We can’t afford Obama

I predicted that President Obama’s leadership was a pending disaster. So we now have his “health reform” (break the bank) proposal, the cap-and-trade (break the bank) energy disaster proposal, and now the most ridiculous of all, the Gitmo prisoners are going to New York to be tried.

Why? Whatever possible reason can this make any sense at all? May I suggest it’s a left- wing “feel good” move to appease our Muslim “friends?”

Don’t say I didn’t warn you. I hope Obama follows Jimmy Carter’s lead by having served only one disastrous term. We can’t afford two at this rate.

Bob Patterson
Lee’s Summit 

Comments

[Smarter Than You]

I’m thankful for Jim so I can always be smarter than someone. . .

The next line from the article you cite is “However, the CMS analysis clearly states that the House bill falls short in attaining a key goal of the Democrats' effort to reform the nation's healthcare system: "With the exception of the proposed reduction in Medicare... the provisions of H.R. 3962 would not have a significant impact on future healthcare cost growth rates."

So now Jim’s advocating a plan to control health care costs that doesn’t control health care costs. More from your article:

“According to the 31-page report, the House-passed bill would increase costs, cut Medicare and expand Medicaid. In aggregate, we estimate that for calendar years 2010 through 2019 [national health expenditures] would increase by $289 billion," the report notes.”

So our village idiot is left to argue that “hey, we’ll raise taxes to cover part of it!” He’s not arguing that the CMS estimates on costs were wrong, he’s just saying rather than use tax monies to reduce the deficit we’ll use them to give the illusion of fiscal competency to Obamacare. How very Democratic, James!

So congrats, Jim, on embracing high taxes, higher health costs and a plan where health care is a higher percentage of the GDP (all part of the CMS you ignored at your own risk).

But since you wanted to play gotcha on the tax provisions, the report also points out that the “impact on Federal administrative expenses is excluded” (it’s always good to ignore additional expenses for Jim’s team) and “the cost estimates shown in this memorandum do not represent the full 10 year cost for this legislation.” (Ditto for ignoring total costs).

That’s OK for Jim, because higher taxes are always an embraceable option for the Democratic Party; and there’s NOTHING else (like current entitlements or record deficits) that those monies could be better utilized for.

[Jim]

"The non-partisan CMS, after carefully reviewing the actual House plan, found that it would increase the deficit..."

Well, let's look at what the CMS was actually "carefully reviewing":

"CMS's analysis is not an apples-to-apples comparison to the cost estimate conducted by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) because CMS did not review tax provisions, which help offset the price tag of the Democrats' measure."

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/67791-cms-house-health-bill-will-hike-costs-289b

So the proposed tax increases on those with adjusted gross income of over $1 million and other provisions that raise revenues to pay for the bill are left out. Their analysis is all cost provisions and no revenue provisions.

In other words, they took a "careful review" of only part of the bill and left the other part out. Meanwhile, the non-partisan CBO and the JCT both did an actual careful review and found that it reduces the deficit significantly.

Nice try, but you're the one ignoring facts here. Sad that that's the best you can do.

[Smarter Than You]

What "fact" was left out, Ed? Since the House Bill is not revenue neutral I should have pointed out the President wouldn't sign it. If only I had had the foresight to. . .wait-a-minute, I DID address that on Nov. 17th:

“I’m sure our President, being a man of integrity, a man of honesty, a man of trust is probably already on the phone telling Nancy to take another pass at the legislation.
Or maybe he’s just the duplicitous hack many have claimed he was all along.
Posted by: Smarter Than You | Nov 17, 2009 5:17:28 PM “

I’m quite sure that left nothing out!

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

My probelm is the President will not read the bill. here is a guy that has ZERo executive and finance experience. he has never been in business, never really worked a real job yet somehow magically is an accounting guru? There is no way it can or will be paid for by "cost cutting" and especially not by government accounting practices which are beyond negligent.

[KC Educator]

As usual your leaving out facts too.

" The non-partisan CMS, after carefully reviewing the actual House plan, found that it would increase the deficit, the actual cost once fully implemented would be $140 billion per year (that's $1.4 trillion per decade, Jim)and would increase the percentage of the GDP spent on health care compared to our current system." STY

The President said he wouldn't sign it unless it was paid for. Yes he did say that he was happy that something was passed in the House, but the final bill has not been passed yet. This is not the President's plan until he signs the bill.

[KC Educator]

The House version of healthcare reform was closer than the Senate version, but not what the President called for either. Support dropped then also because people who support reform are not supporting what is happening. Something will get passed and both Republicans and Democrats will declare victory, but the only group that will win will be the insurance industry. You can spin it any way you want, but the majority of people want change in this country. Both parties are only giving us the same old thing.

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

I was not a Bush fan but I am fair. When Bush did things that were good, I applauded.
Realizing that Congress is part of the problem not just the President. Obama is not "bipartisan". If we needed someone to run around apologizing and giving rhetoric speeches, he is defintely qualified for that. He has ZERO executive experience.

[Greghand]

He is given a free pass and excused!
NoMo
You know better than that! somebodys going to accuse you of calling him "BOY"! It's not politically correct to criticize Obama unless your only critcizing the white half!

[chalveyob]

The hypocrisy of the left know no bounds. They scream about Bush and bailouts and spending, and then Obama does the same thing but 10 times more, and not a word or concern. This Bush did it crap doesn't fly, when bush did the first tarp, and lent GM money conservatives were furious, and said so all over the place. Bush spending wa the main reason democrats took over the house and senate in the first place, dems didn't get more votes, republicans stayed home. So enough with the stupid where were you when Bush did this or that crap. I was right here yelling about it, and now am yelling louder because Obama is spending 10 times what Bush did! Libtards how about som consistency on your side for once?

[Smarter Than You]

Boy, KC, that's a slanted take on the polling. It ignores that after the House Bill passed and before the Senate voted on anything support was dropping.

But since your lie is the one you have to tell to justify your blind support you've got a future in the soon to be much smaller Democratic contingent in Congress.

[KC Educator]

The polls are turning because even people that support healthcare reform are not supporting the Senate version of the bill. The only ones that will benefit are big insurance companies. Maybe what we need is a Constitutional amendment that would allow an initiative process which would force a national vote for programs that obstructionists in Congress will not act on.

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124588837560750781.html

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

Jim it seems you believe anything the liberals say. It also appears more of your groups stance is about payback and finger pointing not objectiveness.
I was against the stimulus and bailouts. I find it rather hypocritical that when Obama writes a hot check, he is given a free pass and excused. Larceny is larceny. We are going to bankrupt the majority to maybe, possibly help a few.

Here is some of the great recovery that is ongoing.

http://www.myfoxphilly.com/dpp/news/local_news/112009_Valero_Shutting_Down_Delaware_City_Plant

[Greghand]

The more truth that comes out on healthcare bills the more people sour. Listening to a politician tell you what you want VS Reading it for yourself! Most of the 38% will regret their support if it comes to fruition and the rest won't care because they don't pay for it.

[Greghand]

Kee I saw that video awhile back! Disturbing! Obama thinks Bush didn't piss enough I guess.

[Smarter Than You]

At least Obama has public support for his plan. Well, at least 1/3rd of the public according to today's latest results:

"Just 38% of voters now favor the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That’s the lowest level of support measured for the plan in nearly two dozen tracking polls conducted since June.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 56% now oppose the plan."

Yes Obama apologists, I know 38% is more than 1/3rd, that's why I used the qualifier "at least" and posted the actual polling result.

[Smarter Than You]

As usual, Jim's pulling a McCaskill and leaving out the updated information. The sad thing is Jim knows it's out there because it's been provided on these blogs.

The non-partisan CMS, after carefully reviewing the actual House plan, found that it would increase the deficit, the actual cost once fully implemented would be $140 billion per year (that's $1.4 trillion per decade, Jim)and would increase the percentage of the GDP spent on health care compared to our current system.

Even under the quickie CBO analysis it takes ten years of revenue collection to pay for just six years of actual coverage, thus producing Jim's illusion of fiscal responsibility. Or did you skip that part too, Jim?

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

You mean the Frank that said "we need to woll the dicethhhh"? regading home loans.
Freddie and Fannie have bankrupted how many times?

[Jim]

I wish Bob could have taken the time to show us how these two health care reform bills "break the bank" when they both cut the deficit by over $100 billion in their first 10 years (and by quite a bit more after that). Bob sure has a funny definition of "breaking the bank."

By the way, Frank has an excellent point, which is why all you Bush Republicans are resorting to your "let's forget the past" talking points. Many of the same so-called conservatives in Congress are voting against this money-saving bill because of concerns over the deficit. Many of them voted for the Medicare Part D bill in 2003, which has added almost a trillion to the deficit and was never paid for. Never heard them utter a peep about the deficit back when they voting for huge GOP spending bills that weren't paid for. Now that they're voting on Democratic bills that are paid for, they balk. It's totally backwards.

[T. Hanson]

Frank was bringing up the point that everyone that is yelling now were pretty silent when Bush was in office, why was that?