Obama Health Care

“I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits either now or in the future. Period”.

Thus saith The One.

So let it be written; so let it be done.

Only in an America populated by drones primarily educated through a government controlled idiot factory could such a contention inspire serious applause.

Even after the Obama-advocated “economic stimulus package” – also known as “the trillion dollar mulligan” – was rammed at breakneck speed through what passes for a system in Washington, there are still millions who believe Obama’s professed fidelity to economic restraint. And why do they believe?

Because he says so.

That is all that is required.

He is Obama.

This is truly an amazing thing to behold. It’s as though we’ve slipped past even the pretense of logical, economic and even mathematical reality and entered an age of Monopoly Money fueled fantasy. The numbers just don’t matter anymore.

Change is in; math is out.

But wait, it gets better.

Obama went on to proclaim that, “Nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have.”

In an AP fact check released immediately after his speech, the following flavor was added to the above recipe:

Employers sponsor coverage for most families, and they’d be free to change their health plans in ways that workers may not like, or drop insurance altogether. The Congressional Budget Office analyzed the health care bill written by House Democrats and said that by 2016 some 3 million people who now have employer-based care would lose it because their employers would decide to stop offering it.

In the past Obama repeatedly said, “If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period.” Now he’s stopping short of that unconditional guarantee by saying nothing in the plan “requires” any change.

See? It’s always those evil employers that are the cause of all of your trouble.

The AP article went on to reveal numerous additional “factually challenged” Obamaisms, such as:

OBAMA: Requiring insurance companies to cover preventive care like mammograms and colonoscopies “makes sense, it saves money, and it saves lives.”

THE FACTS: Studies have shown that much preventive care — particularly tests like the ones Obama mentions — actually costs money instead of saving it. That’s because detecting acute diseases like breast cancer in their early stages involves testing many people who would never end up developing the disease. The costs of a large number of tests, even if they’re relatively cheap, will outweigh the costs of caring for the minority of people who would have ended up getting sick without the testing.

The Congressional Budget Office wrote in August: “The evidence suggests that for most preventive services, expanded utilization leads to higher, not lower, medical spending overall.”

That doesn’t mean preventive care doesn’t make sense or save lives. It just doesn’t save money.


OBAMA: “If you lose your job or change your job, you will be able to get coverage. If you strike out on your own and start a small business, you will be able to get coverage.”

THE FACTS: It’s not just a matter of being able to get coverage. Most people would have to get coverage under the law, if his plan is adopted.

In his speech, Obama endorsed mandatory coverage for individuals, an approach he did not embrace as a candidate.

He proposed during the campaign — as he does now — that larger businesses be required to offer insurance to workers or else pay into a fund. But he rejected the idea of requiring individuals to obtain insurance. He said people would get insurance without being forced to do so by the law, if coverage were made affordable. And he repeatedly criticized his Democratic primary rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton, for proposing to mandate coverage.

“To force people to get health insurance, you’ve got to have a very harsh penalty,” he said in a February 2008 debate.

Now, he says, “individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance — just as most states require you to carry auto insurance.”

He proposes a hardship waiver, exempting from the requirement those who cannot afford coverage despite increased federal aid.


OBAMA: “There are now more than 30 million American citizens who cannot get coverage.”

THE FACTS: Obama time and again has referred to the number of uninsured as 46 million, a figure based on year-old Census data. The new number is based on an analysis by the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured, which concluded that about two-thirds of Americans without insurance are poor or near poor. “These individuals are less likely to be offered employer-sponsored coverage or to be able to afford to purchase their own coverage,” the report said. By using the new figure, Obama avoids criticism that he is including individuals, particularly healthy young people, who choose not to obtain health insurance.


Of course, there will be scores of reports and revelations concerning the obviously logical incoherence of what Obama has proposed.

Sadly, none of them are likely to matter.

Change is in; facts are out.

This is where the ace-in-the-hole (not to be confused with anything that Van Jones might say) that is a populace mostly “educated” by the state and for the state comes into play. With the vast majority of Americans deliberately stripped of their nation’s true history and heritage, they are denied exposure to the perspectives and philosophies that inspired a revolution against an oppressive government and gave birth to the greatest nation in human history. With critical thought and accurate American history intentionally eliminated from the state-controlled system of mass education, government is granted a population more than willing to embrace Obamaism and incapable of doing much else.

All by design.

Change is in; logic and history are out.

So let it be written; so let it be done.


See also: “Create a Godless nation? YES! WE! CAN!”

For more, please visit the FIRE BREATHING CHRISTIAN BLOGWIRE or head on over to the full FIRE BREATHING CHRISTIAN WEBSITE – Copyright 2009 S.A.Buss

14 Responses

  1. Much of the current problem with expensive medical care is due to government interference between customer and provider.
    [] Scarcity – via licensing, and monopoly of controlled substances to allopathy.
    [] Inflation – by requiring adults to buy permission from one government licensee in order to buy medicines from another government licensee.
    [] Tort abuse – a government of lawyers, by lawyers, for lawyers – what else could you expect?
    [] Bureaucratic overhead – government imposed as well as private insurance imposed regulations, paperwork, records, requiring costly staffs to deal with.
    [] Scarcity – restricted access to medical education.
    [] Scarcity – hierarchical oligarchy, with nurses prevented from rising to become physicians.
    [] Inflation – the burden of taxation is passed on to the patient, who is the ultimate tax payer for all the providers – where else do the providers get their money if NOT from the patient?

    There is nothing government can REFORM except getting itself out of the way.

    In contrast to "government run health care", let us consider REAL UNIVERSAL health care – which means everyone can care for anyone.
    [] Decriminalize giving health care;
    [] Decriminalize the trade and possession of medicine and equipment;
    [] Expand opportunities for medical education;
    [] Offer credentials by government supervised examination, regardless of where or how one learned medicine; and
    [] Eliminate tort abuse with "Satisfaction guaranteed, or your money back!" – – – and nothing more.

    And for those found to be criminally negligent, prosecute!
    Otherwise, restore FREEDOM and FREE CHOICE to health care.

  2. One of the reasons the United States ranks 37th (or wherever, depending on which "study" one uses) is that they all heavily weight evaluation on how much the federal government of each nation spends on the general health care of that particular country. Since it is a relatively very low for the United States, this country is heavily penalized for this fact alone.

    And quite frankly, if I'm going to fight a corporation for health care I'd rather fight a private one with rules that can be amended or stretched instead of a faceless government bureaucracy 3000 miles away who would probably have a file on me that notes the re-education camp didn't work and I need to be punished for that.

  3. Frankly, this is better criticism than I expected. It is factually defective in Several ways and drawn on too few sources for such a complex subject, but it is neither hysterical nor unfair. There are economic challenges to achieving universal health care. The question, for me, is why is America the only first-world country that can not solve this problem which continues to be a grave threat to our economy as well as to our health?

    Remember, even though we outspend every other nation on earth per person on health care, America is 37th in world health for a reason. I think it is fascinating that so many Americans are willing to fight for the profits of insurance companies at the expense of their own health.

  4. Hmmm. Illegals are already benefiting from Medicade. Planned Parenthood, that bastion of Liberal virtue, recieves large amounts of Government (read taxpayer) dollars. Also, if something is not specifically forbidden in these bills, they'll find a way to do it. Yes, Obama was full of it. He's the leftist many of us warned people about. Post partisan? What a crock. This has been the most partisan, most corrupt Congress in recent memory, and only partisan hacks refuse to see that. The Democrats make the argument, even better than the Republicans, why 1 party rule is so dangerous to our Republic. Republicans lost their control because they became arrogant. The Democrats have eclipsed them by a factor of 10. Also, the little cry baby needs to drop the Bush bashing. He forgets that the Democrats took Congress back in '06, on the premise of ending the Iraq war, and ending the culture of corruption. It was a LIE. Instead, these despicable people used our troops as pawns, rather than use their control of the purse to end the war, not to mention the proliferation of corruption and cronyism. Talk about a bunch of butt smooching sychophants and hypocrites.

    1. What kind of fool are you billiam? The Democrats couldn't even come close to the arrogance of the last administration. Not in 100 years, let alone the next 8.

      And gets your facts straight goofus. The Democrats took back the House of Representatives, not the whole Congress.

      1. Excuse me, Mike, but the Senate is controlled by the Democrats by a 58-40 majority, with an independent voting with them the vast majority of the time. They will also pick up another seat when "The Swimmer's" seat in MA is filled next January. Since they also control the House and the presidency, it seems to me that you are the one who needs to check on facts.

        And arrogance? At least GW knew he was just a rich cowboy. And he had experience as a CEO, running the Texas Rangers and the State of Texas. Duh-1 has not a clue he's nothing more than a community activist Chicago thug. Great qualifications for being the CEO of the country. He was just like a high school grad on his first job sweeping floors, looking at the boss' job from the outside and telling himself he was good enough to do that, ya don't need no shtinkin' training ta run this company!

        It's difficult to think of a more arrogant attitude than that.

  5. Now, back on topic.

    I see no logic backing up any of your arguments on your blog.

    Do you have a solution to propose for the Health Plan needs of this great country? If so, please present the logical details.

    And please be more respectful than the so-called Christians of the GOP such as Boehner, Wilson, and McConnell who embarrassed themselves today with their contemptuous reactions in front of our well-mannered and logical President Obama.

    Are you in the same class?

  6. Rep Joe Wilson is a Col in the US Army reserves.

    Please contact his Commanding Officer and remind him of his duty to maintain discipline in the ranks.

    Article 88: Contempt Toward Officials: Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

    1. He was not in an "activated" status so by the rules cannot be held accountable for minor offenses under the UCMJ. Read the last sentence of the article -duty or present implies that he is either in uniform or in an activated status. Discipline in the ranks refers to his position in the chain of command, which clearly, being in his civilian job, he was not part of.
      His CO would likely laugh this one off.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *