Home » Obamacare
Category Archives: Obamacare
I’ve said before that I’m not too enamoured of Hillary Clinton. She voted for the Iraq war and she’s not the most sympathetic of characters. Plus, she’s got a lot of baggage.
I’m actually willing to be convinced that Bush is more liberal than his brother and that Rand Paul is not a total nincompoop. Now, I didn’t say that I was convinced, only that I’m open-minded enough to at least consider them. Hey, I considered voting for McCain in 2008 until he turned ultra-conservative at the last minute.
But here’s the problem:
For all you open-minded Liberals who would consider voting for a Repub this time around, there’s something you’re forgetting-Healthcare. If the Repubs get the Whitehouse and the Congress, there is an excellent chance that they will at least attempt to repeal or severely weaken the ACA. This is a serious problem, folks.
So, bearing that in mind, remember. If you do come across a moderate Repub and think he might be a good fit, I don’t care what he or she says. One way or another, they will attempt to repeal the ACA if for no other reason than to get elected to a second term. Mark my words. Every one of them has already thrown down the gauntlet. That toothpaste won’t go back in that tube. They hate it and will kill it if they can.
So, if you’re like me and not a Hillary fan, we’ve got to get to work boosting someone else from the Democratic party. Failing that, we’ve got to make sure that Hillary wins, even if we have to hold our noses while doing so.
We just don’t have a choice folks.
A week that started with mourning over 9 people killed by pure, unadulterated racist thought and ignorance that ends with the upholding, again, of the ACA (Obamacare to the uninformed), the right to fairness in housing and among other things, the rights of gays to marry. This was amazing to say the least.
But there was one other thing that not all may have seen or heard. Last night, June 26th, President Obama gave a eulogy for The Rev. Clementa Pinkney at Charleston’s Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, who was gunned down over a week ago.
Now, folks, I don’t care who you are, but you need to do yourself a favor and listen to this speech. It is 40 minutes long, but it ends in a most fascinating way. It ends with Barack Obama leading the congregation in the sweetest, most extemporaneous sounding rendition of Amazing Grace I’ve ever heard. Now I say that it sounds extemporaneous because I’m not so naive as to think that presidents utter a single word that isn’t written for them and scrutinized over and over before those words are spoken, but this was so pure, so sweet, so courageous and so apparently heart-felt, that I’m willing to consider that possibility that he decided to do it on the spot.
The authenticity we find in this guy is incomprehensible. If you listen to it, he’s off-key, misses some notes, at times he’s hesitant to be the loudest voice, hoping others will fill in the gaps…nothing like the polished and perfected sound-bitey things that spill from the lips of most presidents, including Obama. In 59 years of my life, I have liked and disliked lots of presidents. Not one has ever made me cry. This one did.
YOU CAN SEE THIS EULOGY HERE It is broken down into segments.
Now, those who know me know that religious sentimentality is not my cup of meat. What was so striking here was the conveyance of human kindness and thoughtfulness from him to those mourners. It was obvious that Obama chose this moment to use his high office to take a shot at being a black preacher, allowing and, in some cases encouraging the “yes sirs” and “um hm” and other utterances from the congregation so typical of those churches. It was one of the most moving speeches I’ve ever heard from Obama, and he sets the bar pretty high for speeches.
What struck me afterward was a bit of melancholy though. How, after having heard the love and emotion that he allowed himself to show us last night, the vulnerability that he displayed in that church, the willingness to drop his presidential facade that abandon himself to his speech and that song, how, how, can anyone consider replacing him with Hillary Clinton?
I know that I’m giving you whiplash here, and for that I’m sorry. But that’s what came over me last night as he ended his speech. We, as Liberals, have shown the world that we’re willing to take a chance on someone who displays intelligence, understanding of complex issues, and the ability to speak from his soul. We’ve shown that we have the courage to elect a leader who started in a humble place, the often ridiculed “community organizer”. We’ve shown that we have the courage to elect a man whose name was considered too foreign and Muslim-sounding to be electable, and, after 6.5 years, we’ve been proven prescient in having done so. We were right about this guy folks. He really is a Great President, and will go down in history for having had the courage to pass health care, kill Osama bin Laden and the other hundreds of things he’s done, sometimes at huge political risk.
But now that we’ve been to the mountaintop, now that we’ve seen that there are better people out there than run-of-the-mill political automatons, now that we’ve seen that we can do better, how can we now consider replacing this brilliant guy with Hillary?
We stepped out of a shiny, new Tesla to get to this party. Are we going to leave in a used Oldsmobile?
If I hear one more poorly-informed, Fox-watching Repub remark about how Barak Obama is “shredding the Constitution” or some other such synaptic bile…
I’m waiting for someone, anyone to suggest, even vaguely, what article (yes, the Constitution has more than just amendments), section or amendment is being violated or shredded by President Obama. Yet no one does. This problem occurs likely because reading about 4500 words on 4 pages is quite a lot for those accustomed to getting their news from Sean Hannity. And the amendments make up about another 3000 or so words, which is way more than they can read on the toilet. And it has no pictures, so I suspect that that’s why none of them has read past the Second Amendment before they get bored and switch to Guns and Ammo or Us Weekly.
If there was, in fact, some, any, even an inkling of a violation, does anyone doubt that the same party which impeached Bill Clinton for lying about a blowjob wouldn’t jump at the chance to do the same to a Constitution shredder like Obama? The Repubs control the House and the Senate. They could bring articles of impeachment up tomorrow and the trial could start within a month; lots of time to toss out this Commie, Socialist, Muslim-sympathizing Kenyan before his term ends! Why haven’t they done so? Could it be that they’re simply talking out a particular lower-body orifice which is usually kept from sunlight? Could it be that they’re so proud of themselves for pronouncing a word with more than three syllables that it doesn’t matter whether they’re telling the truth or not? Or could it be, as I suspect, that they simply repeat their memorised talking points whenever they are assigned by their Dear Leader, Roger Ailes? Do they really like sounding so stunningly stupid?
Facts are facts. And none has been brought forth. And none will. The reason is that there has been no “shredding of the Constitution”. The legal guardian of that Constitution, the Supreme Court, still exists in all its glory, even with a conservative majority. They’ll be sure to let us know if, let’s say, the latest challenge to Obamacare stands up or not. And if by some chance they make the ill-informed decision to rule against Obamacare, then it will NO LONGER BE THE LAW, just like the Constitution says it should be. No shredding necessary.
But, since conservatives jump on every chance they can find to say words bigger than Benghazi, I’m sure they’ll continue to make this vacuous claim and, when called out on it, will just slake their embarrassment by turning on O’Reilly.
I’ve been reading about a program, recently ended, in Colorado whereas women were given easy, inexpensive access to IUDs (intra-uterine devices) for birth control. This program is apparently ending due to some moral (they claim it’s a fiscal issue. I don’t buy it), crisis on the part of Colorado legislators, who don’t think that their august body should insinuate itself into a woman’s reproductive choices, in spite of the fact that it has caused teenage pregnancy in that state to drop by at least 40% and abortion by at least 35%, among women under 20 years old. Yes. Abortions are down 35% in the last 4 years in Colorado, simply by giving women incentives to use birth control. If Repubs were true to their word, and really wanted to stop abortion, they’d be handing these things out like balloon animals at a kids birthday party.
But that’s not what I’m writing about today…
I’m writing about the fact that legislators, in Colorado and elsewhere, get to decide what is good or bad birth control, but only for women. I’m curious as to why vasectomies are not as much of a concern for those in authority with the power to control these things through legislation.
I’m curious why men are left to their own devices regarding whether or not they want to impregnate women, but female birth control is a constant subject of debate, including whether companies can be forced to offer insurance that covers it, as in the Hobby Lobby case. Apparently, women need legislative help to lead them along the primrose path to virtue. Or some bullshit like that…
It seems that if we think it sinful and unbecoming a woman to use a temporary device which can allow her to have sex without fear of pregnancy, we might consider the same attitude toward vasectomies, wouldn’t you think? And, yes, vasectomies are, in fact, covered by most health insurance, which was not, apparently, a big concern for Hobby Lobby. Hmm.
Now, I wouldn’t go so far as to suggest that this is further evidence of the conservative war on women, but it appears to be a least a bit of a punch in the gut, no?
John Boehner’s congress, you know the congress that in 2013 passed only 67 laws, compared to the congress described by Harry Truman in the 1940s as the “do nothing congress”, which passed over 900 laws, yeah, that congress, voted to sue Barack Obama yesterday. They’re suing him because he delayed the employer mandate on Obamacare without asking their permission first. Its nice to see that they’ve found something to keep them occupied.
How amazing is it that a congress that spent $71 million of our tax dollars on over 40 votes to repeal Obamacare, is now suing its main protagonist for delaying its implementation! Yessiree bob, they all hate Obamacare and want it to die a creeping, carcass-rotting, stuck in the corner of the sewer grate, reluctant and ponderous death, but dammit, they ain’t a-gonna let anyone delay it!
For any of you who are enjoying this, thinking that it makes Obama “nervous” or in any way worried, (as is being gleefully reported on Fox “News” and Newsmax) consider these facts:
1. This has happened hundreds of times with other Presidents (mostly by cry-baby Repubs) and never, not once, have any of these frivolous suits made it through the review process (they get thrown out of court because the filer lacks standing).
2. If a court were to agree to hear it, the motions and discovery phase would take years, well past the remainder of Obama’s term in office.
3. This is simply a manifestation of a congress which wishes Obama to fail, and is stamping their feet over the fact that his Presidency has been so unbelievably successful. Yeah, ending two wars, leading us back from an economic abyss, capturing Osama bin Laden (remember how Cowboy Bush said he didn’t even think about him anymore, the guy who killed 3000 Americans?), saving the automobile industry, giving us affordable health care, creating the Consumer Credit Protection agency, ad infinitum).
4. Just like when Repubs impeached Clinton, this is simply evidence that Repubs are so bad at actually governing, that all they can do is try to use the courts to get their way. And when they lose, they complain about activist judges!
Move along folks, nothing to see here…
I was going to write today about all the recent events about which Republicans have been wrong. Rather than write what will likely be a very, very long post, I will break it down into many smaller ones. Here goes the first in a series:
Unemployment rate on Barack Obama’s first month as President: 8.2% in February 2009
Before the end of his first year in office it has risen to: 10% by October 2009
Date that Obamacare was signed into law: March 12, 2010
Unemployment rate on that date: 9.9%
Date that John Boehner (and virtually every other Repub) started calling Obamacare a “jobkiller”: Jan 7th, 2011
Unemployment rate on that date: 9.1%
Unemployment rate today:6.1%
Amount of time that Obamacare has been the law: 4.3 years
Decrease in unemployment rate in that time:3.0%, or nearly one-third
Total amount of jobs that have been “killed” by Obamacare: None. 4.5 million jobs have been added since Obamacare signed into law.
Hey, I’m jus’ sayin’
More to come…
Yesterday, in a press conference from Capital Hill, John Boehner was asked about his threatened lawsuit against Barack Obama. You know the one that isn’t about impeachment (his words), but about “not faithfully executing the laws of this country”. When asked to give some specifics as to what laws Obama has not “faithfully executed”, Boehner’s reply was, “when I make that decision, I’ll let you know”.
So, if I have this right…I just know that you did something wrong, dammit! And I’m going to sue your ass over it! Just as soon as I figure out what it is!
The Repub circular firing squad did this once before. They spent 3 years and $25 million paying human bobblehead Ken Star to investigate and bring lawsuits against Bill Clinton, ending up in a useless impeachment hearing over, of all things, a blowjob, AND NOT ONE SINGLE, SOLITARY OTHER THING. Yup, $25 million of those precious semolians that Repubs are so keen on saving, all to bring some kind, any kind, of legal action against one of the most popular Democratic presidents of the last century. And they, as usual, failed. Remember Whitewater, Troopergate, The Rose Lawfirm, Travelgate, Vince Foster, draft dodging, ad infinitum? You don’t? Well that’s because they were investigations and lawsuits that turned up absolutely nothing.
Repubs never saw a lawsuit against a Democrat that they didn’t like, irrespective if it’s just another circle-jerk. Substance is of no consequence, as long as you can tell your idiot followers that you’ve got the Dems on the run.
Now, they’re all ginned up about this “lawsuit”, but don’t know what they’re suing over.
Reminds me of a cartoon I saw years ago, of a bunch of teenagers who wanted to start a band. They bought lots of guitars, amps, drums, keyboards and microphones. When they had it all set up, one of them said, “Great! Now all we have to do is learn to play these things”.
John Boehner (and his confused minions) figure that you first must decide that you want to sue someone, but leave the important part -like the actual purpose of the suit-for later.
I think its a big mistake to waste so much time on this. I mean, if Boehner spends too much time on this lawsuit, how will he have the time to order more votes repealing Obamacare?