We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
More centrist congressional Democrats are staking out a more moderate position than the Democrat Party’s more radical leadership.
Jennifer Rubin, at Commentary’s Contentions blog, chuckles at Leftist naïf Ezra Klein’s revealing the Senate Democrats are being forced to significantly scale back their grand scheme: “One has to laugh: no Santa and no universal healthcare plan that ‘holds down costs.’ ”
How much longer before President Obama has to throw this dead horse under the bus, or falls off his high-horse?
This was supposed to be a red-letter week for national health care, as Democrats started the process of hustling a quarter-baked bill through Congress to reorganize one-sixth of the economy on a partisan vote. Instead it was a fiasco.
Most of the devastation was wreaked by the Congressional Budget Office, which on Tuesday reported that draft legislation from the Senate Finance Committee would increase the federal deficit by more than $1.6 trillion over the next decade while only partly denting the population of the uninsured. The details haven't been made public, but the short version seems to be that President Obama's health boondoggle prescribes vast new spending without a coherent plan to pay for it even while failing to meet its own standards for social equity.
1. There are professionals at the CBO;
2. It's not for lack of "persuasion" by Senator Baucus, asking the CBO to be "creative";
3. The CBO usually underestimates federal programs; the $1.6 trillion is probably on the low side;
4. Medicare was originally forecast/analyzed to cost a fraction of what it now costs;
5. Many of the details of Obamacare haven't been released, so those costs are still to be counted;
6. These are only the federal budget costs; the costs to states and to individuals and businesses are excluded, and likely another multiple.
"How come [the CBO] haven't fallen in with the party line?" Probably, they have long memories that extend back into the 20th century. And there are enough older, still mentally competent, people who remember other earlier government debacles when ambitious politicians tried to grab the reins of control away from a wary public. Hillarycare, anyone?
Anyway, once the Decomcratic Congress can get hold of healthcare, they can slough off the older folks with good memories. Read somewhere yesterday on the 'Net that 65 years of age is the new cut-off point under Universal Healthcare for allowing expensive operations, like joint replacements and heart by-passes, and other treatment solutions to healthcare problems of older people.
All of you good people who are approaching this mandatory cut-off point "Get sick Immediately" as one editorial on Townhall instructed, so you can still access these expensive solutions to pain and increasing age-related health problems before the Obama health police come calling at your house.
Oh, feeblemind, I do hope so, as far as Obama healthcare rationing is concerned. And why is it that no one under the age of 50 seems to realize that cap and trade is American's version of the Value Added Tax, and we all know how helpful that's been to manufacturing and trade in Great Britain. When you tax any complicated product at every stage of its manufacture, you get a monster -- too expensive, badly manufactured and destined for defeat when competing with free market products.