As if Obamaâ€™s health care proposals were not flawed enough, CBS News reports a previously unnoticed provision of the bill which makes a shambles of any privacy surrounding your federal tax returns.Â Under the House bill, the IRS is required to make available to the new government Health Choices Commissionerâ€ established by the legislation and to each state health program all of your personal tax information.
After vowing not to become involved in recriminations over the Bush anti-terror policies, President Obama has allowed his Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint a special prosecutor to dig up all the dirt he can find on the CIA and the anti-terror investigators whose aggressive questioning saved us from countless attacks.
Why the switch? Because Obama needs to do something to appease the left that elected him. After refusing to pull out of Iraq and deciding to follow the Bush timetable for withdrawing and staying in Afghanistan and likely having to beef up our presence there, liberals might be wondering why they elected Obama. After all, his opposition to the war in Iraq and his criticism of the Bush anti-terror policies were the hallmarks of his campaign in 2008.
And, on the domestic front, Obama likely realizes that he may have to pull in his horns on health care and accept some sort of compromise which may not endear him to his constituency.
Published in The New York Post on August 26, 2009
Sen. Joseph Lieberman’s criticism of the Obama health-care initiative may prove to be a pivotal turning point.
Others have focused exclusively on the Obama plan’s impact on health care. The elderly worry about bearing the brunt of the inevitable rationing; others look with alarm at the de facto socialization of one-sixth of our economy.
Sen. Joe Lieberman’s (I-Conn.) criticism of the Obama healthcare initiative may prove to be a pivotal turning point in the congressional debate over the increasingly unpopular proposal. Previous commentary about the Obama plans has focused exclusively on their impact on healthcare in America. The elderly are increasingly recognizing that, whatever its defenders say, extending coverage to 50 million new people — without any new doctors or nurses or equipment or hospitals — will create a scarcity that will lead to rationing, to the disadvantage of those over 65. Defenders of the free enterprise system have looked with alarm at the socialization of one-sixth of our economy and opponents of single-payer systems have argued that government control of healthcare is the inevitable result of the plan.
Holder has now appointed a special prosecutor to investigate those who kept us safe from terrorist attacks. He has totally reversed the proper process. Now the hunters will be hunted, those who protected us will be punished, those who sought to destroy us will be exalted. Fortunately, the American people will see this charade for what it is and will realize the total masochistic reversal implicit in the today’s liberalism. We should be pinning medals on those who kept us safe, not appointing a special prosecutor to investigate them. Where is the special prosecutor to investigate those who attempt to destroy us?
Having stuck his neck out — through trial balloons suggesting a possible abandonment of the public option — President Obama is now retreating into Ft. Democrat and relying on his own party members to jam through health care legislation. With 60 Senators and a 76 vote margin in the House, he need not compromise or even listen to Republicans. He can invoke the so-called “nuclear option” and pass his bill in the Senate with just 50 votes and no possibility of real debate, much less a filibuster.
August is THE crucial month! While the Senators and Congressmen are home in their districts, let’s give them a barrage of attacks on Obama’s proposals to deform our health system! Even as public opinion has turned against the plan, he still has sixty votes in the Senate and an ample margin in the House to pass it. Unless we unleash a FIRESTORM of public outrage, the bill will pass! And your own personal health care will never be the same.
Here’s how to fight it:
1. Arm yourself with the facts: Read Chapter 4 in Catastrophe, “Obama’s Health Care Catastrophe”, which details how Obamacare will destroy American health care and explains what has happened in Canada!
2. Donate Money: The League of American Voters is running an advertisement Dick wrote in the swing states with key Senators. Give them as much as you can to run these ads.
Published in the New York Post on August 17, 2009
Washington is all atwitter about “death panels”: President Obama derides the idea that his health-care reform calls for them; the Senate is stripping “end of life” counseling language from its bill — and last Friday the voice of the liberal establishment, The New York Times, ran a Page One story “rebutting” the rumor that ObamaCare would create such boards to decide when to pull the plug on elderly patients.
President Obama’s retreat from his previous insistence on establishing a government owned insurance company to compete with private health insurers will do nothing at all to mitigate the massive rationing in medical care to the elderly his legislation will force. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, in a rare moment of profundity, said that government alternative to private health insurance is “not the essential element” of the administration’s health care overhaul. How right she is.
The fundamental equation that means worse and worse medical care for our seniors remains exactly as it was before the public option was abandoned: Fifty million new patients to be treated and no extra doctors or nurses to care for them. The result will be precisely the same whether or not there is a public option — massive rationing of medical services to the elderly.
The most ominous signal yet for the Obama health care plan emerged in the poll by Scott Rasmussen released today. While public support for the plan fell to a new low (42% support, 53% oppose — down five points in two weeks), the elderly emerged as the strongest opposition group. Those over 65 rejected the plan by 39-56 while almost half — 46% — said they were “strongly opposed” to it.
The group that supports the plan most strongly is those likely to be least affected, voters under the age of thirty, 67% of whom support the proposals.