Skip to main content

Interesting Grand Promises

So it came to pass.

(1)  Medicare will be cut 1/2 trillion dollars. Sure it will.
      When was the last time you saw a federal entitlement program cut?

(2) Doctors will be paid 20% less the first year and receive
     no increase during the following ten years.
     Boy, are they going to love that.

(3) Virtually every opinion poll indicates a massive
     disapproval of the legislation, less than 300 members
     of the House and Senate have shoved the bill
     down the throats of 300 million people.
      So much for representing your interests.

(4) Sadly, it is now estimated that fewer than 1 in 4 people
      who voted to pass this thing have actually read it.
      Party politics wins again.

(5) The grand promises of transparency and compromise
      turned out to be a lie.
      This healthcare overhauling legislation has never been
       examined, published or even written - which is in violation
        of rules the legislators set themselves.

(6) Worst of all our President, after Ben Nelson (D. Neb.) sold
     his "yes" vote, said "Let's bring this long and vigorous
     debate to an end." 
      Whoa! There was no debate. None. "This was a behind
      closed doors, in the dark, shove it down their throats,
      one-sided-robbery oi our civil right to decide our own
      fate when it comes to health care."

Okay folks. Our heritage has been stomped on. Who did it?
You may print in bold letters:
OUR CROOKED AND CORRUPT FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

Dixon

Comments

Rain Trueax said…
Actually there has been a lot of debate unless you only consider senators pontificating on the floor of the Senate to be the only debate that counts. It's not over yet either as both houses have to agree and that's not a done deal at the moment. As for freedom, I don't like the mandate one bit and have said as much but it's not freedom for people to have to die because they cannot afford treatment for things like blood pressure medications. Something needed fixing and no Republican did a thing about it for all these years and even now sat on their hands with only suggestions that would help the insurance corporations, not the people to get help. To me though a mandate to have to buy it will do nothing to lower the costs and it was wrong. Offering a reasonably priced public option would do the most and to placate the Conservatives, that was thrown out. Too bad!
Ingineer66 said…
Rushed through with no bipartisan support. If the bill is so good for America then why did they have to let certain states out of the requirements so their senator would vote for it. If Nebraska gets their Medicaid paid forever then why not California or Oregon or Arizona? WTF. It is all BS and hopefully unconstitutional but they will probably get 5 justices to affirm it.
Rain Trueax said…
There won't be bipartisan support for anything when one party feels they only win when the other loses. And the deal with Nebraska sounds unconstituional to me and what 5 judges would say otherwise?
Rita said…
Didn't Candidate Obama say he was going to bring everyone to the table to work out a solution for health care? Not politicians, professionals, all out in the open for a good informed debate.

I have to admit I have been extremely naive as to how Washington really works. I assumed there were compromises and I assumed that people mainly voted along party lines, but I thought their motive was to make sure their party supported them in the next election.

If it wasn't so gawdawful, I would laugh about the Starbucks campaign that gave away free coffee if you voted at the last election. They were immediately reprimanded and had to give away a free coffee to everyone otherwise it was considered "buying votes".

But CONGRESS CAN PAY FOR VOTES for their bills they want passed. And those votes sure as hell cost alot more than a cup of Joe. And those bribes cost me money without my consent.

Throw all the bums out and let's elect regular citizens that are not corrupted by the system.

And they wonder why people are gathering for the Tea Parties. They'd rather just ram it down our throats and call us filthy porn names when we dessent.

Popular posts from this blog

Gloves Off

. OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS BETRAYED OUR TRUST AGAIN. Whether we are Democrat or Republican, Liberal or Conservative, makes no difference at all. Our legislators voted according to "what's best for them". It was clear that the people want to reduce the costs and improve access to our overall health care system. It was also VERY CLEAR that they did not want the 2000 page legislative monstrosity that was produced by a small number of far left liberal Democrats, who worked behind closed doors to fashion a pork filled blunderbuss that virtually no one has been able to read, or discuss, or debate, or offer alternatives to specific unreasoned clauses. It is (now) a BAD BILL , passed by BAD POLITICIANS, that compose a BAD MINORITY segment of America's out-of-control government. AND WE HAVE NO LOGICAL WAY TO PAY FOR IT EITHER. The far left liberals like to point at  SOCIAL SECURITY   as a text book success. They are wrong and will not admit it despite the concrete evide

Why Blackwater Mercenaries

Over some years the name Blackwater shows  up in the news. It is, by their own estimation, the largest mercenary group in the world. I think I first noticed it when reports from Iraq mentioned they were employed (by whom?) to escort and protect members of the Iraqi government from place to place. Then I became aware that they had joined several of the firefights between our marines and Iraqi enemies. I wondered just how these mercenaries (that supposedly came from the United States) were  hired by someone (who?) to fight? That led to the question of just who would be responsible if a situation involved the accidental killing of an innocent bystander? It  might be a little sticky for an unauthorised mercenary contracted by the United States but not a member of our military forces.  Or suppose a Blackwater type killed a military Iraqi combatant and was then captured by the enemy. Would he be treated as a spy, or as a American combatant, or whatelse?  And would the Geneva Convention

Sarah-palin-itus

. Am I the only one that watches the liberal roar caused by the soccer mom . . . and laughs?   I suspect Sarah is a nice and decent person who will eventually prove to be a better political critic than elected official. But who knows. She projects an effervescent personality, a better than average intelligence, and solid conservative values. Still,  as a political leader of consequence I suspect she is a female Peter. You do remember THE PETER PRINCIPLE don't you. Dixon