Illegal Aliens Suck on Obamacare Teat

When Rep Joe Wilson called Obama a liar during the SOTU, he was correct.  Illegal aliens are signing up for taxpayer subsidized Obamacare in droves.  In Oregon, an estimated 4000 have been approved.  And what is their excuse?  Here is an excerpt from a Michelle Malkin article published in the National Review:

One Oregon Obamacare manager defended the unlawful illegal-alien enrollment by explaining: “We were just getting people into the services.” And there’s the rub. The imperative of these government social engineers is to herd as many “clients” into taxpayer-subsidized programs as possible. Just last week, Obama’s Homeland Security secretary Jeh Johnson publicized an open letter to families with illegal-alien relatives promising that no one would be deported for seeking Obamacare services.

“No one in America who is eligible should be afraid to apply for health coverage because they have a family with mixed status,” Johnson assured. And in another sign of how the White House is still planning for mass illegal-alien amnesty, Johnson also made clear: “Enrolling in health coverage . . . will not prevent your loved ones who are undocumented from getting a green card in the future or who do not yet have a green card at risk.”

Come one, come all!  Democrats have a taxpayer teat you can suck on.  Obamacare, it’s not just for citizens anymore.

Source:

https://twitter.com/DRUDGE/status/445657313492619264/photo/1

                                      

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/372566/obamacare-illegals-michelle-malkin

Are Democrats Following the Venezuelan Health Care Model?

So the Democrats want a universal health care system.  I bet they have no clue as to what that entails.  They are following in the footsteps of a Third-World country like Venezuela.  Here is a quote from an Associated Press article:

Gonzalez is on a list of 31 breast cancer patients waiting to have tumors removed at one of Venezuela's biggest medical facilities, Maracay's Central Hospital. But like legions of the sick across the country, she's been neglected by a health care system doctors say is collapsing after years of deterioration.

Doctors at the hospital sent home 300 cancer patients last month when supply shortages and overtaxed equipment made it impossible for them to perform non-emergency surgeries.

Driving the crisis in health care are the same forces that have left Venezuelans scrambling to find toilet paper, milk and automobile parts. Economists blame government mismanagement and currency controls set by the late President Hugo Chavez for inflation pushing 50 percent annually. The government controls the dollars needed to buy medical supplies and has simply not made enough available.

The federal government is already monetizing our debt.  Obamacare overtaxed medical equipment which could lead to the same problems as Venezuela.  And now there are discussions of cost/price controls.  Some Democrats have stated they want to turn doctors into serfs.  That would lead to a shortage of medical experts, which means we have to import Third-Worlders whose culture is hostile to Western Civilization.  Hell, Venezuela had to hire Cubans.

 The country's 1999 constitution guarantees free universal health care to Venezuelans, who sit on the world's largest proven oil reserves. President Nicolas Maduro's government insists it's complying. Yet of the country's 100 fully functioning public hospitals, nine in 10 have just 7 percent of the supplies they need, Natera said.

The other nearly 200 public hospitals that existed when Chavez took office were largely replaced by a system of walk-in clinics run by Cuban doctors that have won praise for delivering preventative care to the neediest but do not treat serious illnesses.

Wasn’t one of the mandates for Obamacare preventive care?  Yeah, I thought so.

Source:

  http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VENEZUELA_SICK_HEALTH_CARE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-11-06-00-10-00

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/110813-678648-democrats-would-force-doctors-to-participate-in-medicare-medicaid.htm

4.8 Million Americans Losing Health Insurance and Counting

And it's all by design.  Thank you central planners.

H/T:  Weasel Zippers

Before Obamacare, After Obamacare

H/T:  I Own the World

Obamacare Premiums Send Shock Waves Throughout Country

The Democratic Party’s healthcare law is beginning to send shock waves throughout the country.  North Carolinians are gasping from the outrageous cost of premiums.  Many are bewildered at what they’re forced to buy.  In order for insurance companies to be in compliance with federal standards, 10 “essentials” are required:

Under the new law, all insurance plans must cover 10 “essential health benefits,” including maternity care and pediatric dental and vision care. Plans must also provide certain preventive services, such as mammograms and colonoscopies for free.

Today, people who buy individual policies often choose plans without maternity coverage, for example, to reduce premiums. That choice is gone, too

.

“Now maternity is loaded into everybody’s plan,” Blount said.

That means men will generally be paying more than they did before. But women, who can no longer be charged more just for being female, will probably pay less.

Using Blue Cross rates, Blount calculated two examples: The premium for a “middle of the road” plan for a 25-year-old healthy male will increase from $124 per month to $240. But the premium for a 25-year-old female will drop from $378 to $240 per month.

So, single males and the elderly are forced to buy a coverage that doesn’t apply to them.  And people wonder why health insurance is so expensive.  Advocates for Obamacare point out policyholders in some “Blue States” will see a decrease in their premiums.  Here is a map showing the disparity of Obamacare in individual states.

Here is the reason why some “Blue States” are benefitting from Obamacare; these people have been forced to pay for superfluous coverage for years.  The reason they are going to see a decrease in rates is because now they will be subsidized by the federal government.  And how is the federal government going to pay for all of this?  Look to the Federal Reserve. 

You think $17 trillion in debt is outrageous, you haven't seen nothing yet.  

Source: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/10/06/4365331/insurance-premium-increases-shock.html#.UlFqmVBJO7N#storylink=cpy

Barack Delays the Pain in Obamacare Scheme

H/T:  NC Renegade

Obama's Anaconda is Slowly Squeezing the American People

The Obama administration’s Operation Anaconda is slowing ensnaring millions of Americans into their government health care rubric.  In North Carolina alone, it is estimated that 1 million of our citizens will qualify for subsidized policies.  Keep in mind this state has a population of about 9.7 million.  That is a huge percentage.  And that isn’t factoring in businesses that are going to dump their employees onto these exchanges.

Here is an excerpt from a Charlotte Observer article:

Chaney Stokes is among an estimated 800,000 uninsured North Carolinians who are expected to buy subsidized coverage on the new health insurance exchange. In addition, more than half of the roughly 435,000 North Carolina residents who already have individual policies are expected to switch to the cheaper, subsidized coverage.

The majority of state residents who have other types of insurance – a combined 7.6 million covered through employers, Medicare or Medicaid – are not likely to see dramatic changes in their insurance.

Enrollment in the new insurance plans begins in October and coverage starts Jan. 1. As a practical matter, many North Carolinians will have two options: Blue Cross and Blue Shield or Coventry Health Care of the Carolinas. Both have proposed multiple plans that await approval from the N.C. Department of Insurance and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Under the law, North Carolinians who qualify for subsidies are expected to receive more than $5,000 a year per household on average to offset their insurance costs, according to the U.S. Treasury Department. Subsidy levels will vary depending on income and other factors under the Affordable Care Act, which is often referred to as Obamacare.

Those who don’t get insurance will pay a fine, starting next year at $95 or 1 percent of income, whichever is greater. For Stokes, the 1 percent rule would likely apply, bumping up her potential fine to around $320. By 2016, the penalty will be $695 or 2.5 percent of income.

This country is over $17 trillion in debt, and we’re going to subsidize this monstrosity? And they have no idea on how they're going to pay for it.   This federal government anaconda is squeezing the life blood out of all of us. 

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/07/07/4152686/1-million-north-carolinians-will.html#storylink=cpy

 

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/37000.html

Obama's Medicaid Expansion Promise is a Bait and Switch

Obama’s henchmen are coming out with all sorts of studies trying to entice States into buying their snake oil of expanded Medicaid funds if they adopt the health care exchanges.  As of now, the central government is promising they’ll cover between 90 and 100% of the cost of new enrollees.  But this is just a bait and switch scheme for a one payer system, which will ultimately fall upon the States to fund and administer, while the federal government issues mandates from on high.

Legislators and policy makers shouldn’t get “snookered” by the study authors’ promises of large federal matching shares, Brase said, because taxpayers eventually are on the hook for all the costs.

“They are trying to make you forget that federal dollars are paid for by taxpayers, and because it’s all new spending they even agree that state Medicaid spending will increase,” Brase said.

If North Carolina were to refuse the Obamacare Medicaid expansion, the Medicaid rolls still would grow by 174,000 people by 2022 due to normal population growth and eligibility, the study shows. If the Obamacare expansion were approved, that number would grow by still another 568,000 enrollees.

Such growth concerns Brase. She said there are likely to be hidden technology, personnel, and administrative costs with any expansion.

“If you have to start hiring more people in order to deal with this mass increase in the subsidized [population], then we’re talking about state tax dollars,” Brase said. “It will be hard to cut the rolls” once the newly added Medicaid patients become dependent on the system.

“Already 31 percent of physicians refuse new Medicaid recipients,” according to a recent survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Brase said. With fewer doctors accepting patients, and more doctors leaving the field because of low reimbursement rates, there will be a push at the state level to find new options to treat these patients — and they will not be free.

Unfortunately, the 2012 general election has shown the majority of Americans do believe health care is free.  They have a rude awakening coming.

Source:  http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=9734

Blue Shield of California Hoarding Cash in Anticipation of Obamacare

Blue Shield of California wants to impose another rate increase on their policyholders by a whopping 20%.  Consumer advocates are up in arms, and are accusing the insurance giant of hording cash. State law requires this company to have on hand reserves of $218 million to cover claims.  The company itself has mandated a risk capitalization rate of 375%. 

Many are wondering why Blue Shield needs such high reserves.

Larry Kirsch, a healthcare economist in Portland, Ore., who has studied surpluses at other Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans, said not enough regulators nationwide require nonprofit plans to justify their rationale for hoarding so much cash at a time when many consumers and small businesses are struggling to afford health benefits.

"There ought to be a reasoned analysis for when is enough," Kirsch said. "There always seems to be a 'sky is falling' story. I say prove it to me."

You need proof Mr. Kirsch?  Here it is:

Blue Shield said its reserves have nothing to do with rate increases, and that money has been put aside for the future benefit of its policyholders.

"Reserves are needed to ensure our members' claims can be paid no matter what," said Blue Shield spokeswoman Lindy Wagner. "We need them to protect against uncertainties like a pandemic or another crisis."

The company also expects higher costs from an influx of new customers under the federal healthcare law in 2014.

"It's a once-in-a-lifetime change in the healthcare market that will bring a lot of volatility, and we need higher reserves for that," Wagner said.

Even with these proposed rate increases, Blue Shield said, it expects to lose money in the individual insurance market in 2013

And how will this insurance giant lose money?  Why Obamacare of course.  Twila Brase, president of the Citizens Council for Health Freedom, gave the following warning about this Trojan horse:

“Obamacare requires insurance companies to take everyone,” even those with terminal illnesses who had no health coverage, Brase said. Rather than insurance, she calls Obamacare a third-party payment system with the government which insurance carriers will get preferential treatment.

“The biggest ones win,” she said “They will get all the money from the government and they will be doling it out, but they won’t be private entities anymore,” but more like regulated utilities.

Anymore questions, Mr. Kirsch?

 Source:  http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-blue-shield-rates-20121213,0,6546740.story

http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=9743

Health Foundation Deems Red States as Fat, Ignorant Slobs

A new study by the United Health Foundation has deemed red states an unhealthy place to live.  According to this nonprofit organization, Southerners are a bunch of fat, ignorant slobs that dwell on the hinterlands of a blue state paradise.  The top tier of blissfulness is the following: Vermont, Hawaii (who knew Spam was a health food), New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Minnesota.

Here are the dregs of the union.  I’ll quote a Progressive website so you’ll get the full Monty:

 

The right wing craziness continues to be evident as the Counter-intuitive, Right to Work, Anti-Obamacare, Former Confederate Red States fail yet another test; the health of their citizens.

The United Health Foundation has just released a ranking of the 50 states by health statistics; Ranking from the healthiest (Blue Union State Vermont) to the most unhealthy (Red Right-to-Work-Confederate States Louisiana and Mississippi tied for last palace).

The ten healthiest states are Blue Union States, with the exception of Red Right-to-Work Utah (which was ranked 7^th because of the Mormon prohibition of alcohol, tobacco and coffee).

The ten least healthy states were all Red States and seven of them were also Right-to-Work States

Looking at all of the States we can see that 18 of the top 25 were Blue States and 16 of those were Union States. Blue States represented 72% of the healthiest 25 states.

Looking at the sickest states, the ones that ranked as the lowest 25, we can see that 18 of the sickest 25 were Red States. Red States represented 72% of the sickest 25 states.

As you can see, according to these blue state commies, we’re just a bunch of toothless rubes holding back the Socialist Republic of the United States.  If we would only reject our founding principles, we too would be as healthy, happy and as a mindless as a Maoist. 

The Progressives love to bring up the South’s past of slave ownership.  But at least they refused to become slaves themselves, unlike our northern brethren.  And that’s a heritage all true Americans should embrace.  But hey, we have our share of self-loathing citizens as well.  Here is one of them.  And I wouldn’t be surprised if she is a transplanted Yankee:

Compared to other states, North Carolina ranks near the bottom in low-birth-weight babies, infant mortality and public health funding, according to rankings from the United Health Foundation, a Minnesota-based nonprofit. A relatively high percentage of the state’s residents report having diabetes.

Education, poverty and neighborhood environments help determine how healthy people are, said Pam Silberman, president and CEO of the N.C. Institute of Medicine, and states that have moved up in the rankings over the years have improved in these areas.

The Progressives believe that if the South would submit to their ideology, we would be healthier and happier.  Sorry, I’m not buying your snake oil.

 Source:  http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/12/11/2539287/new-health-rankings-put-nc-near.html

http://www.americashealthrankings.org/rankings

http://uppitywis.org/blogarticle/right-work-slavery-and-sickness

Obama's HHS Capo Makes Offer States Hadn't Better Refuse

The syndicate known as the Obama administration is using one of its capos to strong arm the States into setting up Obamacare exchanges.  The U.S. Department of Health and Human services is making an offer that a once free and independent people can’t refuse.

Residents of states that refuse to set up health insurance exchanges under Obamacare are set to be hit with higher premiums under new rules announced by the Health and Human Services Department.

Insurance companies will be charged 3.5 percent of any premiums they sell through the federal exchanges, the department announced Friday.

And insurers are likely to pass that surcharge on to clients, leading to higher premiums.

The only states to be affected are those that refuse to set up their own exchanges because of opposition to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. They are almost certain to be those under Republican control. In those states, HHS will set up the exchanges

GOP governors are taking a hard line against implementing any part of the healthcare law, which will mean insurers in their states will need to pay the monthly fee, The Hill reports.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer announced this week that her state will not set up an exchange, calling the proposal "too expensive and too risky." Her decision brings the total of states refusing to comply with the act's provisions up to 17.

The exchanges were supposed to be up and running in all states by 2014. HHS plans to charge insurers 3.5 percent of the premiums for each plan they sell through the federal exchange.

If that’s the case, then why would anyone buy a policy from one of these exchanges?  Why not just bypass these thugs and go directly to the insurance companies?  Or will we all receive horse heads at the foot of our beds if we don’t buy from the federal mobsters?

 Source: http://www.newsmax.com/Newswidget/Obamacare-insurance-premiums-states/2012/12/01/id/466088?promo_code=F43B-1&utm_source=Moon_Battery&utm_medium=nmwidget&utm_campaign=widgetphase1#ixzz2DwLQGY58

Is Medicare Distorting the Health Care Market?

Health care cost doubled the rate of inflation in 2010, and in some areas it's five times or greater. If you look at the previous decade, health care rose an astonishing 48%, while the overall economy rated at 26% of inflation. Politicians are quick to point a finger at the insurance companies, but neglect the other three pointing back at them. Since the implementation of Medicare – and subsequent price controls – healthcare cost has skyrocketed, and with it a distortion of the market.

One of the biggest factors for this rising cost of health care is a lack of consumer participation. Since Medicare patients are removed from the process of a cost benefit analysis, they’ll often be given superfluous care. Here is report by Avik Roy of The Heartland Institute published in National Affairs:

In theory, Medicare does include some cost-sharing provisions, especially for physician payments under Part B. But over time, private insurance companies began to realize that Medicare's design allowed them to provide seniors with supplemental coverage to pay for the deductible and co-insurance requirements of the program — a good deal for insurers (for whom costs are finite and low), as well as for the seniors who purchase such plans (and are thereby freed from any direct cost for health care). Today, almost 90% of seniors have supplemental coverage plans, which means in effect that they have unlimited health coverage for a low and fixed cost, and thereby every incentive to seek generous, and even unneeded, care.

Combined with the fact that Medicare generally pays health-care providers on a per-service basis rather than on a per-patient or per-outcome basis, this means that Medicare creates an enormous incentive for everyone involved to provide more services to seniors. Volume, more than the cost of individual services, has been Medicare's fiscal downfall. And, as discussed below, reformers trying to fix the program's finances — from the 1970s through the health-care bill enacted last year — have sought to do so through price controls that reduce the amount the program pays for each service provided, which actually creates an even greater incentive for physicians and hospitals to provide a greater number of services to make up the lost revenue.

Proponents for Obamacare believe the federal government is more efficient than insurance companies when it comes to administration cost. That is laughable. Here are some of the outlays:

First, other government agencies help administer the Medicare program. The Internal Revenue Service collects the taxes that fund the program; the Social Security Administration helps collect some of the premiums paid by beneficiaries (which are deducted from Social Security checks); the Department of Health and Human Services helps to manage accounting, auditing, and fraud issues and pays for marketing costs, building costs, and more. Private insurers obviously don't have this kind of outside or off-budget help. Medicare's administration is also tax-exempt, whereas insurers must pay state excise taxes on the premiums they charge; the tax is counted as an administrative cost. In addition, Medicare's massive size leads to economies of scale that private insurers could also achieve, if not exceed, were they equally large.

Speaking of fraud, the federal government is so efficient that an estimated $60 to $100 billion of Medicare spending goes to fraud. Can you imagine what Obamacare is going to be like?

What’s ironic about this whole Medicare debate is the Bill Clinton factor. The savior of the Democratic Party denigrated Rep. Paul Ryan’s market based plan at the DNC. What Bubba failed to mention is that his own commission gave a similar recommendation. Had he been able to keep his pecker in his pants, we might have solved this problem a long time ago.

In 1997, as a result of the Balanced Budget Act, Congress organized the National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare, under the leadership of Democratic senator John Breaux and Republican representative Bill Thomas. The commission's final recommendation, supported by members of both parties, was that Medicare should be converted to a "market-based Premium Support model" similar to the one used in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.

Under the commission's proposed system, retirees would have been able to choose between private health plans and a traditional government-run fee-for-service plan (a consolidation of Medicare Parts A, B, and C). Thus traditional Medicare would have become one option among many, competing for business. Regardless of what option they chose, beneficiaries would have been expected to pay a premium equal to 12% of per capita health costs, but would have paid no premium at all if they bought a plan that was at least 15% cheaper than the average one. In addition, the commission recommended increasing the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67, in harmony with Social Security.

After the commission made its proposal, President Clinton made a counter-proposal, shaped in large part by his Treasury secretary, Lawrence Summers. He proposed "managed competition" for Medicare, in which private insurers would have engaged in competitive bidding for health coverage of the elderly. Retirees who chose plans that cost less than the average bid would have retained three-fourths of the savings. Clinton also proposed new subsidies to encourage employers to retain private-sector health coverage for their retirees, taking some of the burden off of Medicare.

These two sets of proposals were, in many ways, quite compatible. Indeed, according to historian Steven Gillon, President Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich, along with several prominent Senate Democrats, were close in 1997 to a historic agreement for reforming Medicare along these lines. But after the Monica Lewinsky scandal erupted in early 1998, Clinton was focused on defending himself from impeachment, and this required currying the favor of ideological Democrats over pragmatic ones. Thus no serious effort was made to bridge the various reform proposals, and Medicare's problems went unresolved.

Will we ever be able to fix Medicare and our health care system as a whole? We could if the politicians would stay the hell out of it. I highly recommend reading Avik Roy’s piece in full, just click the link below. It’s rather long, but well worth it.

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2012/05/health-care-costs-double-the-rate-of.html

http://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/saving-medicare-from-itself

Healthcare Explained

H/T: Ace of Spades

Pleasure Police Want to Tax Your Twinkies

The authoritarians love studies, particularly those that depict people as a bunch of slobbering idiots, bumbling through life costing the government, and ostensibly YOU money. And what’s even more galling is having a foreign interloper dictate health policy to Americans. A British medical journal has determined that we Yanks are a bunch of sorry, fat slobs. Here is an excerpt from USNews.com:

With more than two thirds of adults overweight or obese, America is certainly straining the
scales—but we're not the only ones. Countries around the world are trying everything to solve their own obesity epidemics, even if it hits their people's wallets

Several countries, including Hungary and Denmark, have implemented nominal "fat taxes" on unhealthy foods, France has an extra tax on sweetened drinks, and Peru plans to implement a junk food tax in coming months. But a new paper released Tuesday in the British Medical Journal says that in order for such taxes to be effective, they have to make consumers dig deep—only "fat taxes" of 20 percent or more are likely to have broad societal impacts.

Proponents argue that junk foods are vices like alcohol and tobacco, which both have large taxes attached to them in many countries.

The USNews.com reporter went on to laud sin taxes and sanctions against tobacco companies as an example of correcting human behavior. It’s true that cigarette smoking has greatly declined in the past decade. But is that necessarily due to punitive taxes, or a changing attitude to a nasty and smelly habit?

What is missing in this report is the correlation between the current “obesity epidemic” and the decline of cigarette smoking. However, a neurobiologist has made that connection. Here is an excerpt along with accompanying graphs from his blog (see link below):

The main active ingredient in cigarettes is nicotine. Nicotine acts by binding to a specific type of receptor on neurons (nerve cells) called the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor. Acetylcholine is one of the main signaling molecules (neurotransmitters) that neurons use to communicate with one another. Nicotine suppresses food intake, increases energy expenditure, and lowers body fatness. Smokers tend to be leaner than non-smokers, even though they usually have a cluster of unhealthy lifestyle habits (2, 3), and they rapidly gain weight when they quit (4, 5). Administering nicotine to rodents under controlled conditions also reduces food intake and body weight substantially (6).

Since the brain (and particularly the hypothalamus) is the organ in charge of regulating food intake and body fatness, one might guess that nicotine acts there either directly or indirectly. As predicted, nicotine infused directly into the hypothalamus reduces food intake (7), and a recent high-impact paper demonstrated in mice that nicotine exerts its effects on food intake primarily via POMC cells, a type of neuron in the hypothalamus that is important for the regulation of food intake and body fatness (8).

He concludes:

Public health authorities have been waging a war on cigarette smoking since it was firmly established as a risk factor for a number of serious conditions (e.g., cancer and heart attacks)*. There's no doubt that regularly smoking cigarettes is bad for your health-- in fact it's probably one of the most unhealthy habits there is. However, smoking kept us leaner than we should have been in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, likely preventing the gradual changes in the US diet and lifestyle from exerting their full effect on our waistline. As the appetite suppressive effects of cigarettes went away, and our diet became increasingly commercialized, per capita daily calorie intake increased by about 20 percent, and the adult obesity rate doubled.

Of course, this doesn’t explain the recent phenomenon of childhood obesity. But it shouldn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out why kids are fat. Drive through a neighborhood. Do you see any kids playing pickup games such as baseball or football? How about kick-the-can or hide and seek? Do you see any kids playing outside? I contend the main reason kids are fat is because they get no exercise. Medical News Today pointed out the obvious:

Lack of physical activity found to be the most significant factor in contributing to childhood obesity. Researchers assessed the exercise and eating habits of nearly 900 children who were either at risk of becoming overweight or were already considered overweight. They also documented how often the children watched television.

Results of the study show a lack of vigorous physical activity is the main contributor to obesity for adolescents between 11 and 15 years old.

The food police would have everyone believe that we Americans sit around in our squalor, wiping our Cheetos stained fingers on our holey tee-shirts, drinking copious amounts of soda, while belching our way to a blissful diabetic coma. As glamorous as that may sound, it simply isn’t true. Sure, we may be a little overweight. And some may have health problems, but that sure as hell is no excuse for the pleasure police to dictate how we should live our lives.

Source:

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/05/15/junk-food-tax-must-be-fat-or-dont-bother-british-study-says

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2012/02/cigarette-smoking-another-factor-in.html

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/7140.php

No Need to Fear ObamaCare is here!!

Do you want to live a lifestyle, free of want and responsibility? Well, no need to fear Obamacare is here!!


Live it up and don’t worry about your future and that of your grandchildren; besides, shouldn’t they pay this generation for their very existence. If it wasn’t for you, they wouldn’t have the ability to pollute Mother Earth with their foul carbon filled breath.

Obamacare will make sure that those who are fit to live will not face a Death Panel to justify their existence. Just look at all of those who have been issued waivers thus far. To belong to the premium plan all you have to do is become employed by any union or state sanctioned business that funds the Democratic Party. Are you skeptical? Well, just ask our number one salesman, Rep. Anthony Weiner:

The congressman was trying to debunk Republican “myths” about the health care law during a speech at the Center for American Progress. He used the waivers as way to describe how flexible the law actually is and how “this notion that the government is shoving the bill down people’s throats” is not true.


“The administration needs to make this argument more forcefully,” he said. “A lot of people who got waivers were … people who are our friends.”

Side effects of Obamacare may require you to bend over and grab your ankles. Lubricants, anesthesia, and painkillers may not be available due to rationing. Anal leakage guaranteed.

Source: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51840.html#ixzz1JYcG7q4w

Senator Kay Hagan's Disturbing Economic Philosophy

Senator Kay Hagan gave an interview with the Kernersville News in which she articulated her economic philosophy. Folks it is very disturbing.


Senator Hagan bemoaned the uncertainty of the democrat’s health care legislation. She believes that the public is misinformed on the specifics of the bill:

"One misconception about healthcare is that people are concerned about the cost and the debt. I want to assure people that the cost that was identified, the increases were paid for," Hagan said.

"This was a piece of legislation where anything we put in was paid for by insurance companies, pharmaceuticals or levies. What we put in place would affect the debt in a long-term, positive way. We would see a $132 billion reduction in deficit over the first 10 years and a $1.3 trillion reduction in the 10 years after that."


Notice that she plans on paying for this monstrosity by demonizing and extorting money from targeted industries. I believe Senator Hagan is a student of Saul Alinsky.

She omitted how they really plan on paying for socialized health care, as stated here in The Hill:

“CBO Director Doug Elmendorf presented Reid with this preliminary cost estimate in a letter Saturday.Those costs are more than offset during the 10-year budget period by $483 billion worth of spending reductions in Medicare and $614 billion generated from an excise tax on high-cost health insurance plans, taxes on healthcare companies, penalty fees paid by employers who fail to offer insurance coverage and individuals who fail to purchase it and other tax effects of the bill.

The bill would require nearly all legal U.S. residents to obtain health coverage, extend Medicaid benefits to everyone earning up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level and provide subsidies on a sliding scale to people earning between 133 percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty level.”


So Senator Kay Hagan not only extorts money from companies; but those who fail to purchase or offer health insurance are to be penalized to the full extent of the law. That means insurance is mandatory for everyone. I would like to know where in the Constitution; Senator Kay Hagan gets the authority to fine, and throw people in jail for not buying a product.

The Congressional Budget Office also says this about the assertions of Senator Hagan:

“As the budget office has throughout the year, it emphasizes that this will only occur if Congress allows those cuts and tax hikes to take full effect and expresses skepticism that they will. “These longer-term calculations assume that the provisions are enacted and remain unchanged throughout the next two decades, which is often not the case for major legislation,” the letter says.”


We all know the outcome of that.

Senator Hagan gave special exemptions for small businesses. They are to receive a sliding scale depending on the number of employees. They also are to receive a handsome tax credit for joining a STATE EXCHANGE:

“Tax-exempt small businesses meeting these requirements are eligible for tax credits of up to 25 percent of their contribution. In 2014 and beyond, eligible employers who purchase coverage through the State Exchange can receive a tax credit for two years of up to 50 percent of their contribution. Tax-exempt small businesses meeting these requirements are eligible for tax credits of up to 35 percent of their contribution.”


She just can’t wait to get people into the “system”. If you have doubts that Senator Kay Hagan isn't a statist, then you are not paying attention. This woman wants to dictate how businesses operate and how people shall live.

Again, in her interview with the Kernersville News, she states that she is fiscally conservative, because she was chairman of the state budget and had to balance the budget every year; that meant accounting for every dollar. Well of course you did! But there is one big difference from North Carolina’s state capitol and Washington D.C.: YOU DIDN’T HAVE A PRINTING PRESS IN THE BASEMENT.

Senator Hagan remarks on the debt ceiling that was raised:

"You have to put the bill calling for an increase in our debt ceiling into perspective," Hagan said. "It's like putting something on a credit card and having to pay that off.


Increasing the debt ceiling is not authorizing new spending; it is ensuring we have the capacity to pay for things we have already spent money on.”

Wow! She’s right...it is not authorizing new spending. It is paying for all the crap you guys doled out the past year. And you’re going to have to raise it again in the fall. Unbelievable!

I say it’s time to take the credit card away from this spoiled brat. I wonder if she would have spent her $17 million in assets like she’s doing with the taxpayer’s money. That answer should be self-evident; otherwise she would be a pauper.

Senator Kay Hagan is a perfect example why we need to repeal the 17th amendment. Or at least have North Carolina pass a law to recall her.

Source:

http://hagan.senate.gov/?p=news&id=451

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/73079-cbo-health-bill-spends-871b-reduces-deficit-by-132b

Canadian Premier Risk Life in U.S. health industry

It seems that the vaunted Canadian health care system isn't living up to its advertisement. Danny Williams the Canadian Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador has scheduled heart surgery in the United States. He arrived sometime today.

Canadian officials are dumbstruck as to why Mr. Williams would forgo the outstanding, free services in the great white north, and check himself into the rapacious U.S. health care industry. After all, isn't he aware that some greedy doctor might cut off a foot; tonsils; or some other appendage, so that he can make a mortgage payment?

Why didn't our fearless leader, Barack Obama stop Mr. Williams from making such a drastic mistake? Didn't the Premier heed his warnings? Did he not see even one of Obama's 425 speeches?

The Deputy Premier Kathy Dunderdale was at a loss for the Premiers lapse of sanity. "Ultimately we have to be the gatekeepers of our own health." she cried.

God help the Premier.