Posts Tagged Obama
What’s Coming From Dr. Obama MD
Posted by Scott in Entitlements, Healthcare on July 27th, 2009
The President, and democrats in Congress have been pushing hard lately for a health care bill to be passed. The proposed bill will place tough restrictions on current health insurers, as well as set up a government run insurance for any uninsured American.
So what do Americans have to look forward to? Based on other government programs and trends from other countries with socialized health care, here are a few of the things Americans will likely see in the future:
Quotas:Like any other government operation, there will be a budget in place. That essentially means that the government will place limits on itself as far as how much they will be able to spend each year. The President mentioned in his public address last week that doctors often times will choose the more expensive treatment, when a less expensive one will suffice. In this situation, a less expensive treatment might be mandated when a more expensive one is necessary. Additionally, the socialized programs in the UK and other countries are plagued with other similar annual quotas.
Longer Waits: The US Government recently launched the “Cash for Clunkers” program where it will pay $4,500 for your used car if you purchase a new, more fuel efficient car in return. The program was scheduled to start last Friday, but was delayed until today due to a problem with the website used by dealerships to report the transactions. While this doesn’t seem like a major catastrophe, the slightest wait for someone who is having a heart attack would be a disastrous catastrophe.
Poor Coverage: Medicare, Medicaid and veterans’ hospitals are all shining examples of poorly run health care in the US. The US government already has a proven track record of poor coverage through these programs, so why does anyone think that the new system will be any different?
Redundancy: The President said that there are millions of uninsured Americans who will benefit from government run health care. He implied that these millions of Americans are unable to get access to insurance because they simply can’t afford it. If this was true, they would automatically be covered under Medicaid. He failed to mention that there also happen to be millions of young, healthy Americans, who choose to spend their money on other things than health insurance.
The list could continue, but I think I’ve made my point. The government has yet to prove that it is capable of running anything without having bureaucrats putting their two cents in where it isn’t wanted (or needed). Health care is something that should be left to the public to handle, not bureaucrats.
Related Posts From Conservative Posts -
Government Charity With the holiday season in full swing, people are becoming... - Universal Healthcare - Who Does it Help? Ever since Canada and many European nations began universal healthcare...
Related Websites Not Affiliated With Conservative Posts - Home Births May No Longer Be an Option Back in November, I viewed a screening of Ricki Lake...
- The Pros and Cons of Universal Health Care in the United States This is a follow-up to my series last year, Universal...
Obama’s Fly Swatter Approach to North Korea
Posted by Scott in Foreign Affairs, Military on June 21st, 2009
Over the past few months, North Korea has tested missiles and nuclear weapons all in violation of various UN resolutions. The sanctions and other restrictions placed on North Korea have effectively done nothing to stop them from developing longer ranged weapons, which can now reach the United States.
When you have an insect problem outside your house, one might logically conclude that killing the bugs at their source would be the best way to stop them from entering your home. What Obama is effectively doing with the North Korea situation is waiting until the “bugs” enter the house, but arming himself with a fly swatter to control the situation.
The North Koreans seem like they are prepared to launch a missile capable of reaching Hawaii within the next few weeks. Obama has positioned US Naval ships in the Pacific to intercept a North Korean attack, however they’re acting as the figurative fly swatter from this example.
The boundaries have been tested over the last few months, and the North Koreans know what actions the world is willing to take against them. I just hope that the holes in the fly swatter are small enough to keep the pests from getting through.
Related Posts From Conservative Posts - Shape Up Automakers...Or ELSE! President Obama told the US auto industry to shape up,...
- Is it Harder to Kill Terrorists or Get a Job? Note: The following article was originally posted by Todd Manzi...
Related Websites Not Affiliated With Conservative Posts -
Fishing Report: January 08, 2010 Striped Bass, Crab and Halibut At Berkeley/Emeryville, sturgeon trips are... - Military to test weapons on U.S. citizens first, enemies second Um, no thanks? No, really, its ok....I would rather not....
Obama’s Vegas Vacation
The Senate Majority leader, Harry Reid, has a fundraiser planned at Cesar’s Palace on the Las Vegas Strip. He’s planning on having headliners, like Bette Midler and Sheryl Crow perform at the event.
Oh yea, he’s also having some guy named Barack show up too.
The trip to Vegas for Obama is a complete 180 from his position on “corporate excesses”, back when bailout recipients were planning trips to Sin City for their high performers. The President was even quoted as saying “You can’t get corporate jets, you can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayer’s dime” when talking about the corporate excesses.
I guess he changed his mind.
After all, it’s the taxpayer who footed the bill for the Air Force One photo-op flyover of Manhattan. And come to think of it, it’s also the taxpayer who is footing the bill for the President to fly out to Las Vegas.
I guess we shouldn’t complain though. It’s not like he’s taking the trip to further any “excesses”. I mean Harry Reid has only raised a little over $3 million for his reelection campaign. I suppose that might not be enough if he were running against someone who had a chance of winning. But he’s not.
The President has “flip-flopped” more in the first few months of his presidency than John Kerry did during his entire campaign against George W. Bush, and is leading with the “do as I say, not as I do” mentality, which is prevalent throughout the Democratic party.
I just pray that the important issues on the President’s desk don’t take a back seat to this fundraising initiative that he has decided to undertake. Just think how bad President Bush looked when he “didn’t panic little elementary school kids” on September 11th. God forbid, President Obama interrupts a pointless fundraiser to attend to other national security issues.
Related Posts From Conservative Posts - They've Got it All Wrong Continuing on my little rant from the past article on...
- AIG Outrage President Obama lashed out against the plan of AIG to...
Related Websites Not Affiliated With Conservative Posts -
EarthTalk: What Environmental Concerns Will The Next President Face? EarthTalk is a weekly installment from E/The Environmental Magazine. Dear... - New Poll Many Democratic Party supporters in the United States would like...
Supreme Court Takeover
Posted by Scott in Constitution on May 7th, 2009
President Obama will be faced with appointing someone to the Supreme Court now that Justice David Souter has announced his retirement. The question of who he will appoint remains open.
It’s possible that this person will have a liberal agenda that they wish to push on the American people through this position. Even liberals should recognize that this is dangerous, because it could cloud the objectiveness that is necessary when interpreting the Constitution. It is especially dangerous when considering that Supreme Court appointments are for life.
Think about it this way. You go to traffic court to fight a ticket you received, even though you weren’t speeding. The judge hearing your case recently had a family member who was killed by a speeding motorist. He doesn’t care really what your defense is, because he has no sympathy for speeders. It doesn’t matter to this judge that the Constitution requires due process and equal protection of the laws. This wouldn’t be fair to the defendant, nor would it be legal.
Now think about a Supreme Court justice who has an agenda, regardless of what that agenda might be, who uses their position to push their ideas on the American people. If they have as little regard for the Constitution as the judge from the traffic court we’ll instantly loose all protections under the Constitution, unless of course you were in agreement with the justice. Everyone will be equal, but some will just be a little more equal than others.
We have a great country because of the laws that provide us with security from the government. The checks and balances in place keep a group of men from running the government as they see fit, as opposed to how the law says it should be.
I know it seems like an extreme example, but think about if we had President Hitler. He decides to appoint anti-Semite justices to the Supreme Court, who have no problem with rounding up Jews and locking them away in camps. All the appeals in the world won’t fix the injustice as you’ll only be met by an anti-Semitic Supreme Court.
Now, I’m not suggesting that President Obama’s agenda is as extreme as Hitler’s – far from it in fact. I simply used an extreme example to drive the point home.
The bottom line is that the President can only damage this country for eight years. He can, however appoint justices who can continue to damage the country for decades to come. This is where it gets dangerous.
Related Posts From Conservative Posts - Clinton Gun Ban Sunsets! Finally, after 10 long years, the Clinton gun ban has...
- Post Election Whining It's been a week since the election, and we're already...
Related Websites Not Affiliated With Conservative Posts -
Change we can believe in? One thing that I've that I've learned in my short... - Acomplia - FDA Reject? Acomplia Acomplia was supposed to be the miracle drug obese...
Is the US Responsible for Mexico’s Problems?
Posted by Scott in Economy, Foreign Affairs, Guns on April 17th, 2009
President Obama recently visited Mexico to discuss, among other things, the escalating violence in the country, which stems from the growing drug trade.
In his visit, Obama acknowledged that the US shares a piece of the responsibility for the violence in Mexico because of the guns that get smuggled into Mexico from the US. To his credit, President Obama said he would rather concentrate his efforts on anti-smuggling laws rather than on more restrictive laws on sales of guns in the US. Although he did admit that the Clintonian Assault Weapons Ban “made sense”, but that “none of us is under the illusion that reinstating that ban would be easy, and so what we’ve focused on is how we can improve our enforcement of existing laws.” I’m reading that as a positive for now, but stay tuned I’m sure there will be more developments on that front.
Back to my original point, regarding how the US shares the responsibility for the escilating violence in Mexico. Is it our fault that the Mexican economy is in such bad shape that their people have to resort to illegal means to bring money into the country? Is it our fault that the best way for Mexicans to make an “honest” dollar is by crossing the border in to the US and working illegally? Either that or they could team up with a drug cartel and add to the already out of hand violence.
I’m failing to see how the US has caused any of this. True, many of the guns used by the drug cartels were purchased in the US and smuggled across the border. To that same logic though, couldn’t one reason that Mexico is to blame for the US drug problem?
Each country has their own unique social and economic issues, which should be addressed. It doesn’t help either situation though when blame is incorrectly placed on the wrong party. It especially doesn’t help when it’s our President blaming us for other countries problems.
Related Posts From Conservative Posts - Supreme Court Takeover President Obama will be faced with appointing someone to the...
- Universal Healthcare - Who Does it Help? Ever since Canada and many European nations began universal healthcare...
Related Websites Not Affiliated With Conservative Posts - $9 Billion Of Your Tax Dollars Is Spent Dealing With Marijuana Laws Each Year. I am the kind of person that understands that the...
- Declutter Help For Busy Moms You are an active mom, and you want some help...
Harold & Kumar Go To The White House?
Posted by Scott in Gov't Operations on April 7th, 2009
Kumar goes to the White House
Yes it’s true, Kal Penn, the actor from Harold & Kumar Go To White Castle is going to the White House.
Penn, whose most recent role on TV’s House, is reported to have taken a position at the White House as the associate director in the White House office of public liaison.
Penn had worked with the Obama campaign and was a big supporter during the election. He said that his new role does “outreach with the American public and with different organizations. They’re basically the front door of the White House. They take out all of the red tape that falls between the general public and the White House. It’s similar to what I was doing on the campaign.”
I don’t know about you, but is this guy really the face you want as “the front door of the White House”?
I don’t know much about this guy, or his qualifications, but it seems to me like you might need some political experience in order to work in this role. I could be wrong though.
Related Posts From Conservative Posts - Bayer, a Cure for More Than Just Pain Usually, I am not the type to sit around and...
- They've Got it All Wrong Continuing on my little rant from the past article on...
Related Websites Not Affiliated With Conservative Posts -
10 Things Zombieland Taught Me About Stock Market Investing Zombieland looks like an insane movie. There aren't many movies... -
U.S. Census 2010 - GPS Coordinates of Your Front Door Sunday Paper - May 3rd, 2009 Back in February, the...
Illegal Immigrants in Obama’s Family?
Posted by Scott in Immigration on April 1st, 2009
President Obama’s aunt appealed her order for deportation today, extending her time living in public housing in Boston for at least another 10 months.
According to Fox News, Obama’s aunt, Zeituni Onyango, lost her bid for asylum over four years ago, but has continued to live illegally in the United States.
To the President’s credit, he said that the laws regarding her situation should be followed. This does, however add to a growing list of individuals close to the President who have somewhat shady backgrounds. There’s the Treasury Secretary who didn’t pay his taxes, or the Homeland Security director who was the Governor of the state with the highest kidnapping rate in the world.
What’s next? Ex CEO of Peanut Corp. of America for the head of the FDA? Cheech Marin (of Cheech and Chong) for the head of the DEA? Hillary for Secretary of State? Oh, wait.
Seems to me that these problems are more than just a simple oversight. If the President is willing to overlook certain issues from the backgrounds of his nominees, one has to wonder what else he’s overlooking.
Related Posts From Conservative Posts - Getting Vet's Benefits Straight President Obama had fished around with the idea of eliminating...
- A Look Back. Three Years Later Three years ago today, our country was under attack. The...
Related Websites Not Affiliated With Conservative Posts -
In Tennis, Hewitt Targets an Event in Sydney as His Official Return From Injury Lleyton Hewitt, regarded as a former world number one tennis... -
Democrat Feingold Gives Obama a 'D' Sunday Paper - May 3rd, 2009 Senator Russ Feingold (D)...
France Limits Exec Pay
According to the Wall Street Journal, “The French government, trying to quell public anger over executive pay, banned companies that get state funding from issuing stock options to top managers and limited some other forms of compensation.”
Let’s hope it doesn’t get to that in the US, but with the reception the Obama’s are getting on the current stop in Europe, I’m sure it’s not out of the realm of possibility.
The bottom line is, that private companies should be left to run privately. They shouldn’t get bailed out with taxpayer dollars, and they shouldn’t have to answer to the government for their daily operational activities, such as paying their executives.
Related Posts From Conservative Posts - Supreme Court Takeover President Obama will be faced with appointing someone to the...
- The Snackwell Effect The "Snackwell Effect" gets its name from the low-calorie snack...
Related Websites Not Affiliated With Conservative Posts - Forget "Better Online Shopping" - Give Me A Shopping Plug-In I ran across a tip for better online shopping and...
-
How Much Debt is Too Much? The average American is currently carrying at least some form...
Shape Up Automakers…Or ELSE!
President Obama told the US auto industry to shape up, because we can’t keep a permanent flow of cash into their hands. Essentially, he said the bailout funds are going to run dry for the auto industries, if they don’t show that they have a plan to save themselves.
In the same speech, however, President Obama also said that we won’t let the US auto industry simply vanish. To me this seems contradictory.
The short deadlines given to Chrysler and GM, are forcing moves such as a potential merger with Italian automaker Fiat. This may not be the best move for Chrysler, but given the accelerated deadline, it may be their only option. It seems to me as if the Obama administration is forcing the US auto industry to make hasty decisions, for possibly no other reason than to gain popular support from the public.
Granted these companies, in my opinion, wrongfully took taxpayer bailout funds, and should have to be held accountable for what they do with the money. I just don’t think that it makes sense to force them to make moves for the sake of “getting something done”.
Sometimes good things come to those who wait.
Related Posts From Conservative Posts - France Limits Exec Pay According to the Wall Street Journal, "The French government, trying...
- Obama's Vegas Vacation The Senate Majority leader, Harry Reid, has a fundraiser planned...
Related Websites Not Affiliated With Conservative Posts -
College Savings Plan Contributions Instead Of Gifts Grandparents have a unique way of spoiling their grand kids....
-
New Trusts, Will they Help? One of the worries that plagues many Americans is the...
Are We Headed for a Welfare State?
With the proposed programs in the Obama administration’s budget, it appears as if we’re on a collision course with becoming a socialist state. European countries have been on this path for decades, with universal health care and other similar programs.
The question one has to ask is, has any of these programs worked? And in order to answer that question, you have to define what the expected result is. If the result is to have everyone pay for everyone else’s health care, for example, then the program is a failure. If it is to give everyone access to health care, then again the program is a failure.
In the UK, taxpayers fund the government sponsored health care system where everyone has “access” to health care. I say “access”, because, yes everyone is “entitled” to health care for “free”, it just depends on how long you have to wait for it.
It is perfectly reasonable for one to assume that if you have a potentially fatal disease, you should be moved to the front of the line, and you receive top priority. However in the UK, they work on a quota system of sorts. What this means is the government budgets for a certain number of open heart surgeries, brain surgeries, and other like treatments each year. Once the quota is met for the year, anyone waiting for treatment has to wait until the next year. Even if they are at risk of dying before being treated.
So is this what we want? In an on-demand society that complains about a 3 hour wait in the emergency room, do we want to wait months to be treated for serious illnesses?
Hospitals are businesses like any other, except they also accept insurance as a form of payment. If you don’t have insurance, they’ll put you on a payment plan. While this may be financially difficult to those without insurance, it shouldn’t force everyone else to have to pay higher taxes.
Related Posts From Conservative Posts - Generous or Deceitful? I started searching around the internet for some dirt for...
- Pay to Play In an effort to prevent raising taxes where I live,...
Related Websites Not Affiliated With Conservative Posts - Will the failure of Obamas health care reform signal an end to any chances for a second term? Tomorrow when Massachusetts elects Brown for Senate, it will pretty...
- Top Health Issues of 2007...and into 2008 The following is a list of prime health issues from...
-
Poll
Loading ...
Follow On...