never know, since much of it was contributed in cash by people with false names and addresses. Also, a significant portion came through the internet and is not verifiable. Obama has opened himself up to a lot of criticism for this hypocrisy.
Scientists in stolen e-mail scandal hid climate data
The university at the centre of the climate change row over stolen e-mails broke the law by refusing to hand over its raw data for public scrutiny.
The University of East Anglia breached the Freedom of Information Act by refusing to comply with requests for data concerning claims by its scientists that man-made emissions were causing global warming. [Click to read more from the "Times of London"]
Yup. UEA was clearly breaking the law, and the scientists were being unethical--that is, they were lying about data and hiding it to cover their tracks. Why? Probably to steal more taxpayer money for bogus research. Well, now they've been found out. They all need to be sacked and prevented from doing research ever again! They have damaged the reputation of the scientific method.
Obama once again showed his disdain for the Constitution by spanking the Supreme Court in his first State of the Union. The Court had overturned several unconstitutional laws that have been around for quite a while, as well as parts of the McCain-Feingold act.
This was not the forum to disagree about campaign finance reform. A press conference or weekly radio address would have been much more appropriate. Besides, how much of Obama's money came from foreign interests? We may never know, since much of it was contributed in cash by people with false names and addresses. Also, a significant portion came through the internet and is not verifiable. Obama has opened himself up to a lot of criticism for this hypocrisy.
Scientists in stolen e-mail scandal hid climate data
The university at the centre of the climate change row over stolen e-mails broke the law by refusing to hand over its raw data for public scrutiny.
The University of East Anglia breached the Freedom of Information Act by refusing to comply with requests for data concerning claims by its scientists that man-made emissions were causing global warming. [Click to read more from the "Times of London"]
Yup. UEA was clearly breaking the law, and the scientists were being unethical--that is, they were lying about data and hiding it to cover their tracks. Why? Probably to steal more taxpayer money for bogus research. Well, now they've been found out. They all need to be sacked and prevented from doing research ever again! They have damaged the reputation of the scientific method.
Friday, January 1, 2010
Obama’s Report Card for 2009
Stimulus Plan: C
Left the process wholly to Harry Ried and Nancy Pelosi. They assembled a plan that didn’t address the immediate needs, but put together a long-term spending plan that deferred over 60% of the money spent until two years down the road. And it wasn’t STIMULUS but a conglomeration of liberal agenda spending that hadn’t been passed for the last 16 years (under Bush AND Clinton).
Olympics Bid for Chicago: F
Presidents don’t make this kind of trip except when it’s a done deal. Either he thought he could sway the outcome or his staff made a horrible miscalculation.
Far East Trip: D
Went out with open arms to try and garner support for Afghanistan. Clumsily bowed to the Emperor of Japan--unprecedented. Got scolded by China for being fiscally irresponsible.
Afghanistan: D
Took way too long to respond to the situation. Didn’t provide the generals on the ground what they thought they needed to win. We need to either WIN or GET OUT! An in between stance is just like what we did in Vietnam! It’s juyst going to get our troops killed.
Copenhagen Conference: D
Expected a big, binding agreement, but got NOTHING. The conference was a joke, especially after the “science” (or should I say “junk science”) was discredited by the e-mail scandal.
War on Terror: D
The attitude at the top filtered down to the intelligence community. That attitude? There is no war on terror. This allowed people to get killed at Fort Hood and an attempted aircraft bombing over Detroit. Both should have been caught. But if our President says there is no war, then why should we be vigilant?
Health Care Reform: D
He continually showed his ignorance by claiming things about the bills in Congress and the Senate that weren’t true! He was not involved in the process, but once again (just like the Economic Stimulus), did not make his requirements clearly known.
Bipartisanship: F
In spite of claims of reaching out to the other side, kept the loyal opposition out of the legislative process, creating the most polarized Congress since the Republicans won the presidency and congress in 1860.
Overall, President Obama and his staff showed gross naiveté in how they handled Congress, public opinion, and the rest of the world. Clearly, he received a baptism by fire he wasn’t ready for. The sad thing is, he doesn’t realize how badly he did, nor does he understand why his approval ratings are the lowest of any president for his first year. People had grand hopes. He has disappointed America.
Left the process wholly to Harry Ried and Nancy Pelosi. They assembled a plan that didn’t address the immediate needs, but put together a long-term spending plan that deferred over 60% of the money spent until two years down the road. And it wasn’t STIMULUS but a conglomeration of liberal agenda spending that hadn’t been passed for the last 16 years (under Bush AND Clinton).
Olympics Bid for Chicago: F
Presidents don’t make this kind of trip except when it’s a done deal. Either he thought he could sway the outcome or his staff made a horrible miscalculation.
Far East Trip: D
Went out with open arms to try and garner support for Afghanistan. Clumsily bowed to the Emperor of Japan--unprecedented. Got scolded by China for being fiscally irresponsible.
Afghanistan: D
Took way too long to respond to the situation. Didn’t provide the generals on the ground what they thought they needed to win. We need to either WIN or GET OUT! An in between stance is just like what we did in Vietnam! It’s juyst going to get our troops killed.
Copenhagen Conference: D
Expected a big, binding agreement, but got NOTHING. The conference was a joke, especially after the “science” (or should I say “junk science”) was discredited by the e-mail scandal.
War on Terror: D
The attitude at the top filtered down to the intelligence community. That attitude? There is no war on terror. This allowed people to get killed at Fort Hood and an attempted aircraft bombing over Detroit. Both should have been caught. But if our President says there is no war, then why should we be vigilant?
Health Care Reform: D
He continually showed his ignorance by claiming things about the bills in Congress and the Senate that weren’t true! He was not involved in the process, but once again (just like the Economic Stimulus), did not make his requirements clearly known.
Bipartisanship: F
In spite of claims of reaching out to the other side, kept the loyal opposition out of the legislative process, creating the most polarized Congress since the Republicans won the presidency and congress in 1860.
Overall, President Obama and his staff showed gross naiveté in how they handled Congress, public opinion, and the rest of the world. Clearly, he received a baptism by fire he wasn’t ready for. The sad thing is, he doesn’t realize how badly he did, nor does he understand why his approval ratings are the lowest of any president for his first year. People had grand hopes. He has disappointed America.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)