Saturday

Obama says "Screw you, I'll do it myself".


This president has no understanding of our constitution and its implications. With every new proposal he brings forth, another piece of our constitution is rewritten in the red ink of socialism.

Not content to sit on the sidelines and allow open debate and honest inspection of his ideas he has now chosen to take an active role in the fashioning of yet another Marxist program.

Does it seem odd that such an important announcement would hit the wire on late on a Saturday afternoon? Nevertheless I found this jewel lurking on MSNBC today (excerpts in bold):

Obama to take a greater role on health care
Advisers say president determined to make sure final bill bears his stamp

Good, if it has his fingerprints prominently displayed throughout then there will be no denying that this abomination is his and his alone.

WASHINGTON - After months of insisting he would leave the details to Congress, President Obama has concluded that he must exert greater control over the health care debate and is preparing an intense push for legislation that will include speeches, town-hall-style meetings and much deeper engagement with lawmakers, senior White House officials say.

Literal translation being “I can’t trust these legislators to enact legislation that would make the Founding Fathers roll over in their grave”. I believe Obama is afraid that left to their own devices most in the Senate and Congress, minus the lunatic fringe (Pelosi and Reid), would realize that what he is proposing is nothing less than political suicide.

Mindful of the failures of former President Bill Clinton, whose intricate proposal for universal care collapsed on Capitol Hill 15 years ago, Mr. Obama until now had charted a different course, setting forth broad principles and concentrating on bringing disparate factions — doctors, insurers, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, labor unions — to the negotiating table.

But Mr. Obama has grown concerned that he is losing the debate over certain policy prescriptions he favors, like a government-run insurance plan to compete with the private sector, said one Democrat familiar with his thinking. With Congress beginning a burst of work on the measure, top advisers say, the president is determined to make certain the final bill bears his stamp.

What has happened to America and her free market? “He favors a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurance”? Since when has it become the government’s place to compete in the free market? This is absolutely insane and I cannot believe that such a proposition is being considered.

People have forgotten that government intervention in the form of Medicare and Medicaid is the reason medical costs are where they are today. As usual the government’s solution to problems caused by the government is… wait for it… more government.

“Ultimately, as happened with the recovery act, it will become President Obama’s plan,“ the White House budget director, Peter R. Orszag, said in an interview. “I think you will see that evolution occurring over the next few weeks. We will be weighing in more definitively, and you will see him out there.”

Stumping hard for his socialist plans is what Obama does best. I would be willing to bet that what we get at these “town hall meetings” and the like is loads of crap platitudes and generalities. What we will not see fleshed out is any semblance of a plan.

One has only to look at recent history to understand this is true. For example, the closing of Guantanamo, the stimulus plan, the bailouts, troop withdrawals in Iraq and so forth. Each of these ideas was announced and implemented before there was a plan in place. The results speak for themselves.

'Historic down payment'
On Saturday, while Mr. Obama was traveling in Europe, he used his weekly radio and Internet address to make the case that “the status quo is broken” and to set forth his ambitious goals.

Broadly speaking, he wants to extend coverage to the 45 million uninsured while lowering costs, improving quality and preserving consumer choice. His budget includes what he called a “historic down payment” of $634 billion over 10 years, accomplished mostly by slowing Medicare growth and limiting tax breaks for those with high incomes.

It is a historic down payment to be sure, but for what? With no plan in place that prescribes how and for what this money will be spent it seems likely to become another “lock box” to be raided at the whim of legislators.

Why would we allow ourselves be lulled into believing that our leaders have “miraculously” become models fiscally responsibility? Given their fiscal irrational exuberance as of late, I have little hope that this is anything more than another taxpayer rip-off.

“We must attack the root causes of skyrocketing health costs,” Mr. Obama said, pointing to the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota and other institutions as among those that offer high-quality care at low cost. “We should learn from their successes and promote the best practices, not the most expensive ones. That’s how we’ll achieve reform that fixes what doesn’t work and builds on what does.”

Translation: We will determine which procedures you are allowed to have. We will be the arbiters of “best practices” and not those pesky doctors and their outdated Hippocratic Oath. It will become about dollars and cents and not people. Funny, this is the same argument Obama and his sycophants use to attack insurance.

The radio address was the start of a public relations campaign coinciding with a 50-state grass-roots effort that Organizing for America, the president’s political group, began Saturday to promote a health care overhaul. His hope is to provide what his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, called “air cover” for lawmakers to adopt his priorities. It is a gamble by the White House that Mr. Obama can translate his approval ratings into legislative action.



“Obviously,” Mr. Emanuel said, “the president’s adoption of something makes it easier to vote for, because he’s — let’s be honest — popular, and the public trusts him.”

I could not have written a more damning indictment of this administration's bait and switch modus operandi that Emanuel’s own words. While the president is distracting us with parlor tricks and platitudes lawmakers will be rewriting the constitution. Good to be king right.

'Stone tablets'
But as Mr. Obama wades into the details of the legislative debate — a process that began last week when he released a letter staking out certain specific policy positions for the first time — he will face increasingly difficult choices and risks.

Aides say he will not dictate the fine print. “It was never his intent to come to Congress with stone tablets,“ said his senior adviser, David Axelrod. But he will increasingly make his preferences known.

If he embraces a tax on employee benefits, an idea he attacked when he was running for president, he may infuriate labor and the middle class. If he insists on a big-government plan in the image of Medicare, he could lose any hope of Republican support and ignite an insurance industry backlash. If he does not come up with credible ways to pay for his plan, which by some estimates could cost more than $1 trillion over 10 years, moderate Democrats could balk.

Many Republicans are already angry over the emphasis Mr. Obama placed on the public plan in last week’s letter. Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, said Friday that “the key to a bipartisan bill is not to have a government plan in the bill.”

Mr. Obama is well aware of these risks, advisers say. “This is what he is now very focused on,“ Mr. Orszag said. “What are the key things that are nonnegotiable? He is asking those sorts of questions: What are the drop-dead things that we need to have in order to have some hope of addressing long-term cost growth?”

Pledge of bipartisanship



Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the senior Republican on the Finance Committee, recalled how Mr. Obama made a personal pledge of bipartisanship when he and Senator Max Baucus of Montana, the committee’s Democratic chairman, joined the president for a private lunch at the White House last month.

“I said, ‘Yeah, it’s a problem,’ ” Mr. Grassley said of the public plan, “and he said something along the lines of, ‘If I get 85 percent of what I want with a bipartisan vote, or 100 percent with 51 votes, all Democrat, I’d rather have it be bipartisan.’ ”

Bipartisanship – Republicans do what we say or we publicly lambaste them with the help of the all too willing Obama media machine. If past exercises in bipartisanship are an indicator of the future then Republicans, and by proxy their constituents, will be excluded from debate; at least in any substantive manner.

On Friday, Mr. Grassley said he viewed the letter as “a political document, not a policy document,” intended to shore up Democratic support while letting Mr. Obama remain flexible.

Senator Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat who is a longtime proponent of revamping health care, said Mr. Obama seemed to be wrestling with how far he could push Congress.

I am curious as to where “we the people” fit in this apocalyptic battle, who is on our side? It seems that this battle is about insurance companies, politicians, big government and money. What it should be about is “the people”. Why is no one asking what we think, why is the minority of the uninsured dictating the level of care and cost for the majority?

“The president is very much aware that to bring about enduring change — health care reform that lasts, gets implemented, wins the support of the American people and does not get repealed in a couple of years — you need bipartisan support,” said Mr. Wyden, who was among two dozen Senate Democrats who met with Mr. Obama about health care last week. “So he’s grappling with, how do you do that?”

Mr. Obama began taking steps to make his case early in his administration. He convened a “fiscal summit” where health care was a major topic, followed by a “health summit.” Not long ago, he invited industry leaders to the White House, where they pledged to cut $2 trillion in health care costs over the next decade. But he has been restrained in his dealings with Congress.

He has, however, shown himself willing to exercise his presidential muscle when he thinks it is necessary. In April, Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota, the Budget Committee chairman, balked at the idea of having the Senate consider health legislation under the fast-track process known as reconciliation, which could avoid a Republican filibuster. At a private meeting, Mr. Obama pressed him on it.

“I want to keep it on the table as an option,’ ” Mr. Conrad recalled the president saying. Not long after that, Mr. Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, visited Mr. Conrad on Capitol Hill. Mr. Conrad was not convinced, but decided not to stand in the way. “The Budget Committee chairman does not top the president of the United States,” he said.

I guess that answers the question as to the issue of bipartisanship. Disagree and we will perform and end-run around you. Problem solved.

Going forward, Mr. Emanuel said, lawmakers could expect “quiet one-on-one discussions” with the president.

But Republicans like Mr. Grassley say that after promising to leave the legislative process to Congress, Mr. Obama must be cautious about his words, and about the appearance of meddling.

“He’s doing good by staying out of it as much as he is,” Mr. Grassley said. “He’d better use kid gloves at the start.”

Make no mistake. When the smoke clears the plan that will be presented to the American people will be the plan Obama wants. There will be token gestures and meaningless concessions designed to placate critics but in every substantive way it will be Obama’s plan alive, well and intact. I wish I could say the same for those of us who will be forced to abandon our above standard healthcare for socialized medicine.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Be respectful or be deleted. Your choice.