Would you Believe? Obama’s Version of Reality


This comes from an AP story which up to now has mostly been in the tank for Obama. However even a stopped clock is right twice a day so here is one of those times even AP got it right.

AP FACT CHECK from the OBAMA speech on July 22, 2009 in an article titled:

FACT CHECK: Obama’s health care claims adrift?

WASHINGTON - JULY 24:   U.S. President Barack ...
Image by Getty Images via Daylife

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama‘s assertion Wednesday that government will stay out of health care decisions in an overhauled system is hard to square with the proposals coming out of Congress and with his own rhetoric.

Even now, nearly half the costs of health care in the U.S. are paid for by government at all levels. Federal authority would only grow under any proposal in play.

A look at some of Obama’s claims in his prime-time news conference:

__

OBAMA: “We already have rough agreement” on some aspects of what a health care overhaul should involve, and one is: “It will keep government out of health care decisions, giving you the option to keep your insurance if you’re happy with it.”

THE FACTS: In House legislation, a commission appointed by the government would determine what is and isn’t covered by insurance plans offered in a new purchasing pool, including a plan sponsored by the government. The bill also holds out the possibility that, over time, those standards could be imposed on all private insurance plans, not just the ones in the pool.

Indeed, Obama went on to lay out other principles of reform that plainly show the government making key decisions in health care. He said insurance companies would be barred from dropping coverage when someone gets too sick, limits would be set on out-of-pocket expenses, and preventive care such as checkups and mammograms would be covered.

It’s true that people would not be forced to give up a private plan and go with a public one. The question is whether all of those private plans would still be in place if the government entered the marketplace in a bigger way.

He addressed some of the nuances under questioning. “Can I guarantee that there are going to be no changes in the health care delivery system?” he said. “No. The whole point of this is to try to encourage changes that work for the American people and make them healthier.”

He acknowledged then that the “government already is making some of these decisions.”

___

OBAMA: “I have also pledged that health insurance reform will not add to our deficit over the next decade, and I mean it.”

THE FACTS: The president has said repeatedly that he wants “deficit-neutral” health care legislation, meaning that every dollar increase in cost is met with a dollar of new revenue or a dollar of savings. But some things are more neutral than others. White House Budget Director Peter Orszag told reporters this week that the promise does not apply to proposed spending of about $245 billion over the next decade to increase fees for doctors serving Medicare patients. Democrats and the Obama administration argue that the extra payment, designed to prevent a scheduled cut of about 21 percent in doctor fees, already was part of the administration’s policy, with or without a health care overhaul.

Beyond that, budget experts have warned about various accounting gimmicks that can mask true burdens on the deficit. The bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget lists a variety of them, including back-loading the heaviest costs at the end of the 10-year period and beyond.

___

OBAMA: “You haven’t seen me out there blaming the Republicans.”

THE FACTS: Obama did so in his opening statement, saying, “I’ve heard that one Republican strategist told his party that even though they may want to compromise, it’s better politics to ‘go for the kill.’ Another Republican senator said that defeating health reform is about ‘breaking’ me.”

___

OBAMA: “I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that. But I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home, and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.”

THE FACTS: The facts are in dispute between black scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. and the white police sergeant who arrested him at his Cambridge, Mass., home when officers went there to investigate a reported break-in. But this much is clear: Gates wasn’t arrested for being in his own home, as Obama implies, but for allegedly being belligerent when the sergeant demanded his identification. The president did mention that the professor was charged with disorderly conduct. Charges were dropped.

___

OBAMA: “If we had done nothing, if you had the same old budget as opposed to the changes we made in our budget, you’d have a $9.3 trillion deficit over the next 10 years. Because of the changes we’ve made, it’s going to be $7.1 trillion.”

THE FACTS: Obama’s numbers are based on figures compiled by his own budget office. But they rely on assumptions about economic growth that some economists find too optimistic. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, in its own analysis of the president’s budget numbers, concluded that the cumulative deficit over the next decade would be $9.1 trillion.

___

Associated Press writer Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar contributed to this report.

A Canadian’s View of National Health Care


Shona Holmes- Against Nationalized Health Care Ad


Think about it and then call your congressman and tell them no to national health care.

This is What Makes America Great


In spite of all the blather coming forth from capital hill, this story once again proves the greatness of America. When the American people are FREE to live their lives and make their own decisions, we have proven time and again the USA is an altruistic nation. Although the current crop of political hacks continually speak down our nation and our economy, there are still hope for change. America is still great because her people are great.
clipped from www.odemagazine.com

Standard economic theory states that people are interested only in their own material gain. But new insights from behavioral economics show that altruism rather than avarice is our primary motivation.

The City of Yonkers, New York, wound up in a distressing predicament early this year. The municipal budget was running a deficit and the economic crisis was sorely aggravating the problem. Layoffs were needed and among the casualties were six firefighters, including, most regrettably, a young man who’d recently rescued several children from a burning apartment building. The job cuts were due to go into effect the first week of January.
But then something remarkable happened. The men and women of the Yonkers Fire Department offered to work days free for six months so the city could save money and their colleagues could save their jobs. The deal was approved by 75 percent of firefighters and the layoffs were avoided.
“We banded together and voted to save our brethren.”

Does GM Bailout Come with a Company Car?


As a major shareholder in the newly formed Government Motors I demand to know when I can pick up my company car. Could someone tell me which of the dealerships still in business are taking requests for company cars? Now that I am the majority stock holder in the company I would like to have as one of my perks a nice new company car and not one of them HYBRIDS either. I want one of those big old gas guzzlers that the President drives. If Ms Pelosi can fly around in a company jet, and the President can drive around in his fleet of SUV‘s then AS A MAJOR SHAREHOLDER IN GOVERNMENT motors SO CAN I.

Please make delivery of my new company car to the address you have on file in my Share HOLDERS portfolio. THANK YOU.

clipped from canadafreepress.com
The biggest bankruptcy in US history was also the fastest bankruptcy in US history. Isn’t it amazing how fast the government can move when they are motivated by a historic confiscation of private sector power and wealth?
As of this morning, American taxpayers are now the majority shareholder in the newly created Government Motors, which will build the Chevrolet, Cadillac, GMC and Buick brands looking forward.
American taxpayers paid over $50 billion for 60.8% of GM. That money was used to save 66,000 American jobs. That comes to $757,575.76 per job saved. A little pricy if you ask me, but we are talking about union jobs here.
By comparison, less than 1% of the Obama-Pelosi “stimulus” package was directed at stimulating small businesses, which account for 98% of all jobs in America. But when it came time to save union jobs, Obama-Pelosi opened up the taxpayer pocketbook and coughed up a very generous $757,575.76 for each of 66,000 GM jobs saved.

Government Program Aimed at Teen Pregnacy Fails


Once again the enlightened and educated amongst us prove COMMON SENSE has died. These government programs in England and in New York are destined to fail because of the very foundation they are attempting to build upon. Instead of teaching these AT RISK young ladies about self-esteem, and the virtues of a chaste lifestyle, they reason that since these girls are going to have sex anyway we might as well teach them about sex. And like every other government mandated program IT FAILED! Not only did it fail it FAILED miserably.The truth is it made the matter worse than if they would have left the girls alone.

Sound familiar?

clipped from www.dailymail.co.uk
A multi-million pound initiative to reduce teenage pregnancies more than doubled the number of girls conceiving.
The Government-backed scheme tried to persuade teenage girls not to get pregnant by handing out condoms and teaching them about sex.
But research funded by the Department of Health shows that young women who attended the programme, at a cost of £2,500 each, were ‘significantly’ more likely to become pregnant than those on other youth programmes who were not given contraception and sex advice.
A total of 16 per cent of those on the Young People’s Development Programme conceived compared with just 6 per cent in other programmes.
The failed YPDP, launched in 2004, was based on a similar scheme in claimed to have significantly reduced teenage pregnancies.
However, attempts to replicate the work elsewhere in the U.S. did not lead to a fall in teenage pregnancies, casting doubt on the project as a whole.