Evidently I missed the new Kronies action figure when it dropped in September:
Posts Tagged ‘ObamaCare’
(I was trying to think of a more clever headline, but let’s just go with the obvious, shall we?)
One of the last, best hopes for Obama and Harry Reid to keep control of the senate is Louisiana incumbent Mary Landrieu hanging on to one of the last Democratic seats in the south.
Let’s discuss just the highlights of why Louisianans should vote for Rep. Bill Cassidy over Landrieu. The latest polls show Casserly up, but at under 50%. (And remember that the Democrat’s ground game surprised a lot of pollsters in 2012.)
Remember how Mary Landrieu was one of the deciding votes for ObamaCare in the senate?
Contrary to popular belief and what FOX News said, people here read the bills. For 40 years we read the bills. But we did not have to read the bills; all we had to do was look at the faces of kids dying of cancer who had no way to get cured… I don’t need to read a bill. I listen to my constituents. That is what this is about.
Somehow I doubt she’s going to listen to those whose policies were canceled, or whose prices doubled or tripled, thanks to ObamaCare. Maybe that’s why 59% of Louisianans oppose ObamaCare, and more than half disapprove of Landrieu’s performance.
And Landrieu says she would vote for ObamaCare again. Maybe that’s why the National Federation of Independent Business has endorsed Cassidy. (More on Landrieu’s ObamaCare support here.)
Poor Second Amendment Record
Landrieu got a D from the NRA-PVF on her gun rights voting record. Despite crowing about her Second Amendment support, she has voted for several gun control measures. While not as hostile to Second Amendment rights as Nancy Pelosi or Andrew Cuomo, she’s betrayed gun rights enough for Louisiana gun owners to be leery of her.
No less than Michelle Obama said that re-electing Landrieu was critical for gun control efforts. And remember: When push comes to shove, there’s no such thing as a pro-gun Democrat. I guarantee you that Mary Landrieu is no more “pro-gun” than Bart Stupak was pro-life.
Mary Landrieu doesn’t actually live in Louisiana:
In Washington, Sen. Mary Landrieu lives in a stately, $2.5 million brick manse she and her husband built on Capitol Hill.
Here in Louisiana, however, the Democrat does not have a home of her own. She is registered to vote at a large bungalow in New Orleans that her parents have lived in for many decades, according to a Washington Post review of Landrieu’s federal financial disclosures and local property and voting records.
On a statement of candidacy Landrieu filed with the Federal Election Commission in January, she listed her Capitol Hill home as her address.
It takes a special kind of stupid to put your D.C. mansion down as your home address.
Finally, for a hard-hitting look at how Mary Landrieu has ignored her constituents, take a look at this ad:
Reminder: Louisiana has system whereby the top two candidates will go to a runoff on December 6. Unless Bill Cassidy is able to win outright in November (which seems doubtful at this point), he’s going to need help in the runoff. And if the control of the senate hangs in the balance, you know Democrats will pull out all the stops to keep Harry Reid in power…
Here’s your Friday LinkSwarm of semi-random linkage goodness:
The inequality police are worried that we are living in a new Gilded Age. We should be so lucky: Between 1880 and 1890, the number of employed Americans increased by more than 13 percent, and wages increased by almost 50 percent. I am going to go out on a limb and predict that the Barack Obama years will not match that record; the share of employed Americans is lower today than it was when he took office, and household income is down. Grover Cleveland is looking like a genius in comparison.
A Monday LinKSwarm to kick off your week with:
“Obama says what he has to say to make reporters stop asking about it.”
#ExplainAFilmPlotBadly Respected archaeology professor has secret life where he indulges his taste for wearing leather and using whips.
— BattleSwarm (@BattleSwarmBlog) September 6, 2014
Time for another random roundup of news and links:
As to Mr Earnest’s point on “what Congress intended”, who can say? No Congressman who voted for the bill read it. Presumably, some legislator’s staffer wrote that actual line about “established by the State”. If we could locate him among the vast entourages of the Emirs of Incumbistan, we could ask him what his “intention” was. Until then, calibrating the competing degrees of deference to a corrupt bureaucracy, a contemptuous executive, a politicized judiciary and a feckless hack legislature brings to mind Samuel Johnson’s line about arguing the precedence of a louse and a flea, with a tick and a cockroach thrown in.
— Maddy Perennity (@Madel_Schmadel) July 19, 2014
Twas once a Vancouver Philly Whose political race was a dilly After the shouts She had to drop out For shaking dew off the lily @rsmccain
— BattleSwarm (@BattleSwarmBlog) July 22, 2014
D.C. Circuit court rules 2-1 against federal ObamaCare subsidies in Halbig vs. Burwell:
In a case with potential to scramble the Affordable Care Act, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that federal subsidies for health insurance were not properly designed.
If upheld by the Supreme Court, the ruling could limit subsidies on the federal healthcare.gov exchange currently used by 36 states.
This is breaking news that doesn’t even appear to be up on the Google News index, and I haven’t seen a direct link to the decision yet.
Instead of invalidating ObamaCare outright, the federal judicial system seems to have successively gutted it in ways most likely to inflict massive electoral defeats on the Democratic Party while giving them nothing to show for it…
Update 2: But wait! The 4th District Court has ruled in favor of federal ObamaCare subsidies in the King vs. Burwell case.
Confused? You won’t be, after
this episode of Soap the Supreme Court takes up the case…
More news from inside the handbasket, including the dust-up in Gaza and the illegal alien surge at the border:
— Dan McLaughlin (@baseballcrank) July 10, 2014
— YCT-UT (@YCT_UT) July 10, 2014
The Supreme Court handed the Obama Administration yet another defeat today:
1. For-profit corporations are persons protected under RFRA. (Pp. 16-20.)
2. Closely held for-profit corporations are capable of engaging in an exercise of religion protected by RFRA. (It “seems unlikely” that publicly traded corporations would “often” assert RFRA claims, but no need to decide whether they can.) (Pp. 20-31.)
3. The HHS mandate substantially burdens the exercise of religion by the Hahns, the Greens, and their companies
Given the ferocity with which Nancy Pelosi fought for the ObamaCare language that enabled Obama’s HHS to impose the abortion mandate, I think this really is a stinging defeat for the left. No, you can’t have an abortion mandate. Not yours.
Note that the text of the ruling “is based on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), and not the First Amendment. (In other words, this is a statutory decision, not a constitutional one.)”
And for the Obama Administration:
This one about narrowing pediatric service networks when your baby has a hole in her heart:
Norah was diagnosed with a hole in her heart and Wolff Parkinson White syndrome. Norah’s heart has extra circuits and will randomly fire off at up to 300 beats per minute during one of her spells. Dr. Garmany told us that it is not an extremely rare disorder; some people live their whole lives not knowing they have WPW and others die at age 8 leaving behind parents who had no idea.
Norah was hooked up to monitors overnight and came back for test after test. While the financial consequences of Norah’s medical issues are a tough burden, the emotional toll is much, much harder. Every time she naps for more than an hour, every time she is in the middle of playing and suddenly starts screaming, when her feet turn blue or her face turns red; we are constantly panicked. The silver lining is that our amazing pediatrician helped catch it early and we have (had) full faith in one of the best pediatric cardiologists in the country.
In late May, we were notified that because of tripling premiums, my husband’s employer was dropping Cigna for a new insurance. This comes one year after they dropped United Healthcare because premiums were increasing drastically. United and Cigna are very similar and adequate insurances, however we did lose coverage, options, and our deductible went from one thousand per family member to two thousand per family member. Out of pocket for our family went from eight thousand to eighteen thousand.
Last year we lost thousands in out of pocket expenses to keep premiums bearable, this year his employer changed to a policy with fewer doctors. It should also be said that my husband’s employer is not the bad party here; they’ve increased their contributions every year to reduce premiums as well. Most employers care deeply about their people, but the tide of Obamacare will be too big to be shielded from. We lost doctors. We lost our most important doctor; Norah lost Dr. Garmany. We have to start all over; removed from the expert we fully trust. Obamacare has taken away the peace we had knowing our baby had the best care possible.
We are stuck with one plan, one option, and it is a company that nobody knows. Even doctors in the network believe that they are not in the network. We found out in the last week of May that open enrollment ends June 1st with Norah’s looming appointment June 6th. We searched immediately for our doctors, spent every day writing appeals and trying to get Dr. Garmany and others in the network. We are the third party, trying to match doctors who have never heard of a sketchy PPO to a PPO that has one person trying to answer the phone for the entire company. A billing specialist at one of our doctors asked if we were insured with “Uncle Jerry’s Medical Insurance and Tackle Shop.”
Obamacare is the problem. Period. Insurances companies were providing a product that was voluntary to purchase and people bought it willingly and happily. Some, like my husband, pick one job over another for medical benefits that the company provides. Medical insurance is a benefit and was a good benefit for us. Insurance companies must cover their asses because they are now being forced to sell a product they do not want to sell, many times to people who do not want to buy it. Anyone who cannot find Obamacare at fault for the massive number of families who have lost coverage, doctors, or endured huge increases in premiums and deductibles is in denial or in need of strong medication.
I want to shed light on my problem because there are millions of families that have similar issues and millions more to come. This is only the beginning; as time ticks down to the new date of the employer mandate, millions more will have a story just like Norah’s. Obamacare is a ruse, rammed through Congress in a disgusting fashion and shoved down the throats of good, tax-paying Americans. The dirty trick of Obamacare is to destroy companies like Cigna and United, who cannot provide affordable insurance while covering people at forced rates that would otherwise cause them to lose billions, while insurance companies like First Health Network will pop up all over the place and provide insurance that nobody wants. Obamacare is designed to destroy private insurance and force Americans into Uncle Sam’s loving arms.
Read the whole thing.