Fraud for your own good

[Dr.Who]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...pose-Of-ObamaCare-A-Single-Payer-Trojan-Horse

The Affordable Care Act is already doing a fantastic job at it's true purpose: taking great health insurance plans away from people and replacing them with either a much higher-priced, inferior plan or....nothing.
In all the discussion about ObamaCare, many people are missing the point about the true purpose of the law. Supposedly, the purpose of the Affordable Care Act was to lower health insurance costs and provide better health insurance plans for people to purchase.

Far from it.

The actual purpose of the ACA is to prepare the ground for a single payer system to come later.

ObamaCare was designed to 'fix' the problem of a country in which most had health insurance coverage and were happy with the status quo.

Progressives realized they were never going to get this backwards country to a single payer system as long as 85% of Americans had coverage and the majority of them were satisfied with the health insurance plan they had. The top leadership of the Democratic Party rightly recognized this situation as a huge obstacle to ever getting a single payer system implemented on the entire country from Washington DC.

The goal of ObamaCare is a national transformation from a country where 85% had health insurance & of those 87% were happy with their plan, to one where almost no one will be happy with what they have been forced to take.

After a few years of this new situation, Progressives figured people would be ready to hear their solution to the problem: a single payer system.

If people were never going to voluntarily hand over their private insurance plans, they would just have to be tricked into it then.

Let that sink in: Since American citizens were never going to voluntarily hand over their health insurance plans, a strategy was formed in which those plans would be stripped from them involuntarily. And that strategy was the Affordable Care Act and the multitude of lies that Democrats told about it.

They repeatedly lied to the country about keeping plans and keeping doctors and premiums being lower, knowing full well the entire time that this would not be the case.

But by the time the public figured this out, it would be too late. The law would have already passed and be in force, and millions of people will have had their insurance plans ripped from their fingers before they could even protest about it.

As I discussed in this previous column, Obama and the Democratic Party knew they had to deliberately mislead as many Americans as possible about what the ACA would do to their health insurance plans in order to pass the bill.

President Obama asked the country to trust him when he repeatedly promised it the ACA wouldn't affect people who liked their current plans and wanted to keep them. He performed perhaps the biggest political dirty trick ever pulled on the American people and he did it openly and brazenly.

He could do that with a clear conscience because like many Progressives, Obama believes in lying to people for their own good.

At least Conservatives will treat people like adults. To the Progressives, Americans will always be stupid children who need to be coerced, bribed or tricked into doing the 'right' thing.

How could Democrats think they could get away with this kind of shameless behavior? They were convinced back in 2008 they had at last grown their base to the point they would never lose another election. Many of them still think this, despite the setback of losing the House of Representatives in 2010 and 2012. They still see a 'permanent Democratic majority' out there and so remain confident they can propagandize their way out of any consequences.

The arrogance of the Progressive Left knows no bounds. They fully expect to get away with this.

At this point, no one has even askedBarack Obama about all the false promises he made to the American people about the ACA. How much longer will the President be allowed to skate by on this before he's confronted with the fact the promises he uttered so freely and extravagantly in 2009 have now been shown to be utterly false?

The radical Leftists in control of the Democratic Party remain convinced despite having pulled a gigantic fraud upon the American people with the Affordable Care Act, enough of their base will stick with them to deliver election victories in 2014 and 2016.

It'll be up to the American people to prove them wrong.

 

[Dr.Who]

“What we’ve done with Obamacare is have a step in the right direction, but we’re far from having something that’s going to work forever,” Reid said.

When then asked by panelist Steve Sebelius whether he meant ultimately the country would have to have a health care system that abandoned insurance as the means of accessing it, Reid said: “Yes, yes. Absolutely, yes.”

 

[Dr.Who]

Barack Obama traveled the country promising that ObamaCare would lower the cost of health insurance and increase availability to healthcare. But it has had the opposite effect: Health insurance costs are skyrocketing. Doctors are dropping out of the healthcare market in droves, and HMOs are firing doctors by the thousands.

But this was no surprise to Obama’s central planners. They knew that health insurance premiums would skyrocket for most Americans. They knew that doctors would drop out of the healthcare market in droves. They knew that most would opt out of Obamacare and pay the fine.

And they know Obamacare will eventually collapse.

With Obamacare and the entire healthcare industry in shambles, the public will clamor for single-payer, socialized medicine that will eventually put everything—insurance, doctors, nurses, hospitals, medical equipment—even our own bodies—under the all-wise control of government.

It’s called stealth socialism.

ObamaCare is a Trojan Horse for socialized medicine.


Moving the country to socialized medicine step by step.

And the real goal: a communist utopia, with everything owned by the government, including our very own bodies…


Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/obamacare-trojan-horse-socialized-medicine/#98JlVX1YsQreHdxB.99

 

[Dr.Who]

There's no mystery why ObamaCare won't work. It won't work because it's an absurdity. The only mystery is why anyone ever thought it would work. But maybe that's no mystery either. Maybe its proponents didn't care whether it worked. Indeed, maybe they didn't even want it to work.

It's no secret what ObamaCare's principals really want. They want a Cuban healthcare system in which the state is your provider, your doctor, and your hospital. They won't call that what it is -- a socialist system. Instead, they call it a "universal single-payer system" because that sounds better. It's an everybody-in/nobody-out system in which the Federal government pays for everybody's healthcare -- at first, by forcibly redistributing income from those who earned it to those who didn't and, later when there's nothing left to redistribute, by restricting both the quality and quantity of healthcare available.

Indeed, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and others have plainly said what they really want is a "universal single-payer system." Obama has even gone so far as to disclose their strategy: interim solutions which ultimately "transition" to the final solution. While still a U.S. senator, Obama said, "it is my belief that it's not just politically but economically . . . better for us to start getting a system in place -- a universal healthcare system signed into law by the end of my first term as president and build off that system to further . . . make it more rational . . . ." And "more rational," in Obama's self-professed worldview, inevitably means more statist intervention and redistribution.

So what if ObamaCare doesn't work? All that establishes is ObamaCare didn't go far enough. The real problem was always private providers, private doctors, private hospitals, and maybe even private drug manufacturers. And the real solution is "transitioning" to a "universal single-payer system."

In this healthcare context, ObamaCare was never more than a socialist Trojan horse in a free-market Troy. If socialism is initially unable to breach the free market's walls, place a superficially attractive gift outside its gates designed, in the dark of night, to eventually unleash socialism within the citadel itself.

It isn't as if there aren't already many other examples of socialism's incremental approach. We long ago socialized education. We've practically socialized home mortgages. We're willing to socialize car manufacturing losses. We've accepted the socialization of big bank losses. We're well on our way to socializing even groceries (what's the U.S. Agriculture Department anymore but a social welfare agency subsidizing 47 million people's food?). And socializing whatever child-care we haven't already socialized will surely be the next feminist tactic in winning the war against women (Nancy Pelosi has already said so). Something approaching one-third the working-age residents of the planet's economic superpower now appears either disabled or otherwise unable to feed itself. What's that all about?
Indeed, statism's ultimate equalitarian objective is socializing the U.S. Constitution itself -- that is to say, "fundamentally transforming America" from a "regressive" charter of "negative rights" to a "progressive" one of "positive rights." After all, "negative rights" are only what government can't do to you, "positive rights" are what government must do for you, and all good socialists have always known the former merely constrain government's provision of the latter. Indeed, Barack Obama (lamenting Earl Warren's waste of Franklin Roosevelt's good crisis) said so in explicit terms while he was yet but an Illinois state senator.

So what does "fundamentally transforming America" from "negative rights" to "positive rights" involve government doing for you? Well, apparently, just about everything. Government must educate you, house you, feed you, care for your heath, care for your children, provide you with a job, and otherwise ensure you are suitably cosseted by all the middle-class comforts of a life for which you no longer have any individual responsibility.

The absurdity of the socialist worldview should be obvious even if it hadn't been for its malefic failure during the 20th century everywhere on earth where it was seriously attempted.

It's absurd because everything that a benevolent government must do for you ultimately equates to nothing that a malevolent government can't do to you. It's absurd because it destroys both incentive and capital. It's absurd because, as Adam Smith long ago noted, the butcher won't butcher, the brewer won't brew, and the baker won't bake unless he has a market incentive to do so. It's absurd because it's fundamentally inconsistent with the human (let alone the animal) condition. It's absurd because there really isn't any free lunch anywhere in organic existence.

How absurd, for example, would it be for government to force Tampa retirees -- who'd worked hard all their lives, saved their income, and now drive nowhere but their local grocery stores once or twice a week -- to buy seven-passenger family crossovers equipped with four-wheel drives, 30-gallon gas tanks, mud and snow tires, and dealer-supplied child-restraint seats? And, if they didn't, tax them to subsidize the same vehicles for Chicago minimum-wage workers who like big families but don't like riding buses? About as absurd as ObamaCare.

How absurd would it be for government to force 20-year-old outdoor enthusiasts -- who drive hundreds of miles a week for fun, sport, and physical vigor -- to buy paraplegic vans equipped with wheelchair lifts and hand throttle and brake controls? And, if they didn't, tax them to subsidize the same vehicles to save the impaired, their families, and their friends (not to mention voluntary charities) from having to bother themselves about impairments? About as absurd as ObamaCare.

Consider then: if government can force you to buy healthcare coverage you neither want nor need and tax you if you don't, why may government not one day also force you to buy a vehicle you neither want nor need and tax you if you don't? Or buy anything else you neither want nor need? And what is the "transition" then to come? George Orwell once had some notions about that.


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013...orse_in_a_free-market_troy.html#ixzz2jRTshkCC
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

 

[Dr.Who]

This morning, the White House released a video by White House Health Reform Office communications director Linda Douglass, purporting to refute claims that President Barack Obama’s health care plan will not cause millions of Americans to lose their health insurance or doctor. Watch it:

[youtube]

The White House blog writes: “For the record, the President has consistently said that if you like your insurance plan, your doctor, or both, you will be able to keep them.” But all Douglass’ video really does is play clips of Obama making this same promise earlier this year.

But no one is disputing that Obama SAYS he wants to allow people to keep their insurance and doctor. Conservatives have been calling the public option a Trojan Horse for single-payer health care (which, by definition, means you would lose your current insurance and doctor), for a reason. The Greeks did not walk up to Troy, knock on the city walls and say, “Let us in so we can kill everybody.” No, they hid in a seemingly harmless gift, so the Trojans would let their guard down and bring them into the city. Only later, after time, did the Greeks spring the fatal attack. Obamacare is based on the exact same principle. Don’t believe us? Then watch Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) admit as much earlier this year:

[youtube]

Schakowsky tells her Health Care for America Now audience: “And next to me was a guy from the insurance company who argued against the public health insurance option, saying it wouldn’t let private insurance compete. That a public option will put the private insurance industry out of business and lead to single-payer. My single-payer friends, he was right. The man was right.”

Still don’t believe us? Then watch Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) admit as much just last week:

[youtube]

Frank tells a member of Single Payer Action: “I think that if we get a good public option it could lead to single-payer and that is the best way to reach single-payer. Saying you’ll do nothing till you get single-payer is a sure way never to get it. … I think the best way we’re going to get single-payer, the only way, is to have a public option and demonstrate the strength of its power.”

Still don’t believe us? Then watch Washington Post reporter Ezra Klein admit as much at Netroots Nation last year:

[youtube]

Klein tells his netroots audience: “They have a sneaky strategy, the point of which is to put in place something that over time the natural incentives within its own market will move it to single-payer.”

Still don’t believe us? Then watch Paul Krugman admit as much at a forum in New Jersey earlier this year:

[youtube]

Krugmans tells his audience: “[T]he only reason not to do [single-payer] is that politically it’s hard to do in one step…You’d have to convince people to completely give up the insurance they have, whereas something that lets people keep the insurance they have but then offers the option of a public plan, that may evolve into single-payer, but you can do it politically…”

Is the White House and Linda Douglass going to refute all the “disinformation” put out by the liberals quoted and filmed above?

 

[Dr.Who]

I could have sworn that i heard a quote from Ezekiel Emanual saying that this was not a trojan horse because if we had listened they were saying all along that they wanted this to be a transition to single payer.

Anyone know where to find that?

 

[Cruella]

And everyone criticized Cruz for making a big deal out of Obamacare going into effect.

 

[Dr.Who]

A better title for this thread would have been:

Beware of Greeks bearing gifts. The Greeks of course are Democrats. But that makes the issue about dems versus pubs and we are all starting to see that that is the wrong dichotomy.

I would think that all the dems are part of the "elite" who control us and most of the pubs - cruz and others excepted. but then I wonder if some of the dems are not also duped. Which dems in congress would be excepted?

 

[Cruella]

Senate Democrats supported rule that led to insurance cancellations

Washington (CNN) - Senate Democrats voted unanimously three years ago to support the Obamacare rule that is largely responsible for some of the health insurance cancellation letters that are going out.
In September 2010, Senate Republicans brought a resolution to the floor to block implementation of the grandfather rule, warning that it would result in canceled policies and violate President Barack Obama’s promise that people could keep their insurance if they liked it.

 

[dogtowner]

Greatest act of fraud ever. This is way past impeachment, its perp walk right out the front door of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

 

[Dr.Who]

Senate Democrats supported rule that led to insurance cancellations

Washington (CNN) - Senate Democrats voted unanimously three years ago to support the Obamacare rule that is largely responsible for some of the health insurance cancellation letters that are going out.
In September 2010, Senate Republicans brought a resolution to the floor to block implementation of the grandfather rule, warning that it would result in canceled policies and violate President Barack Obama’s promise that people could keep their insurance if they liked it.

Now this is what we can be telling people:

1) 100% of dems voted for this
2) the pubs stated publicly in the form of a resolution that the result would be canceled policies as far back as 9/10.