Tag Archives: health care reform

Obamacare Defender Pissed at Losing Her Policy, Paying Higher Rates

crew-2231

Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.

To be filed under living proof that liberal voters and supporters of Obama are to ignorant to vote. 

 

21

After attempting to force the boat that will not float.

You now have the temerity (balls), to whine about it when you thought it was just great to force it on Americans who do not want it and will refuse to sign up for it.

It’s called karma madame.

 

obamacare_rally001_16x9

Shame on you Ms. Sue Klinkhamer, first for working for Obama and being dumb enough not to figure out that you would be standing in line with the rest of the cake eaters. 

I have no pity for your plight. 

After one full term of the loser, one would think you would be smart enough to get a clue.  Apparently not.

Suggest you stick your whining where the sun don’t shine, you know the place where Obama has his head when he is awake and not on the greens or vacation.

Reason Magazine

|

Photo: Found in a ghetto trash can.

The Chicago Sun-Times reports on the oh-so-ironic reversal of Sue Klinkhamer, 60, who used to work for Rep. Bill Foster (D-Ill.), who lost his seat partly because voters didn’t want Obamacare. Klinkhamer wrote her old boss:

dt.common.streams.StreamServer

Sue Klinkhamer, Photo: Chicago Sun Times

“I spent two years defending Obamacare. I had constituents scream at me, spit at me and call me names that I can’t put in print. The congressman was not re-elected in 2010 mainly because of the anti-Obamacare anger.

When the congressman was not re-elected, I also (along with the rest of our staff) lost my job. I was upset that because of the health care issue, I didn’t have a job anymore but still defended Obamacare because it would make health care available to everyone at, what I assumed, would be an affordable price. I have now learned that I was wrong. Very wrong.”

Me: sniff sniff LMAO

On September 1 of this year, Klinkhamer was paying $291 a month for an insurance policy with a $3,500 deductible. Those days are over, though, as of December 31, when her policy goes away. Instead,

“I can have a plan with similar benefits for $647.12 [or] I can have a plan with similar [but higher] pricing for $322.32 but with a $6,500 deductible.”

Read more here.

What arguably makes this state of affairs worse is that the Obama administration seems to have known all along that folks such as Klinkhamer were gonna get screwed. But hey, President Obama won the election, so get over it, right?

Continue reading

Mr. President, For the Sake of the Economy and Our Constitution: Resign!

Comments by Jim Campbell
Great read but one thing is glaringly missing. With a paper tiger in the White House who is known more by world leaders, dictators and despots as “The Bowing Queen” and a complete push over.
Want a great laugh? Google Pictures use the terms Obama Bowing, he is even shown bowing to Nancy Pelosi.  For the record Congressman Allen West as a President would bow to no man and apologize to nobody for America’s greatness.
Obama believes he can talk and charm his way to achieve his unknown goals and objectives of his foreign policy. How’s that working for you Sparky with Iran, Egypt, your illegal war in Libya and now Somalia?  No sir for the sake of the entire world you must resign immediately.  The world looks to the US  as a bastion of freedom, you would destroy that and thus you make the world a much more dangerous place . 

Big Government

It’s been popular lately for GOP Presidential hopefuls and many conservative pundits to declare that we can’t afford four more years of Barack Obama in the White House. I agree, but I would take it a step further. I don’t think we can afford even another year and a half of this big government, economy-busting wrecking ball. It’s time for the President to cut his losses and resign.

Continue reading

IRS chief: Buy health insurance or lose your tax refund

It seems rather obvious that the czars who put this horrible plan together didn’t quite understand the following: It will be a job killer.  Smaller companies will go out of business. This is a time for more tax cuts, not tax increases. Simply stated, profits employ, taxes destroy. Don’t think a lot of people are going to be worrying about loosing a refund if they are unemployed.
Another option worthy of consideration is filling out a W-4 and claiming tax exempt status.  The IRS won’t like it, you will be required to pay it eventually with 6% interest, but that is certainly a way to shut the money off from the clowns that are writing bad check on the generations to come.  They all belong in jail.  Random thoughts while watching the passing parade, I’m J.C.
Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Douglas Shulman discusses his role in overseeing the collection of $2.4 trillion in tax revenue during a luncheon gathering at the National Press Club in Washington, Monday, April 5, 2010. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

Individuals who don’t purchase health insurance may lose their tax refunds according to IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman. After acknowledging the recently passed health-care bill limits the agency’s options for enforcing the individual mandate, Shulman told reporters that the most likely way to penalize individuals that don’t comply is by reducing or confiscating their tax refunds.

Speaking at the National Press Club on Monday, Shulman downplayed the IRS’s role in enforcing the recent overhaul of the health insurance industry by claiming the agency would not aggressively target individuals who don’t purchase coverage. He noted that the health-care bill expressly forbids the agency from freezing bank accounts, seizing assets or pursuing criminal charges, but when pressed said the IRS would most likely use tax refund offsets to penalize those that don’t comply with the mandate. The IRS uses refund offsets to collect from individuals that owe the federal government a delinquent debt.

“These are not the kinds of things we send agents out about,” Shulman said. “These are things where you get a letter from us. Congress was very careful to make sure there was nothing too punitive in this bill.”

Continue reading

What Hath Queen Nancy Wrought?

David Horowitz’s NewsReal
When it comes to all things Pelosi, one must look to the silver lining in the continuous movement of dark clouds she casts upon us.  If she and Harry are dumb enough to use the “Slaughter Solution”, aptly named, it will be the end of liberalism and most of the Democratic Party as we know it.

More important, leaving in past bribes like, Sen. Ben Nelson’s Cornhusker Kickback and Sen. Mary Landrieu’s Louisiana Purchase, will make the entire legislation deemed Unconstitutional. Using the SWAG method, (Scientific Wild Ass Guess) two areas come immediately to mind. Doubtless should the law pass it will be challenged by other clauses as well.

Article 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. (seems to me if I’m paying for people’s medicare in Nebraska, and Louisiana, as well as other bribes yet to be discovered, I’m being deprived by this bill of my liberty and freedom, by this poorly written bill.
KEY ISSUEAs has been pointed out in several venues in the last few days, Article 1 Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution requires that before a bill becomes law, (1) “Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it”; and, (2) “in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively.”

The process of nullification guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment is currently being used to by the states to protect it’s citizens from the heavy handed abuse of power by the 111th most “most honest and transparent” congress in history.  Random thoughts while watching the blind, crippled, and crazy attempt to show Americans what’s good for them, J.C

Nancy the First, by the Grace of Gaia, of the Divided States of America, of Her other Realms and Territories, Queen, Head of the Commissariat, Defender of the Faithless, declares that her royal decree alone will suffice to make ObamaCare the law of the land.

In a surprising moment of candor, Nancy of the House of Pelosi said she wishes to avoid a vote in the House on ObamaCare because the legislation would be defeated in that chamber. “Nobody wants to vote for the Senate bill,” said Her Majesty Queen Nancy.

Winner: Ms. Brain Dead, USA 2010

This helps to explain Queen Nancy’s support of the so-called Slaughter Solution. Under the plan, the House would vote on a procedural motion, that is, the “rule” that is supposed to govern debate on a matter going before the House. In this case a “self-executing rule” would be used that would “deem” the Senate version of ObamaCare to have been passed.

To the weasels who support it the advantage of using a self-executing rule is that lawmakers would be able vote to approve the Senate version of the ObamaCare legislation –complete with unpopular add-ons such as Sen. Ben Nelson’s Cornhusker Kickback and Sen. Mary Landrieu’s Louisiana Purchase– and then be able to tell their constituents that technically all they did was approve a procedural motion.

Complete Article:

The Byrd Rule for Reconciliation: Never, Never, Never to be Used as a Shield for Controversial Legislation

This is an outstanding one minute video that shows Robert Byrd, explaining why reconciliation was not allowed under the Byrd Rule for Hillary Care.  So sweet because it comes from the author and one of their own. Random thoughts while watching the passing parade, J.C.

by Jeff Hedgpeth

The Byrd rule states that a bill should not be considered under reconciliation if it

“produce[s] changes in outlays or revenue which are merely incidental to the non-budgetary components of the provision.”

While there is some question regarding the interpretation of the word “incidental”, Senator Byrd (D-WV) seems rather clear in the above video about his interpretation of “incidental” in respect to a health care bill – specifically Hillary-Care.

The Left can call reconciliation on Health Care Reform “a simple up or down vote” if they choose, but it doesn’t change the fact that America doesn’t want this bill, or that the author of the Byrd Rule himself spoke out emphatically against its use for such a bill.

Rich Terrel Rich is a VERY talented political satirist and artist. I recently found him his art is featured though out my site. Want some great pictures click on his name above.

Hepsy


Voting Female:

SamHenry’s Blog:

Dancing Czars:

Government Mess

Lisa in Texas

No Left Turnz

Socialism is not the answer

Government Mess

Diary of a Mad Conservative

Government Mess

No Left Turnz

Socialism is not the answer

Obama Calls for ‘Up or Down’ Vote on Health

Using whatever means necessary, I’m still betting against the pundents, they are wrong.  This bill will go down in flames.  When it doesn’t please remember in spite of the hand wringing, and spin about the republicans being “the party of no”.  Republicans in fact  demonstrated at the summit they are the party of “Hell No” if the bill couldn’t be written from scratch.  For sure we will hear about republication obstruction. This again is false as republicans produced 6 areas in which both parties could agree. Obama would have none of it. My way or the highway.  He will be gone soon, but it would serve him well to remember politics is the art of compromise.

We must not forget, that up until this time, the democrats have not been able to agree upon the bills in the house and senate that apparently will go through and up or down vote at this juncture.    Why any of them would walk the plank for the radicals in their party is beyond me.

Democrats face an especially tough fight in the House, where the ranks of the undecided also include some lawmakers who voted yes before but say they no longer favor the Democratic bill. At least a half-dozen House Democrats who voted against the health-care bill say they are now undecided. Random thoughts while watching the democratic party self-immolate.

By HENRY J. PULIZZI And LAURA MECKLER

Wall Street Journal

WASHINGTON—Looking to push the “long and wrenching debate” over health care into its final stages, President Barack Obama asked lawmakers to schedule a vote on overhaul legislation “in the next few weeks.”

“No matter which approach you favor, I believe the United States Congress owes the American people a final vote on health-care reform,” Mr. Obama said Wednesday in remarks at the White House. “We have debated this issue thoroughly, not just for a year, but for decades.”

President Obama outlines his three-part proposal for health care reform in an address at the White House. Courtesy Fox News.

The president called for an “up-or-down vote,” likely opening the way for Democrats to use the budget reconciliation process to pass the legislation without Republican support. Though he didn’t mention reconciliation specifically, Mr. Obama said health-care overhaul should be allowed to pass with a simple majority, pointing to past votes on COBRA health coverage and both Bush administration tax cuts.

The Democrats’ likely strategy would see the House pass the legislation approved by the Senate in December. The House would then vote on a companion bill with changes to the Senate version.

As expected, Mr. Obama rejected the pleas of GOP lawmakers to scrap the legislation and start over. “For us to start over now could simply lead to delay that could last for another decade or even more,” Mr. Obama said. He challenged Republicans who favor less oversight of the insurance sector to vote against his proposal.  Complete Article: