People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Sunday, September 12, 2010

Like Ducks In a Barrel

The liberal partisans at the New York Times make it so easy for us to ridicule them, it's almost not fun.

Watchword of the day: Stupid.

ObamaCare Was Just Another Welfare Program

How many times did I tell you that?

Obama kept trying to make us believe that he was going to provide health care coverage for 30 million people who had no insurance, improve care for everyone else in the country, and lower everyone's (except those getting the free ride) costs.  And in the end, I predicted, ObamaCare would end up like every other Democrat proposal coming out of Washington since Lyndon Johnson's New Deal began, it would prove to be more costly for those footing the bill for all this Washington generosity - the American taxpayer.  As always.

Well, the bill is coming due.  And all the grandiose talk about reducing the costs of health care are fast evaporating. 

It's enough to make you want to start a revolution.

Jake Tapper to President Obama:

[O]n health care reform, this is six months since health care passed.  You pledged, A, that you would bend the cost curve, and, B, that Democrats would be able to campaign on this.  And CMS reported yesterday that the cost curve is actually bending up:  from 6.1 percent to 6.3 percent post-health care legislation.

OBAMA: With respect to health care, what I said during the debate is the same thing I'm saying now, and it's the same thing I will say three or four years from now.  Bending the cost curve on health care is hard to do.  We've got hundreds of thousands of providers and doctors and systems and insurers, and what we did was we took every idea out there about how to reduce or at least slow the costs of health care over time.  But I said at the time it wasn't going to happen tomorrow, it wasn't going to happen next year.  It took us decades to get into a position where our health care costs were going up 6, 7, 10 percent a year.  And so our goal is to slowly bring down those costs.

Now, we've done so also by making sure that 31 million people who aren't getting health insurance are going to start getting it.  And right now middle-class families all across America are going to be able to say to themselves, starting this month, you know, "If I've got a kid who is under 26 and doesn't have health insurance, that kid can stay on my health insurance.  If I've got a child with a pre- existing condition, an insurer can't deny me coverage.  If I get sick and I've got health insurance, that insurance company can't arbitrarily drop my coverage." 

TAPPER:  ... CMS study from February predicted a 6.1 percent increase, and now post-health care 6.3 percent.  So it seems to have bent it up.

OBAMA:  No -- as I said, I haven't read the entire study.  Maybe you have.  But -- you know, if -- if you -- if what the reports are true, what they're saying is, is that as a consequence of us getting 30 million additional people health care, at the margins that's going to increase our costs, we knew that.  We didn't think that we were going to cover 30 million people for free.  But that the long-term trend in terms of how much the average family is going to be paying for health insurance is going to be improved as a consequence of health care.  And -- and so our goal on health care is if we can get instead of health care costs going up 6 percent a year, it's going up at the level of inflation, maybe just slightly above inflation, we've made huge progress.  
To summarize Obama's lengthy response:  Health care costs will go up, not down, as a result of the American taxpayer shelling out money - more money - to pay for a new welfare program for the poor.  "We didn't think that we were going to cover 30 million people for free."

Well, actually "we" did.  Obama kept telling us that his primary goal was to reduce the cost of our health care delivery system, even with the inclusion of an army of newly insured paid for by his grand scheme.  He now says, essentially, that it would be stupid to think such a thing is possible considering the fact that all these poor people needed to be covered.

So.  As I told you all along:

The middle class gets hosed.
The government gets bigger. 
We're saddled with another massively expensive entitlement program that we can't afford.
Welfare.  More welfare.

For the love of God, this has to stop.

A Confession

Nobody is more black and white on the subject of crime and punishment than I am.  And when it comes to punishment, as many of you know, I consider "cruel and unusual" to be relative terms that allow for a good deal of gray area that I wish our system would explore more often when it comes to the many murderers, child molesters, and rapists out there who prey on innocent Americans.

But I have to tell you, I have great difficulty dealing with the thought that we are about to execute a woman here in the Commonwealth. 

Different standard?  Without doubt.

Unjustifiable by modern Constitutional standards?  No argument.

Does the woman in question deserve harsh punishment?  Absolutely.

But she's a woman.  And to me, there should be a different standard for women (as there still is - for a time? - for children and the mentally impaired).

Call me a softy.  Tell me I'm wrong.  I understand.

Ever More Troubling

The more I learn about this Muslim dude in New York, the more wary I become. From Joel J. Sprayregen:
I suspect that the articulate Imam will find a way to refine his "predictions."  Are those Americans who insist that the Mosque should not be relocated comfortable with threats of violence?  Are President Obama and Mayor Bloomberg dismayed -- as I am -- by the stark failure of the Imam to say that it is totally impermissible to commit mass murder in support of his project?
Read the whole thing. Why does the left feel the need to cower before people like this Imam Rauf?