A Bipartisan Plan to Wreck the System
The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Wildear
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: A Bipartisan Plan to Wreck the System

  1. #1
    Senior Member TXduckdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Republic of Texas

    Default A Bipartisan Plan to Wreck the System

    Here's a little political humor from the Wall Streetr Journal....

    The health-care address President Obama should really give to Congress.By HOLMAN W. JENKINS, JR...

    What follows is a leaked first draft of President Obama's speech on health care tonight, complete with instructions for Democrats in the audience.

    Members of Congress, Ladies and Gentlemen, Children of the Obama Youth Corps—I come to you tonight to speak frankly about our nation's health-care crisis and how we in Washington can make it worse.

    Salami tactics on health care have long involved slicing the salami from both ends.

    On one hand, we enlarge the government's role in providing health care, making more and more voters dependent on Washington.

    On the other, we enact regulations and restrictions to keep driving the private insurance system off a cliff.

    To the American people I promise tonight, whatever compromises lay ahead, whatever the arduous negotiations, Democrats and Republicans will work together to continue to drive the current system off a cliff. (Applause from Democrats in the audience; Nancy Pelosi beams.)

    Even if we cannot enact my administration's "public option," we will extend the great work of previous generations, making sure private health care continues to be unaffordable to more and more Americans, and piling up fresh mandates on employers so fewer and fewer of our citizens will have either jobs or health insurance.

    At the same time, with tax dollars, we will continue to subsidize ever more consumption of that which everyone agrees we already consume too much.

    We may not get there right away. But by taking these steps, we will bring closer the day when the only form of health care for most Americans will be government-provided health care, and the dream will never die. (Pandemonium among Democrats. Nancy Pelosi daubs her eye.)

    I want to give a shout-out to our Republican friends, who have been with us every step of the way, who have been an important part of our salami progress so far—by pushing various "patient's bills of rights," defending the tax giveaways that encourage spending regardless of cost or benefit; by expanding Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans benefits and subsidized health care for middle-class children.

    I say tonight, without Republican help, we could never have brought the system to its current dysfunction and I thank you.

    Now, much has been said about our "public option" that's been confusing and misinformed. It's in that spirit that I speak to you tonight.

    Critics wonder: How can a new "public option" bring meaningful competition to the health-insurance marketplace and drive down costs?

    They miss the point. The great work done so far has tended to squash competition, and we would continue this work—by restricting the ability of insurance companies to design and market their policies; by regulating what coverage they can offer; by using tax distortions to keep consumers in the dark about what their health care really costs, so they will continue to treat it as a "free lunch" when it actually gobbles up more and more of their disposable incomes.

    People, this is why insurance rates keep going up and up, and why a competitive marketplace, in which consumers reward those who provide high-quality care at low cost, hardly exists. And I say again, with all humility, this is a great bipartisan achievement.

    So the purpose of our public option is not to change any of this, but merely to scoop up the growing number of Americans who won't be able to get private coverage because we've made private coverage so expensive and uneconomic.

    Some say the public plan would be unfairly subsidized with tax dollars. No, no, no—the public option would be self-sustaining, just like the Post Office, just like Medicare, just like the federal government, which carefully lives within the tax revenues it receives each year.*

    Now, my administration is not wedded to the "public option." I know my Republican friends say families should not have health care. They believe we can save money by lying down before rapacious insurance CEOs. They say the indigent should be encouraged to practice self-surgery (I'm sure some Republican somewhere thinks this is a good idea).

    But let's put aside our differences and recognize how much we have already accomplished together. I say to Republicans and Democrats alike, if we can just keep working together to inflate the burden of public and private health-care spending as we have the past 30 years, we will push the system to the breaking point. Yes, we can. Yes, we can. (Democrats chant, "Yes we can." Nancy Pelosi levitates above the audience, flies around the chamber three times and bursts into flame. . . .)

    . . . Together we can push our current health-care system over a cliff, and then—well, then [STRONG ENDING HERE]


    *Certain factual statements subject to OMB review.
    Train the dog, the ribbons will take care of themselves.

  2. Remove Advertisements

  3. #2
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007


    Thought someone else might have come across this sooner. I'm wondering which parts of HB3200 will be retained in the "new" proposals.

    Detroit News posted at 8:05 am on August 29, 2009
    by Ed Morrissey

    Earlier in the week, we found out that unions have good reasons to conduct an Astroturf campaign on behalf of ObamaCare - in fact, ten billion good reasons. The Detroit Free Press reported that HR3200 gives a $10,000,000,000 subsidy to union pension and benefit plans, a key component that had gone largely unremarked. Later in the week, the Detroit News' editorial board blasted the payoff and demanded its removal:

    One reason the public so distrusts the health care plan being considered by Congress is that so many troublesome details keep bubbling out of the massive legislation.

    The latest example is the $10 billion taxpayers will be asked to shell out to prop up the United Auto Workers' retiree health insurance program.

    In effect, it would ask every taxpayer, regardless of whether they'll have health insurance coverage themselves after they retire - and most won't - to chip in to maintain the UAW's coverage, which even after the union's givebacks is still better than what the average American worker receives.

    That's one important point to remember. Union health plans will be exempt from the limitations of ObamaCare, allowing unions to operate as insurers while forcing everyone else into government-approved plans in "exchanges". Instead of having the union pay for their own plans, taxpayers will subsidize them, while getting less themselves.

    The Detroit News notes that the biggest beneficiary of this largesse will be the United Auto Workers, whose pension plans are in serious trouble. This should be a showstopper anyway, as the American taxpayer has bailed out the UAW not once but twice, first in dumping billions of dollars into GM and Chrysler, and then in the politicized bankruptcies that gave the UAW large portions of both companies.

    We've spent enough on the UAW, thank you very much. As the editorial argues, it's up to the UAW to adjust their pension plans to bring them into financial reality, not to the American taxpayers to subsidize their failure for a third time in a year.
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  4. #3


    TXduckdog, Hi guy, I left you a note on your Baucus
    Care line. It would be just as apropriate here. Somehow we seem to hear only the negitive from a lot of people, nothing positive. Where is what can be done or more important should be done? I am asking you and anyone else who has a viable idea to bring it forth instead of pandering to the worst throughts, destructive and negativity. You and many other Authors a this site seem to posses the fundimental ability to use intellegent thought but fall short of the God given basis for this gift. Be constructive and not destructive, anyone can tear done. I would like to see your positive ideas. What you can do to fix it, not talk down any fix. Something that will show me that you have independent thinking.

    We had a problem starting back in the 1950's when the market first expanded with Blue Cross, then Blue Shield. The concensus was that it would work about 10 to 20 years and then would turn into exactly what we have today. Granted, took a little longer but it is probably worse than we expected. We had people back there who could think clearly actually interpret the probable future.

    The system, when it was new, did work. If enough people would have listened to those forward lookers, then we would not have to change it now. What stopped them then where negating talk and outright greed of many. The final nail was a lack of concern about any thing not happening tomorrow. (Boy, I can make a fortune off this insurance thing/and each year they had to up the anti.) By the way how old are you or was that your dad.

    Badmouthing over, let us work together to fix it, not to do nothing or make it worse. If you had to REALLY REALLY use the current system of private insurance, in all likelyhood it would be you writing this.

    P.S. I have had Single Payer since 1965... love it. Because of family I am familar with for profit insurance or no insurance. The last option totally sucks if you or your spouse have worked your entire lifetime. My wife just gave me another parting truism. Anyone who has SINGLE PAYER including the most Right Wing of the Right Wing will kill you before giving it up.

  5. Remove Advertisements

  6. #4
    Senior Member TXduckdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Republic of Texas


    So, Newbie...address your specific concerns from this opinion piece of the WSJ.

    The only thing i'm interested in is keeping the federal government out of this issue.

    The negativity on this board is from the fundamental disagreement we have with the Dems/Left who thing the federal government has the answer for everything.
    Train the dog, the ribbons will take care of themselves.

Similar Threads

  1. Pro Plan smoe plan
    By Steve Shaver in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 104
    Last Post: 05-13-2008, 02:26 PM
  2. Septic system ?
    By 5labs in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 03-12-2008, 12:44 PM
  3. Dog Trainer Killed In Wreck
    By Rosemary Westling in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 11-15-2007, 02:16 PM
  4. remote system help
    By pupaloo in forum Product Review
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-09-2006, 12:51 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts