What You Should Know About the Democrat Health Bill - Hidden Taxes, Fines and Bribes

President Obama and his legion, Pelosi, Reid, Stupak, et al, have said basically that once the American people get to know what’s in the healthcare legislation, they’ll actually like it. We all know how very important it is to the President and Speaker Pelosi that the American people be happy.

One must assume, based on the President’s assurance, that once we get to know this health care reform legislation up-close and personally, we’ll be so happy that we’ll all gather on a hilltop and hold hands to sing a groovy song and will vote unanimously to usher in a new age of Aquarius.
Okay. Let’s see if that works.

Here are a couple of things I learned about this legislation since its passage that I had not known previously.

• When you buy your federally mandated, IRS enforced - either by penalty of a fine or imprisonment - health care insurance you may be buying from an insurance company that will donate a portion of what you spend for your insurance to a special fund to help pay for abortions. It is now mandatory that certain insurance carriers provide a portion of what you pay them for health care coverage to a special abortion fund – Stupak’s hastily scribbled hall pass aside, this is now law.
          o There is no special fund for Breast Cancer
          o There is no special fund for Heart Disease
          o There is no special fund for Diabetes or MS
          o There is ONLY a special fund to pay for abortions

• When you sell a home in Mr. Obama’s new and improved America a 4% tax will be levied on your proceeds from the sale which will go to cover Health Care costs.

• Tanning? Apparently Dems want us all to be pasty for some reason…if you frequent tanning salons, you will pay a 10% excise tax.

• Mobility be damned! If you purchase a wheelchair, you will pay a 2.3% excise tax. I’m sure those confined to wheelchairs will consider this to be a great step forward in care.

• Pharmaceutical companies will be allowed to pass a $3 billion annual fee on to you, the consumer, in the form of more expensive drugs and medication.

• About those fines – Citizens who don’t purchase insurance would be subject to a fine of $325 in 2015 and $695 in 2016. Individuals may be subject to a charge equal to as much as 2.5 percent of their income in 2016.

• The Medicare payroll tax will now be applied to investment income, beginning in 2013.
          o A new 3.8 percent tax will be levied on interest, dividends,    capital gains and other investment income for individuals making more than $200,000 a year and couples making more than $250,000.

• The Medicare payroll tax will increase by 0.9 percentage point to 2.35 percent on wages above $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for married couples filing jointly.

• A 40% tax on health benefits happens in 2018 and applies to premiums exceeding $10,200 a year for individuals and $27,500 for families. In other words, that phrase – “If you like your current insurance, it won’t change” was a big fat lie. If you have great insurance, you’ll now be taxed for the privilege. A 40% tax is a change.

• Taxes and more taxes –
          o According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, a nonpartisan agency, this legislation will generate $409.2 billion in additional taxes by 2019. The Congressional Budget Office also says that the Health Care Reform legislation will impose about $69 billion in penalties for both individual and businesses who don’t meet new mandates to buy health insurance.

• Here’s a really sneaky tax “increase” – if you itemize your tax returns, the deductible for medical expenses will change. You will only be allowed to deduct medical expenses in excess of 10% of your adjusted gross income. Currently that number is 7.5%.

• A medical plan tax that includes several different provisions to increase multiple taxes on things such as cosmetic surgery, cafeteria plans, health insurance providers, production and importation of drugs and medical devices, medical information providing, hospitals and the adjusted gross income floor of medical expenses.

• Doctors and hospitals will receive less compensation than they do now to control revenue streams.

• The Medicare program will see $500 billion in cuts to its program along with the Medicare tax being raised.

• 60% of new enrollees in health care programs will be fully subsidized by you.
Then there’s all those “incentives” laced into the legislation - strangely – only for those Representatives who voted “Yes” for this legislation.

• $300 Million more in Medicare subsidies for Louisiana

• NV, MT, WY, ND, UT all receive $2 billion in Medicare subsides

• Connecticut gets $100 Million to build a hospital

• 11 states total receive 8.5 Billion in Medicaid payments


Even the most casual observer must wonder how a struggling economy, with out-of-control unemployment can bear the burden of so much additional taxation and spending.

President Obama gloated, “This is what change looks like.”

To be fair, I suppose it is possible that Barack Obama never actually said the change he was promising would be positive change, or even change that the American people wanted.

This may be what change looks like, but it is also what bitter partisanship looks like.
Obama promised to reach across the aisle. He never mentioned that once he reached across he was going to sucker punch the Republicans.

Never did I hear Obama promise to ignore the will of the people.

Since last night, Obama, Pelosi and their legion have taken time to grin and pose for the cameras and proclaim the passage of this bill as “historic”. They’ve taken time to pat themselves on the back and to say that this legislation compares to the passage of Medicare, the passage of Social Security and the passage of Civil Rights.

In terms of the monumental impact this law will have on our nation, they are correct to rank it up there with all of those past life-changing pieces of legislation. There is however one incredibly glaring difference. Those milestone pieces of legislation all passed with bi-partisan support.

The only bi-partisanship exhibited in the passing of this legislation was on the side of dissent with more than 30 Democrats crossing over to the Republican side of the aisle to cast their “No” votes.  The only Democratic Representative from the state of Texas to vote "No" was Waco's Chet Edwards.

Obama, Pelosi and the others have suddenly become aware of the words “prayer” and “constitution” and the terms “founding fathers” and to watch them use these words to justify their power grab is insulting. It’s every bit as insulting as the American people being told over and over again that “once you understand it” you’ll be happy to have it.

The condescending attitude from this President and this Congress is unprecedented.  The President added to the insult by saying, “We proved that this government -- a government of the people and by the people -- still works for the people."

Mr. President that is perhaps your boldest and most condescending lie to date.
56% of the people in this nation opposed this health care reform legislation. Your actions have proven that your words have no meaning and that your government -- a government of the politician and for the politician -- views the people with absolute disdain.

John G. Winder , The Cypress Times 

Timeline of Major Provisions in the Democrats’ Health Care Package

Source:  Committee on Ways and Means Republicans

2009

•2‐year tax credit (total cap of $1B) for new chronic disease therapy investments
•Medicare cuts to hospitals begin (long‐term care (7/1/09) and inpatient and rehabilitation facilities (FY10))

2010

•States and Federal officials review premium increases
•FDA authorized to approve "follow‐on" biologics
•Increase brand name pharmaceutical Medicaid rebate (from 15.1% to 23.1%)
•Medicare payments to physicians in primarily rural areas increase (2 years)
•Deny "black liquor" eligibility for cellulosic biofuel producers credit
•Tax credits provided to certain small employers for health care‐related expenses
•Increase adoption tax incentives for 2 years
•Codify economic substance doctrine and impose penalties for underpayments (transactions on/after 3/23/10)
•Provide income exclusion for specified Indian tribe health benefits provided after 3/23/10
•Temporary high‐risk pool and high‐cost union retiree reinsurance ($5 B each for 3.5 years) (6/23/10)
•Impose 10% tax on indoor UV tanning (7/1/10)
•Medicare cuts to inpatient psych hospitals (7/1/10)
•Prohibits lifetime and annual benefit spending limits (plan years beginning 9/23/10)
•Prohibits non‐group plans from canceling coverage (rescissions) (plan years beginning 9/23/10)
•Requires plans to cover, at no charge, most preventive care (plan years beginning 9/23/10)
•Allows dependents to stay on parents’ policies through age 26 (plan years beginning 9/23/10)
•Provides limited protections to children with pre‐existing conditions (plan years beginning 9/23/10)
•Hospitals in "Frontier States" (ND, MT, WY, SD, UT ) receive higher Medicare payments (FY11)
•Hospitals in “low‐cost” areas receive higher Medicare payments for 2 yrs ($400 million, FY11)

2011

•Medicare Advantage cuts begin
•No longer allowed to use FSA, HSA, HRA, Archer MSA distributions for over‐the-counter medicines
•Medicare cuts to home health begin
•Wealthier seniors ($85k/$170k) begin paying higher Part D premiums (not indexed for inflation in Parts B/D)
•Medicare reimbursement cuts when seniors use diagnostic imaging like MRIs, CT scans, etc.
•Medicare cuts begin to ambulance services, ASCs, diagnostic labs, and durable medical equipment
•Impose new annual tax on brand name pharmaceutical companies
•Americans begin paying premiums for federal long‐term care insurance (CLASS Act)
•Health plans required to spend a minimum of 80% of premiums on medical claims
•Physicians in "Frontier States" (ND, MT, WY, SD, UT ) receive higher Medicare payments
•Prohibition on Medicare payments to new physician‐owned hospitals
•Penalties for non‐qualified HSA and Archer MSA distributions double (to 20%)
•Seniors prohibited from purchasing power wheelchairs unless they first rent for 13 months
•Brand name drug companies begin providing 50% discount in the Part D “donut hole”
•10% Medicare bonus payment for primary care and general surgery (5 years)
•Employers required to report value of health benefits on W‐2
•Steps towards health insurance administrative simplification (reduced paperwork, etc) begins (5 yr process)
•Additional funding for community health centers (5 years)
•Seniors who hit Part D “donut hole "in 2010 receive $250 check (3/15/11)
•New Medicare cuts to long‐term care hospitals begin (7/1/11)
•Additional Medicare cuts to hospitals and cuts to nursing homes and inpatient rehab facilities begin (FY12)
•New tax on all private health insurance policies to pay for comp. eff. research (plan years beginning FY12)

2012

•Medicare cuts to dialysis treatment begins
•Require information reporting on payments to corporations
•Medicare to reduce spending by using an HMO‐like coordinated care model (Accountable Care Organizations)
•Medicare Advantage plans with a 4 or 5 star rating receive a quality bonus payment
•New Medicare cuts to inpatient psych hospitals (7/1/12)
•Hospital pay‐for‐quality program begins (FY13)
•Medicare cuts to hospitals with high readmission rates begin (FY13)
•Medicare cuts to hospice begin (FY13)

2013

•Impose $2,500 annual cap on FSA contributions (indexed to CPI)
•Increase Medicare wage tax by 0.9% and impose a new 3.8% tax on unearned, nonactive business income for those earning over $200k/$250k (not indexed to inflation)
•Generally increases (7.5% to 10%) threshold at which medical expenses, as a % of income, can be deductible
•Eliminate deduction for Part D retiree drug subsidy employers receive
•Impose 2.3% excise tax on medical devices
•Medicare cuts to hospitals who treat low‐income seniors begin
•Post‐acute pay for quality reporting begins
•CO‐OP Program: Secretary awards loans and grants for establishing nonprofit health insurers
•$500,000 deduction cap on compensation paid to insurance company employees and officers
•Part D “donut hole” reduction begins, reaching a 25% reduction by 2020

2014

•Individuals without gov't‐approved coverage are subject to a tax of the greater of $695 or 2.5% of income
•Employers who fail to offer "affordable" coverage would pay a $3,000 penalty for every employee that receives a subsidy through the Exchange
•Employers who do not offer insurance must pay a tax penalty of $2,000 for every fulltime employee
•More Medicare cuts to home health begin
•States must have established Exchanges
•Employers with more than 200 employees can auto‐enroll employees in health coverage, with opt‐out
•All non‐grandfathered and Exchange health plans required to meet federally mandated levels of coverage
•States must cover parents /childless adults up to 138% of poverty on Medicaid, receive increased FMAP
•Tax credits available for Exchange‐based coverage, amount varies by income up to 400% of poverty
•Insurers cannot impose any coverage restrictions on pre‐existing conditions (guaranteed issue/renewability)
•Modified community rating: individual or family coverage; geography; 3:1 ratio for age; 1.5 :1 for smoking
•Insurers must offer coverage to anyone wanting a policy and every policy has to be renewed
•Limits out‐of‐pocket cost‐sharing (tied to limits in HSAs, currently $5,950/$11,900 indexed to COLA)
•Insurance plans must include government‐defined "essential benefits " and coverage levels
•OPM must offer at least two multi‐state plans in every state
•Employers can offer some employees free choice vouchers for health insurance in the Exchange
•Government board (IPAB) begins submitting proposals to cut Medicare
•Impose tax on nearly all private health insurance plans
•Medicare payment cuts for hospital‐acquired infections begin (FY15)

2015

•More Medicare cuts to home health begin

2016

•States can form interstate insurance compacts if the coverage with HHS approval (2016)

2017

•Physician pay‐for‐quality program begins for all physicians
•States may allow large employers and multi‐employer health plans to purchase coverage in the Exchange.
•States may apply to the Secretary for a limited waiver from certain federal requirements

2018

•Impose "Cadillac tax on “high cost” plans, 40% tax on the benefit value above a certain threshold: ($10,200 individual coverage, $27,500 family or self‐only union multiemployer coverage)

The Key To Socialism In The USA: Destroy The Tea Party Movement

From Dr. Melissa Clouthier:

Why stop at socialism? I mean, really. That’s just a pretty way of saying communism. Here’s the most accurate label for the New Left:  NeoComms. I plan to use it everywhere.

Think I’m being extremist? Well David Frum and all his smooth talking moderate talkers can chew on this:

These debates are happening on the basis of charges like reformism, revisionism, and right opportunism. For me, this is proof that not enough has been done to modernize our organization and to transform Marxism from an old catechism into a real guide to action and a way of understanding the concrete conditions of struggle in our own country and in our own time. As one of the main preconvention documents said, “We have to accept and adapt to the reality that times have changed” (from U.S. Politics at a Transition Point).

The growing influence of the Tea Party movement, the long and grueling fight that was healthcare reform, and so many other features of the current struggle should demonstrate convincingly that though the 2008 election dealt a major blow to the ultra-right, it did not knock them out completely as we had hoped.

Rather than jumping to the conclusion that we need to shift our focus to criticism of Obama, the Democratic Party, or the labor movement, we should instead be seeking to recommit ourselves to defeating the ultra-right and building the broad democratic coalition more strongly than ever. This is the orientation that the main discussion documents point us toward. We have to keep in mind who the “main social force(s) hindering progressive development” are and keep our fire aimed at them (from U.S. Politics at a Transition Point).

If the policy of defeating the ultra-right was correct in the 1980s, the 1990s, and 2008, how can it not be just as correct now that we are in a moment of transition toward a time when we can more forcefully go on the offensive? Let’s update our strategic policy to take account of post-election developments of course, but let’s not take a path that would isolate us from the rest of the coalition for change.

So the threat to Marxism-Leninism isn’t from President Obama and the Democrats. Indeed, the problem with the Democrats is their implementation. The communists merely disagree with how it’s happening. They like that it’s happening.

And in fact, the real problem is the Tea Partiers. The pesky folks pushing back against socialism must be stopped. Notice that they didn’t mention the Republicans.

The article ends with a plea to change the communist movement, maybe even renaming it and making it more palatable to the modern world.

Why? Why hide what you are? Ultimately, don’t bother. Just call yourselves Democrats and be done with it. And commies should worry about Tea Partiers. They name you. And the Democrats, too.

Communists. Socialists. Statists. Totalitarians.

NeoComms.

The name change won’t disguise a NeoComm. The ideas reveal the heart of these people.

Much as they’d like to destroy the Tea Party movement, it won’t happen. The Tea Party movement is organic. It will morph and change and grow. It isn’t headed by an organization. It doesn’t require one leader to exist.

But most of all, the beliefs of the Tea Party folks will help them win in the end. Liberty. Ingenuity. Creativity. Life. Happiness. Freedom. Those values beat the smallness of socialism. Always.

Why Socialism Doesn't Work - A Class Experiment

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had once failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan".

All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.

Could not be any simpler than that.

Without the Consent of the Governed

WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED
By JB Williams Friday, March 26, 2010

Obama’s Unconstitutional Health Care Treachery is just the beginning of a dark and sinister age in American history. Now that Obama & Co. have found the legislative mechanisms to subvert the Law of the Land on the federal health care grab, they intend to rush forward with the passage of “financial reform”—“energy reform”—and “Immigration reform”—none of which are any type of “reform.”

All of these measures are massive federal power and resource grabs, moving the vast resources of the United States from private sector control to public sector control. It is called socialism, by way of democratic process.

All of it will be done over the next few months without the consent of the governed, before the November election when leftists expect to lose their fifteen minutes of power in the voting booth. They plan to advance their anti-American agenda no matter how many stand opposed, and in such a manner that it can never be reversed.

As I pointed out very clearly in my most recent column, for any federal law to be “constitutional,” it must meet this minimum standard…

1. It must be within the limited federal powers enumerated in the Constitution
2. It must enjoy the support of the vast majority of “the governed,” from which all federal powers are derived
3. It must not infringe upon the unalienable individual rights of any citizen
4. It must not infringe upon the rights of any state, protected by the Tenth Amendment
5. It must become law by way of legal legitimate legislative process

Obama’s Health Care treachery violates all five of these standards and as a result, it cannot be allowed to stand. They are just getting started. This is about much more than health care, yet health care is where the people must put a stop to all of it.

How the rest of the world runs is of no consequence to Americans. In the United States of America, “the people” are the government, and our federal government derives every ounce of its power strictly from the “consent of the governed.” Our elected officials are not Kings - they are “servants.”

Read More...

Max Baucus Admits To Being A Communist

Well, maybe not exactly in those words, but he said this:

In an unusual speech on the Senate floor moments ago, Max Baucus declares that the "healthcare bill" to be "an income shift, it is a shift, a leveling to help lower income middle income Americans." Baucus continued, "[t]oo often, much of late, the last couple three years the mal-distribution of income in America is gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy, and the middle income class is left behind. Wages have not kept up with increased income of the highest income in America. This legislation will have the effect of addressing that mal-distribution of income in America."

That is exactly what Communists believe, so Max Baucus is clearly a secret Communist. I suspect most "progressive" Democrats agree with him.

Max Baucus is the Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, and the Democrat most responsible fo Obamacare's final shape other than Nancy Pelosi.

Baucus' candor is appreciated, though the fact that he waited until the bill passed to announce the real agenda behind the massive tax hikes isn't a profile in courage. And the seniors on fixed income who are about to lose Medicare Advantage would laugh at Baucus' pseudo-populism. (h/t Hugh Hewitt)

You can see the video below.



We all knew that the Obamacare bill wasn't about healthcare. There were many ways to achieve healthcare reform that would have cost a fraction of the cost of the Obamacare bill. There had to be more to it. Sen. Baucus has admitted that there was and defined it as a massive redistribution of wealth in America.

The Democrat Party will be remembered as the party responsible for destroying the capitalist system, along with freedom, in America. Now only they can determine how much you have the right to earn. And only they have the right to determine how much you have to give up from your capital to give to those who weren't as successful as you.

The Statue of Liberty is shedding tears. When asked by a citizen, "What have you made?", after coming out of the Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin retorted, "A Republic, if you can keep it." Sadly, it doesn't appear that we can.

We cannot let the statists and the Marxists continue to run this country. America was founded as the Land of the Free, where citizens can be free to live their lives with minimal interference from their government. We must take it back. We have to see that conservative Republicans are elected in November so we can take back the House of Representatives

20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms

20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms
By:  David Hogberg

With House Democrats poised to pass the Senate health care bill with some reconciliation changes later today, it is worthwhile to take a comprehensive look at the freedoms we will lose.

Of course, the overhaul is supposed to provide us with security. But it will result in skyrocketing insurance costs and physicians leaving the field in droves, making it harder to afford and find medical care. We may be about to live Benjamin Franklin’s adage, “People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.”

The sections described below are taken from HR 3590 as agreed to by the Senate and from the reconciliation bill as displayed by the Rules Committee.

1. You are young and don’t want health insurance? You are starting up a small business and need to minimize expenses, and one way to do that is to forego health insurance? Tough. You have to pay $750 annually for the “privilege.” (Section 1501)

2. You are young and healthy and want to pay for insurance that reflects that status? Tough. You’ll have to pay for premiums that cover not only you, but also the guy who smokes three packs a day, drink a gallon of whiskey and eats chicken fat off the floor. That’s because insurance companies will no longer be able to underwrite on the basis of a person’s health status. (Section 2701).

3. You would like to pay less in premiums by buying insurance with lifetime or annual limits on coverage? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer such policies, even if that is what customers prefer. (Section 2711).

4. Think you’d like a policy that is cheaper because it doesn’t cover preventive care or requires cost-sharing for such care? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer policies that do not cover preventive services or offer them with cost-sharing, even if that’s what the customer wants. (Section 2712).

5. You are an employer and you would like to offer coverage that doesn’t allow your employers’ slacker children to stay on the policy until age 26? Tough. (Section 2714).

6. You must buy a policy that covers ambulatory patient services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and newborn care, mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment; prescription drugs; rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices; laboratory services; preventive and wellness services; chronic disease management; and pediatric services, including oral and vision care.

You’re a single guy without children? Tough, your policy must cover pediatric services. You’re a woman who can’t have children? Tough, your policy must cover maternity services. You’re a teetotaler? Tough, your policy must cover substance abuse treatment. (Add your own violation of personal freedom here.) (Section 1302).

7. Do you want a plan with lots of cost-sharing and low premiums? Well, the best you can do is a “Bronze plan,” which has benefits that provide benefits that are actuarially equivalent to 60% of the full actuarial value of the benefits provided under the plan. Anything lower than that, tough. (Section 1302 (d) (1) (A))

8. You are an employer in the small-group insurance market and you’d like to offer policies with deductibles higher than $2,000 for individuals and $4,000 for families? Tough. (Section 1302 (c) (2) (A).

9. If you are a large employer (defined as at least 101 employees) and you do not want to provide health insurance to your employee, then you will pay a $750 fine per employee (It could be $2,000 to $3,000 under the reconciliation changes). Think you know how to better spend that money? Tough. (Section 1513).

10. You are an employer who offers health flexible spending arrangements and your employees want to deduct more than $2,500 from their salaries for it? Sorry, can’t do that. (Section 9005 (i)).

11. If you are a physician and you don’t want the government looking over your shoulder? Tough. The Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to use your claims data to issue you reports that measure the resources you use, provide information on the quality of care you provide, and compare the resources you use to those used by other physicians. Of course, this will all be just for informational purposes. It’s not like the government will ever use it to intervene in your practice and patients’ care. Of course not. (Section 3003 (i))

12. If you are a physician and you want to own your own hospital, you must be an owner and have a “Medicare provider agreement” by Feb. 1, 2010. (Dec. 31, 2010 in the reconciliation changes.) If you didn’t have those by then, you are out of luck. (Section 6001 (i) (1) (A))

13. If you are a physician owner and you want to expand your hospital? Well, you can’t (Section 6001 (i) (1) (B). Unless, it is located in a country where, over the last five years, population growth has been 150% of what it has been in the state (Section 6601 (i) (3) ( E)). And then you cannot increase your capacity by more than 200% (Section 6001 (i) (3) (C)).

14. You are a health insurer and you want to raise premiums to meet costs? Well, if that increase is deemed “unreasonable” by the Secretary of Health and Human Services it will be subject to review and can be denied. (Section 1003)

15. The government will extract a fee of $2.3 billion annually from the pharmaceutical industry. If you are a pharmaceutical company what you will pay depends on the ratio of the number of brand-name drugs you sell to the total number of brand-name drugs sold in the U.S. So, if you sell 10% of the brand-name drugs in the U.S., what you pay will be 10% multiplied by $2.3 billion, or $230,000,000. (Under reconciliation, it starts at $2.55 billion, jumps to $3 billion in 2012, then to $3.5 billion in 2017 and $4.2 billion in 2018, before settling at $2.8 billion in 2019 (Section 1404)). Think you, as a pharmaceutical executive, know how to better use that money, say for research and development? Tough. (Section 9008 (b)).

16. The government will extract a fee of $2 billion annually from medical device makers. If you are a medical device maker what you will pay depends on your share of medical device sales in the U.S. So, if you sell 10% of the medical devices in the U.S., what you pay will be 10% multiplied by $2 billion, or $200,000,000. Think you, as a medical device maker, know how to better use that money, say for R&D? Tough. (Section 9009 (b)).

The reconciliation package turns that into a 2.9% excise tax for medical device makers. Think you, as a medical device maker, know how to better use that money, say for research and development? Tough. (Section 1405).

17. The government will extract a fee of $6.7 billion annually from insurance companies. If you are an insurer, what you will pay depends on your share of net premiums plus 200% of your administrative costs. So, if your net premiums and administrative costs are equal to 10% of the total, you will pay 10% of $6.7 billion, or $670,000,000. In the reconciliation bill, the fee will start at $8 billion in 2014, $11.3 billion in 2015, $1.9 billion in 2017, and $14.3 billion in 2018 (Section 1406).Think you, as an insurance executive, know how to better spend that money? Tough.(Section 9010 (b) (1) (A and B).)

18. If an insurance company board or its stockholders think the CEO is worth more than $500,000 in deferred compensation? Tough.(Section 9014).

19. You will have to pay an additional 0.5% payroll tax on any dollar you make over $250,000 if you file a joint return and $200,000 if you file an individual return. What? You think you know how to spend the money you earned better than the government? Tough. (Section 9015).

That amount will rise to a 3.8% tax if reconciliation passes. It will also apply to investment income, estates, and trusts. You think you know how to spend the money you earned better than the government? Like you need to ask. (Section 1402).

20. If you go for cosmetic surgery, you will pay an additional 5% tax on the cost of the procedure. Think you know how to spend that money you earned better than the government? Tough. (Section 9017).

Congress health care vote: a dark day for freedom in America

The following are great comments about the health care vote by Nile Gardner writing in the Telegraph in the UK:


The passage last night of Barack Obama’s health care reform bill through the House of Representatives is yet another blow to freedom in America inflicted by the Obama administration. The legislation, which comes at a staggering cost of $940 billion, will hugely add to the already towering national debt, now at over $12 trillion. It is yet another millstone round the necks of the American people, already faced with the highest levels of unemployment in a generation.

It is also a great leap forward by the United States towards a European-style vision of universal health care, which will only lead to soaring costs, higher taxes, and a surge in red tape for small businesses. This reckless legislation dramatically expands the power of the state over the lives of individuals, and could not be further from the vision of America’s founding fathers. It has also been rushed through Congress without proper scrutiny, in the face of overwhelming public opposition, and with not an ounce of bipartisan support.

Above all the health care bill is a thinly disguised vanity project for a president who is committed to transforming the United States from the world’s most successful large-scale free enterprise economy, to a highly interventionist society with a massive role for centralized government. The United States has thrived as a nation for over 230 years precisely because of its love for freedom and its belief in free markets.

What we have just witnessed is a massive slap in the face for limited government and the principle of individual responsibility. Its net result will be the erosion of freedom in America, and a further undermining of the country’s economic competitiveness. This may be a political victory for the president and his supporters in Congress, but it is in reality a defeat for America as a great power, and another Obama-led step towards US decline.

The emasculation of America by its 44th President

Melanie Phillips, at the UK Spectator, writes about the weakening of American and the sucking up to America's enemies and the throwing of America's friends under the bus by the current administration:

"Terrific blog post at the Telegraph by Nile Gardner who absolutely gets the point about Obama’s catastrophic strategy of sucking up to America’s enemies while kicking its friends in the teeth:

In the past month we’ve seen ample evidence of this with the State Department’s appalling decision to openly side with Argentina against Great Britain over the Falklands, and the White House’s bullying of Israel. Meanwhile, the Obama team swiftly issued a groveling apology to terrorist sponsor Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, for earlier casting aspersions over the Butcher of Tripoli’s call for a jihad against Switzerland. A barbaric Islamist tyrant with American blood on his hands is, incredibly, treated better than the leaders of both Britain and Israel.

...In the space of just over a year, Barack Obama has managed to significantly damage relations with America’s two closest friends, while currying favour with practically every monstrous dictatorship on the face of the earth. The doctrine of “smart power” has evolved into the shameless appeasement of America’s enemies at the expense of existing alliances. There is nothing clever about this approach – it will ultimately weaken US global power and strengthen the hand of America’s enemies, who have become significantly emboldened and empowered by Barack Obama’s naïve approach since he took office.

The Obama presidency is causing immense damage to America’s standing in the free world, while projecting an image of weakness in front of hostile regimes. Its treatment of both Israel and Britain is an insult and a disgrace, and a grim reflection of an unbelievably crass and insensitive foreign policy that significantly undermines the US national interest.

As a result, the world’s tyrannies are now looking upon the nation that is supposedly the protector of the free world with undisguised contempt at its self-induced weakness. As Jennifer Rubin notes at Commentary, while Hillary Clinton and the Obamites went ballistic at the ‘insult’ to the US of Israel’s housing policy, Clinton herself was subjected to a public and humiliating dressing down by none other than Vladimir Putin. Rubin observes:

Putin has figured out that there is no risk — so long as you aren’t a small democratic ally of the U.S. — of incurring the wrath of the Obami. No condemnations or even frowns will be forthcoming. This is, you see, what comes from throwing ourselves at our adversaries’ feet and scorning our allies. Adversaries learn to take advantage of us while friends learn not to trust us.

Weakening America and strengthening its enemies. Yup, that was all in the prospectus when Obama ran for power. And now we are beginning to see its mortal effects."

Washington Times Commentary: Impeach the President?

Writing commentary in the Washington Times, Jeffrey T. Kuhner says that if Obama signs a healthcare bill which is presented to him through the so-called "Slaughter Solution" he will be violating the Constitution and will have committeed "high crimes and misdemeanors" warranting impeachment.

The Democrats are assaulting the very pillars of our democracy. As the debate on Obamacare reaches the long, painful end, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is confronting a political nightmare. She may not have the 216 votes necessary to pass the Senate's health care bill in the House.

Hence, Mrs. Pelosi and her congressional Democratic allies are seriously considering using a procedural ruse to circumvent the traditional constitutional process. Led by Rep. Louise M. Slaughter, New York Democrat and chairman of the House Rules Committee, the new plan - called the "Slaughter Solution" - is not to pass the Senate version on an up-or-down vote. Rather, it is to have the House "deem" that the legislation was passed and then have members vote directly on a series of "sidecar" amendments to fix the things it does not like.

This would enable House Democrats to avoid going on the record voting for provisions in the Senate bill - the "Cornhusker Kickback," the "Louisiana Purchase," the tax on high-cost so-called "Cadillac" insurance plans - that are reviled by the public or labor-union bosses. If the reconciliation fixes pass, the House can send the Senate bill to President Obama for his signature without ever having had a formal up-or-down vote on the underlying legislation.

Such a move would be in violation of the Constitution, according to Kuhner and others.

The Slaughter Solution is a poisoned chalice. By drinking from it, the Democrats would not only commit political suicide. They would guarantee that any bill signed by Mr. Obama is illegitimate, illegal and blatantly unconstitutional. It would be worse than a strategic blunder; it would be a crime - a moral crime against the American people and a direct abrogation of the Constitution and our very democracy.

It would open Mr. Obama, as well as key congressional leaders such as Mrs. Pelosi, to impeachment. The Slaughter Solution would replace the rule of law with arbitrary one-party rule. It violates the entire basis of our constitutional government - meeting the threshold of "high crimes and misdemeanors." If it's enacted, Republicans should campaign for the November elections not only on repealing Obamacare, but on removing Mr. Obama and his gang of leftist thugs from office.

It is time Americans drew a line in the sand. Mr. Obama crosses it at his peril.

Interesting times we live in.

Read the whole article here.

Technorati Tags: Healthcare Bill,Slaughter Solution,Impeachment,Obamacare

Obamacare: Drafting of a Socialist Democracy

Michael Erickson argues that, rather than showing a deaf ear to the cries of most Americans against the big government approach of "Obamacare," its proponents in fact are pursuing a long term, political advantage, one that will more than make up for expected electoral defeats in November. As such, Republicans cannot hope to win, unless they provide an alternative, positive vision of their own.

In recent weeks, much has been made within conservative media circles of the apparent penchants of President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi, and company for political suicide. The argument is that, in defying the clear will of the American people by forcing through "Obamacare," even if necessary by the most tawdry of Congressional procedural gimmicks, they are showing a cavalier disregard for their own electoral prospects in November.

There is certainly a strong, factual basis for the claim. Polls have been steadily turning against "Obamacare" since the "Cornhusker Kickback" and the "Louisiana Purchase" became common parlance. The old game of "pay to play," which indeed has been a mainstay of legislative sausage making since the machinations of Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton, is now open to public scrutiny and comment like never before possible - thanks in large part to the internet and twenty-four hour cable news. Given how President Obama from the start handed over the details of his own health care agenda to the likes of Reid and Pelosi, it was inevitable that the process would be consumed by legislative trickery, resulting in a loss of public confidence.

Republican victories in special elections in Virginia, New Jersey, and then, most surprisingly, in Massachusetts confirmed the polls, especially as each of these contests emerged as a virtual referendum on "Obamacare." There is now a "perfect storm" brewing, one very capable of replicating, if not outdoing, the GOP takeover of Congress in 1994. Even Democrat spin does not pretend that this is going to be a typical, mid-term loss for the party occupying the White House.

Nevertheless, in spite of this cauldron, the Democrat leadership very defiantly presses ahead. There is no longer even the pretense of "fair play" or "listening to the voters," as President Obama tries to win over votes in the House by offering trips on Air Force One, and as Speaker Pelosi brandishes every one of her carrots and sticks over the remaining few dozen "undecided" Democrat Congressmen. If the House manages to pass the Senate bill, then it will be done as a most crass exposition of legislative skullduggery. It will be the sheer triumph of sophistry over reason, realpolitik over statesmanship, and Washington insiders over the people. Even the victors will need to sweep their embarrassment under the rug and brace themselves for the onslaught come Election Day.

This is not a pretty picture, and yet it easily could have been avoided if indeed President Obama had pursued a sincere, health care summit with the Senate and House Republican leadership, in the aftermath of the victory of Scott Brown in the Massachusetts special election. If he had pulled a "Clinton," by really reaching to the center and "triangulating" himself between the big government solution offered by the Democrats and the status quo presumably being offered by the GOP, then he could have forced both sides into a truly bi-partisan bill - one that would permit him then to transcend the old, partisan fray and recapture his role as the one, and indeed indispensable, agent of change. With some dare and imagination, he could have dismantled overnight the GOP surge accompanying Brown's victory, thereby showing himself to be the master impresario on the Washington stage.

Instead, Obama dug in his heels, by only adding a few, non-controversial, and relatively unimportant, Republican ideas to his post-summit proposal. It was sheer window dressing, and even the mainstream media could not suggest otherwise. In the aftermath, conservatives could not but ask: Is Obama simply not as smart as the "triangulating" President Clinton, who manipulated that Gingrich surge in 1994 into his own re-election two years later? Or is he allowing his ideological drive, one born in said cradle of Frank Marshall Davis, Bill Ayers, and Rev. Jeremiah Wright, to overcome his better judgment?

The implication behind both questions is that President Obama, and the leftist, Democrat leadership on Capitol Hill, are making a mistake; but in considering this from a long term perspective, they are appearing rather as the "fools" who don the stage in several of Shakespeare's plays. They are knaves, to be sure; and, when we see Pelosi in particular bumbling her way through a press conference, there is no doubt a good measure of basic obtuseness as well. Still, I cannot but help see the upturned, sly smile, as the "fool" bespeaks a canny insight in his jest.

If "Obamacare" passes in any form, the Democrats in the short term will face certain obliteration; but, in the long term, they will have done more since both the New Deal and the Great Society to cultivate an overarching dependency class. In creating a system of permanently increasing taxes and deficits (once it becomes clear that the presently imagined manners of paying for this new system will be all too inadequate, especially after the first decade of its existence), this monstrosity will rape whatever financial independence the already overtaxed middle class may be able to muster. More importantly, it will diminish expectations among American consumers of health care, as they reconcile themselves to the inevitable rationing of care. Instead of aspiring for better and more, even in regards to so personal an issue as their own health care, they will become accustomed to having less; and, among the indoctrinated, they actually will see a moral "good" in such a condition. I cannot help but think of Orwell's 1984, where the citizens of Oceania learn over time to regard their subsistence in squalor as a "patriotic duty" for the good of the "war." The next thing we know, we shall have a Vice President tell us that it is our "patriotic duty" to pay higher taxes and to settle for less.

Let us be clear on this point. "Obamacare" cannot but fail, in terms of its own, underlying financial solvency; and this in turn will create a burgeoning demand for a "public option" as a "remedy" for the overtaxed employers and individual policy holders trying in vain to make a living under its conditions. Also, when the United States Supreme Court inevitably throws out as unconstitutional the mandate that Americans purchase health insurance, the argument will be that, absent a "public option," there will be nothing to keep insurance companies in line.

Far from being a bumbling disaster, "Obamacare" will turn out in time to be a most grand, Machiavellian scheme. It will usher forth the socialist democracy for which said Democrat Party has been uniformly committed since Senator George McGovern and the "New Left" wrested power away from the "Old Guard" in 1972. Its proponents understand that, while Americans traditionally aspire to be free, in fact most of them will give up that freedom for the "protections" offered by an ever expanding government, if conditioned to see that they are unexceptional and that their best days indeed are behind them. When we are just another European style socialist democracy, and when most of us are content with that fate, then indeed the tyrants will have won. They know that; it is a key component of their Marxist playbook. That is why they are playing for keeps on this particular bill, in spite of the very real prospects of electoral obliteration in November.

Republicans alone stand between this agenda and the precipice. None of the "third parties" will be able to rise in sufficient opposition; and, in the end, even the loudest of street rallies cannot do more than slow the tide. But if the GOP is to be effective to this end, then it must do more than simply say "NO" to "Obamacare," or merely offer up ideas that it knows all too well will go nowhere on Capitol Hill. It must not play politics as usual on this one, because if it does, then it will turn out to be as much an aid to that emerging tyranny as the Democrat Left.

Rather than be the party of "NO," the Republicans must be the party of "YES" to an alternative, but compelling, vision of the future: YES to a free market based system of health care (rather than a perpetuation of the cartel system that prevails in the status quo), which would include a dismantling of Medicare as we know it in our time; YES to an economy of sound money and fiscal restraint (rather than that loose money, Keynesian worldview with which Republicans have been all too fond since the deficits of the Reagan years); and YES to an American exceptionalism - in health care as in all other industries and cultural aspirations.

We of the "loyal opposition" must be less loyal and more revolutionary. There is no better time than the present to rise to the clarion call of real change. If in our opposition to "Obamacare" we come to see ourselves in that light, as patriots of a noble, American landscape, not as subjects of a global world of scarcity, then the legislative affronts facing us today may have their silver lining.

Palestinian 11 Year Old Children Committed to Death and Destruction

This is why there can be no peace between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs.  Until the Arabs stop this horrific child abuse and stop teaching their children that blowing up Jews is beautiful from the time they are born there will never be a peaceful solution.




Kids seek Shahada­ Martyrdom for Allah

Palestinian children: Martyrdom for Allah is preferable to life and suicide terror is natural.

Presenter: You described Shahada as something beautiful. Do you think it is beautiful?
Walla, age 11: Shahada [Martyrdom] is a very, very beautiful thing. Everyone yearns for Shahada. What could be sweeter than going to paradise?
Presenter: What is better, peace and full rights for the Palestinian people, or Shahada?
Walla: Shahada. I will achieve my rights after becoming a Shahid [Martyr].
Presenter: OK, Yussra, would you agree with that?
Yussra, age 11: Of course; Shahada is sweet. We don't want this world, we want the Afterlife. We benefit not from this life, but from the Afterlife.
Presenter: Do you actually love death?
Yussra: Death is not Shahada.
Presenter: No, I mean the absence after death.
Yussra: No child loves death. The children of Palestine adopted the concept that Shahada is very good. Every Palestinian child, say someone aged 12, says: O Lord, I would like to become a Shahid.
Presenter: We've got a call, Sabrine from Ramallah.
Sabrine [telephone]: Ayyat al-Akhras was 17 when she blew herself up –
Presenter: Sabrine, are you for it or against it?
Sabrine [by telephone]: Of course I support blowing up, it is our right.
Presenter: Sabrine, now, is it natural that Ayyat al-Akhras blows herself up?
Sabrine: Of course it's natural.

Israel and the U.S.: Best friends?

Why Is The US Undermining The Sovereignty Of Israel?

WHY IS THE U.S. UNDERMINING THE SOVEREIGNTY OF ISRAEL?
By Gary A. Aminoff

Here are a few questions that I would like answers to:

When was the last time a sovereign nation announced urban planning decisions in its principal city and had the wrath of the United States rain down upon it?

What right does the Secretary of State have to declare the decision by the City of Jerusalem to allow the construction of 1,600 housing units "insulting" to the United States?

Why is the United States interfering in the right of a nation to conduct its business and provide housing for its residents?

The degrading treatment of a sovereign country by the United States is intolerable to all who believe in the right of nations to govern their own countries.   It is especially troubling to American Jews who wonder why their government is treating Israel differently than it treats any other country?

The answer, of course, lies with the troubled political position of President Barack Obama.  Obama, apparently having no coherent foreign policy, having alienated many of our allies, along with taking actions that make the United States appear weak and indecisive, needs a foreign policy "win."

He, like many on the left, have delusions that the real reason the Palestinian Arabs won't make peace with Israel is because of.....settlements.  Those who know the truth would double over in laughter at the thought, if the matter weren't so serious.

The political naivete demonstrated by this administration, from the President to the Vice President to the Secretary of State to Special Ambassador Mitchell is astounding.  They clearly have no understanding of what motivates the Palestinians.  They think it is (wait for it)...the settlements.

The truth is, and everyone clearly knows this except our brilliant administration, that if Israel were to decide to destroy every settlement in the West Bank or all the housing in Jerusalem there would still be no peace with the Arabs.

Wake up Secretary Clinton, housing of residents of Jerusalem has NOTHING to do with whether the Arabs make peace with Israel or not.  Israel gave up ALL of its settlements, and moved ALL of its population out of Gaza.  Did that make a difference to the Arabs?  Did it result in peace?  Of course not!

They are playing our administration for fools.  The housing issue is simply a "red herring" that enables them to avoid negotiating with Israel.  Danny Danon, a member of the Israeli Knesset had this to say today,

"Secretary Clinton recently embraced the task of helping solve shipping problems of American food products to our shores, yet condemns our right to build homes for Jews in the city of Jerusalem. Jews living in Jerusalem is why Israel exists as a Jewish state. With all due respect, Madam Secretary, forget the gefilte fish for Passover and support our inalienable rights to the Jewish homeland, Israel.”

Here is the bottom line and why there will never be peace anytime soon between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs.

The goal of the Palestinians, whether they are led by Hamas or by Abbas, is not peace with Israel.  It is the total destruction of Israel and its disappearance from the Middle East along with all of the Jews.

You can call for whatever talks you want to arrange.  No amount of talking will result in peace between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs in our lifetime.  Perhaps a new generation of Arabs who are not taught to hate Jews from the time of their birth will be able to accept Israel in the region.  But, like the Jews after the exodus from Egypt, it will take a full 40 years for that generation to come into power.

I will tell you one way that peace could occur tomorrow from the Israeli point of view.  Have the Arabs declare that they recognize the State of Israel and that they agree to stop bombing Israel or attacking Jews.  Achieve that, and you will achieve instant peace.  Since we all know the Arabs will never do that.....we also know there will be no peace.

It is counter-productive for the US to put pressure on Israel.  Israel is not only a sovereign country, it is a democracy, it supports the US and the West, and it is a country which produces innovative products that make our everyday life easier and safer.  The medical achievements that have come out of Israel in the past 20 years have saved an untold number of American lives.

To attempt to humiliate or subjugate Israel for domestic political gain is behavior which is not worthy of the long history and special relationship between the United States and Israel.


Gary Aminoff is the President of the San Fernando Valley Republican Club and is a member of the Republican Jewish Coalition.  He is a commercial real estate broker practicing in Beverly Hills.

The Slaughter Solution Will Lead to Congressional "Slaughter"

The Slaughter Solution is a plan by Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), the Democratic chair of the powerful House Rules Committee and a key ally of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), to get the health care legislation through the House without an actual vote on the Senate-passed health care bill.  You see, Democratic leaders currently lack the votes needed to pass the Senate health care bill through the House.  Under Slaughter’s scheme, Democratic leaders will overcome this problem by simply “deeming” the Senate bill passed in the House - without an actual vote by members of the House.

Read more here , here and here.

Pelosi is so desperate to pass an unpopular bill she is looking for any way this can be deemed "passed" whether the American people want it or not.

"Passing" this bill through parliamentary manipulation will cause a populist uproar even worse than passing it on a straight up or down vote.  The Democrats are determined to destroy their party.

Congressional Suicide Bombers

U.S. Taxpayers Pay to Promote Middle East History Revision

Arlene Kushner, writing in the Washington Times explains how the U.S. Government (meaning U.S. Taxpayers) have funded a 39 page glossy "Palestine Guide Book" just released by the Palestine Authority in which Israel doesn't exist.

The U.S. government, via the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), has provided support for a glossy 39-page "Palestine Guide Book." Just released by the Palestinian Authority Ministry of Tourism, it declares on its first page, "Palestine lies between the Mediterranean Coast and the Jordan River." Not until Page 10 are we informed - under the heading "Country" - that "Palestine comprises the West Bank and the Gaza Strip."

Ms. Kushner then provides a history of the area which history is ignored in the Palestine Guide Book.

The PA, awash in internal politics that are neither moderate nor conciliatory, has been displeased consistently with negotiations - despite some extraordinarily generous offers. It thus suits the PA to create "facts" unilaterally, making its case to the international community rather than at a negotiating table.

This booklet promotes fallacious positions that defy a major U.N. Security Council resolution and a written agreement between Israel and the PLO - both of which require negotiations for determination of final status for Palestinian Arabs.

It is unsettling to see the USAID logo on the back cover, but it is no accident.

Magdouline Slameh, head of the PA Ministry of Tourism Department of Materials and Translation, expressed gratitude to this writer for the wonderful support provided by USAID. She said her staff wrote the booklet in close cooperation with the USAID offices in Ramallah.

Go here to read the whole article.

Technorati Tags: Middle East,Israel,Palestinian HistoryHolocaust,History Revision

Dennis Prager: Why Democrats Don't Care About Our National Debt

Dennis Prager, writing in Townhall.com, explains why the Democrats don't care about the $10 Trillion National Debt:

[...]

"And most Americans do not understand the difference between liberal and left. They do not realize, for example, that there is no major difference between the American Democratic Party and the leftist social democratic parties of Western Europe. They do not know that from Karl Marx to Obama, the left (as opposed to liberals) has never created wealth because it has never been interested in creating wealth; it is interested in redistributing wealth.

Therefore, unprecedented and unsustainable debt, a debt that will negatively affect most Americans' quality of life, renders the dollar increasingly undesirable, and undermines America's prestige and power in the world -- these developments do not particularly disturb the left. They may trouble the president, the Democratic Party, and others on the left on some political level, but that pales in comparison to what the left really wants: a huge government overseeing a giant welfare state and a country with far fewer rich Americans."

[...]

"But the demise of the dollar as the world's currency disturbs the left as much as does America's not getting a gold medal in curling at the Winter Olympics.

And as for America wielding less power in the world, that is a positive development for the American left. It is the world community as embodied in the United Nations that should wield power throughout the world, not an "overstretched," "imperialist" and "militarist" United States.

I used to believe that left and right have similar goals for America, that they just differed in the means they wanted used to get there. I was mistaken. The left has a very different vision of America than those who hold the founding values of America, most especially individualism and small government. And if the price of a once in a lifetime possibility of getting to a giant welfare state dominated by the left is America's steep financial decline, that is a price fully worth paying."

Read the whole article.

The Central Economic Fallacy of the Century

The late Murray N. Rothbard once published a major article titled “Ten Great Economic Myths.” Included on Rothbard’s hit list were the notions that deficits are the cause of inflation and that economists can accurately forecast the future.

One myth that he didn’t cite dominates Washington today: that the economy can be successfully “managed” from some central point. This idea underlies, directly or indirectly, all of the others Rothbard mentions.

Unfortunately, society’s intellectual, political, and economic “mainstream” still accepts what should be called the Central Economic Fallacy of the Twentieth Century. The “mainstream” just doesn’t get it. Thus, we continue to see a basic progression. First, government subsidizes x or regulates y to correct for some government-diagnosed problem z. Unwanted side effects result, and z, assuming it exists, often grows worse. Government intervenes again to fix the side effects and redouble its efforts to battle z. More undesirable side effects result. And the process continues, with government growing inexorably as interventions accumulate. More and more of the economy is micromanaged through increasing webs of subsidy, regulation, and quick fix. The logical end result, as Ludwig von Mises has shown in great detail, is socialism.

Read the whole article. The author makes a lot of sense.

The Democrat Light Brigade Rides Into The Valley of Death

Bill Saracino, writing in the Political Vanguard has an article about the Democrats and their drive to oblivion.

For one thing, the interests of re-electing Obama in 2012 might in fact be served by having a Republican-controlled congress as a foil in 2011 and 2012– more on this in a future column. Be that as it may, the opportunity for leftists to socialize 17% of the American economy does not come around often. To the true-believing socialists in Ms. Pelosi’s caucus and Mr. Obama’s White House – and there are many – such an achievement is worth sacrificing individual political careers, especially since most of the casualties will be among the less liberal members of the Democrat caucuses. Their thinking is that even a small step forward on health care will be the camel’s nose under the tent – irreversible in the future and certain to grow, as is the history of virtually all government entitlement programs of the past.

Sadly that may be true, and as such is bad news in the long run, but likely very good news in the short run for Republicans. President Obama and Ms. Pelosi appear content to treat Democrat members of Congress as the famed British Light Brigade of the Crimean War was treated by their commanders. The Light Brigade (cavalry) was ordered by incompetent officers to attack entrenched Russian and Turkish artillery. The result was a predictable slaughter of the cavalry.

Alfred Lord Tennyson immortalized the charge of the Light Brigade in his eponymous poem. Reading it again, it is difficult not to see recalcitrant Democrats in Congress in the poem’s stanzas, being ordered by their commanders onward, ever onward, to attack the entrenched artillery of vehement voter resistance to Obamacare.

“Half a league, half a league, half a league onward, into the valley of death rode the six hundred. Forward the Light Brigade, was there a man dismayed, not though the soldiers knew, someone had blundered. Theirs not to make reply, theirs not to reason why, theirs but to do or die, into the valley of death rode the six hundred.”

There are currently 314 — not 600 — Democrat members of Congress. Those who have not drank the Pelosi/Obama Kool-Aid will shortly have to decide if they want to follow orders, vote for Obamacare and thereby ride into the valley of death that the voters will prepare for them this November. It will be fascinating to watch. Enough Democrats to defeat Obamacare know it is fatally flawed, know that “someone has blundered,” those someones being the president and Madame Speaker.

If those Democrats decide that the time has come to “make reply” and “to reason why,” they will stand firm and Obamacare will lose in the House. If, howeverb they decide that theirs is “but to do or die,” some form of Obamacare will pass, and the Democrat congressional majority will likely ride into the valley of death this November.

Go here to read the whole article.

U.N. Encourages Hollywood To Produce Leftist Propaganda Films

The United Nations is in Hollywood to encourage filmmakers to produce films that support a leftist agenda. The Los Angeles Times published an article about it today.

When United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was foreign minister of South Korea from 2004 through 2006, he experienced directly how entertainment can shape popular perceptions, when not one but two TV networks began airing miniseries about the lives of Korean diplomats.

Although the series romanticized diplomat life with requisite dashes of love and conflict, the net effect for the foreign ministry was a burnished public image. "Good storytelling is a very strong tool to change the attitudes and minds of people," Ban recalled in an interview.

Ban said that's what was on his mind this week as he led a veritable platoon of top U.N. officials, including the heads of UNICEF and the World Health Organization, on a mission to Hollywood to build relationships with the entertainment community and encourage film and television story lines about issues high on the U.N. agenda, such as climate change and violence against women.

"I'm here to talk to the creative community -- Hollywood -- about how they could help the United Nations' work," he said."I've been meeting presidents and prime ministers, and leaders of the business communities, but my audience has always been very limited. If a journalist picks up what I have said, that's all I can do, but I really want to have the U.N. message coursing continually, and spreading out continuously to the whole world. The creative community, through [TV] and movies, can reach millions and millions of people at once, repeatedly, and then 10 and 20 years after a film's been made, the messages can be constant."

Read the whole article here.