Marxists, Czars & Thieves

Prince Alwaleed Inflation is Imminent

via kosmosnet.com

The History of Political Correctness (Video)

Part 1

   

 Part 2

   

 Part 3

America Rising: AN OPEN LETTER TO DEMOCRAT POLITICIANS

AMAZING VIDEO!  

Cavuto: Obama Has Lost His Soul

I couldn't agree more

How the Firefighters really feel about the "Cadillac Tax" issue

Firefighters Rip Obama For Breaking Campaign Promise Over Cadillac Tax

The International Association of Fire Fighters--an influential union that belongs to the AFL-CIO--has released the strongest condemnation yet of President Obama's support for taxing high-end health insurance plans as a means of financing a major health care overhaul--accusing him of breaking a campaign promise, and threatening to hold him accountable.

via tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com

My husband is a Firefighter. I have asked him to ask many questions at his union meetings in hopes of understanding what the angle is on the Cadillac Tax. (For the record, our health insurance premiums are more expensive than previous insurance we carried through my old job (non-union), the copays are high, and they deny payments on lots of things that our old insurance covered)  

At his most recent union meeting this week, he was told that the IAFF (the firefighters union) who is affiliated with the AFL-CIO, wanted Obama to open up state lines so that all union members could pool together to get insurance because it would be cheaper than the insurance they are getting through the city governments that they work for. This has been a conservative talking point in Healthcare Reform since the '08 campaigns.

A member on the retiree benefits committee then told my husband that doing this would cut the cost of HC by at least 30%. When my husband asked why this was not being considered, he was told that the Insurance companies did not want to give up the monopolies they hold in each state. That opening up the state lines would create competition, and that the Insurers have been aggressively lobbying against this.

This little tidbit really opened my eyes - It explains why the insurance companies are so in bed with the Obama Admin and the left. As much as I hate to agree with Obama, the Insurance companies (at least in this case) are being pretty evil. That said, Obama is LETTING THEM. He has no interest in making healthcare "AFFORDABLE" for most of us - he just wants the "poor" (read "those on the government dole") to have free healthcare paid for by the rest of us. To take it a step further, I also think that the unfunded state medicaid mandates are designed to bankrupt the states. This, in turn, causes the states to surrender their sovereignty to the almighty Federal Government, who can print as much money as they need to in order to "bail out" the states that it has bankrupted. This is the lynchpin in Obama's socialist agenda.

Also see:

 IAFF Condemns Obama on Healthcare 

Irate Labor Leaders Press Obama on Proposed Health Care 'Cadillac' Tax

MSNBC Interview: Schaitberger Hammers Excise Tax on 'Ed Show'

IAFF Excise Tax Update - 1/14/2010

House Approves Landmark Health Reform

IAFF Statement on Pending Senate Approval of Health Care Reform Legislation 

Obama, Union Leaders Meet on Health Care Benefits Tax; 2-Hour Session Yields No Deal; Unions Predict Tax Could Provoke Rank-and-File Backlashtehouse.blogs.foxnews.com

Health Experts and Double Standards -Jonathan Gruber, Peter Orszag and the press corps.

The press corps is agonizing, or claims to be agonizing, over the news of Jonathan Gruber's conflict of interest: The MIT economist has been among the foremost promoters of ObamaCare—even as he had nearly $400,000 in consulting contracts with the Administration that weren't disclosed in the many stories in which he was cited as an independent authority.

Mr. Gruber is a health economist and former Clinton Treasury hand, as well an architect of Mitt Romney's 2006 health plan in Massachusetts that so closely resembles ObamaCare. His econometric health-care modelling is well-regarded. So his $297,600 plum from the Department of Health and Human Services in March for "technical assistance" estimating changes in insurance costs and coverage under ObamaCare, plus another $95,000 job, is at least defensible.

However, this financial relationship only came to wide notice when Mr. Gruber wrote a commentary for the New England Journal of Medicine, which has a more stringent disclosure policy than most media outlets. Last week the New York Times said it would have disclosed Mr. Gruber's financial ties had it known when it published one of his op-eds last year. Mr. Gruber told Politico's Ben Smith that "at no time have I publicly advocated a position that I did not firmly believe—indeed, I have been completely consistent with my academic track record."

via online.wsj.com