Skip to comments.Pelosi and Obamacare (vanity)
Posted on 03/15/2014 2:30:04 PM PDT by BobL
Ok, I'll come out of my hole in the ground (as Bugs Bunny once said) and make a vanity post here on Obamacare.
The first thing to keep in mind is what the Dems say and do in public does not necessarily have anything to do with what they say and think in private.
In private, the Democrats love Obamacare. Sure, they wish the president hadn't hired Affirmative Action types to put the website together, but the idea of millions of new people going to a government website for something other than downloading their tax forms is a huge deal to them. They do not want Obamacare to go away and if you carefully look at their public statements and actions, you will see that.
Look at what is considered the most direct attack on Obamacare by an elected Democrat, Ann Kirkpatrick of Arizona. She had a narrator, in a political ad, say the following: (she) blew the whistle on the disastrous health care website, calling it stunning ineptitude, and worked to fix it. Read it again, carefully - she NEVER says that she has a problem with Obamacare, only with the website. It's no different than saying that you have a problem with Hitler's radio ads (in the 1930s)...they were terrible. As to Hitler, well there is a "Jewish problem" that needs to be dealt with...
The capability for me to impart just how improvement health care is an issue to Democrats is next to impossible, it is that important (and, to be honest, I don't know why). But if you look carefully at their actions two clear patterns emerge: (1) No matter what the president has done to flout the law, the Democrats are JUST FINE with it; and (2) No matter what the House Republicans do to try to fix, or otherwise give relief, from the law, is DOA in the Senate, and that includes things like criminal background checks on the "coaches" that have access to your personal information (including Social Security Numbers and birth dates), privacy protections, and delays in the individual mandates. The bottom-line is very simple, the Democrats will not permit the Republicans to get any credit at all for helping Americans get through this nightmare.
So now look at Ms. Pelosi. The Dems kept her on in 2011, even though her party got walloped in the House in 2010. They kept her on in 2013, even though the Dems had nothing to show in the House in the 2012 elections. And she is still with us. She has been saying, from day one, that Obamacare will not hurt the Dems in elections. She stated that the country would come to just love Obamacare...of course that didn't happen. Now she says the totally unexpected loss of Alex Sink to David Jolly was NOT due to Obamacare, in fact it was a "victory" to her, in that the Republican only won by a thin margin...of course it was a defeat (huge defeat) for her, just as a victory by Sink would have been an endorsement of Obamacare.
Why does she say this, when she knows that even people in her OWN PARTY are laughing at her? The answer is that Republicans will have no power at all against the President until 2017 (at best), as Obamacare is the law of the land and that changing the law over a presidential veto will take 67 Republican Senate votes, which is mathematically impossible in the 2014 elections (and neither is it reasonably possible for the House to end up with 290 Republicans in 2014, or ever). So Obamacare does not change - it is THE LAW, and that is all she cares about. And then, 2017 should be a cake-walk for Hillary (at least as she sees it), so still, no more changes to Obamacare by Congress.
But her real fear is that some Dems might team up with Republicans to create that veto-proof majority to actually make substantial changes, or even effective repeal, of Obamacare - and soon. So she is in a rear-guard action - not to defend Obamacare as it is (since the president changes it every week at his own whim anyway), but to PREVENT significant legislative modifications, which would be permanent. So, no matter how bad elections go, she will never blame the defeats on Obamacare, since she knows that other Dems, the ones that want to keep their seats, will take that as a green-light to finally fix (or repeal) it.
The bottom-line: Her actions are only to protect Obamacare, not to improve it, and definitely not to protect her members from losing their seats. The Democrats, at least the vast majority of them, HATE REPUBLICANS so much that they will continue to defend this, even if it means having to become a lobbyist again after losing their seats - they simply will not let the dream of Socialized Medicine slip away again, as it did for them, 20 years ago.
I’m not sure what your point is, other than your last sentence or two, and I agree. Pelosi is absolutely safe in her guaranteed dimwitted liberal Dem-voting district and she cares about nothing other than herself. I doubt she has the personal capability of accepting “blame” for something so altruistically-sold and conceived and to her dying day will undoubtedly insist that it was the Republicans who made it fail and it was the Republicans who wanted to kill old people and prevent youngsters from being the poets and musicians they could have been. This is someone so self-enclosed in her own small eyeball-popping head that they are incapable of seeing anything outside it. She is royalty and she’ll let you know it any time she can. She’s emblematic of the sociopaths we have in Congress, not just on the Dem side, either.
Thanks, I did mean to point out that she is PERFECTLY SAFE in her little district and that the Dems are IDIOTS for keeping her as leader when she has nothing to lose by being totally off the wall.
My main point is that Socialized Medicine is SO IMPORTANT for the Democrats that they will sacrifice a decade (or more) of being out of power, if that’s what it take to not let it slip away.
The difficult part, for me, is understanding just why it’s that important to them.
They were supposed to be able to sign up and get the care congress gets, for a pittance. After a few years, the government was supposed to take over paying even the pittance and then they would get the same care as the president for free.
Instead, they got plans that not only are beyond their budgets...the plans don't even provide care unless they have something as dire as cancer, in which instance the long waiting times for treatment will mean that it has progressed past all hope.
Now, each and every day, people not only grow more angry with them for having supported this travesty and defended it as the facts began to be revealed...they are being ridiculed.
If their drug addled brains had attention spans longer than ferrets, there would be hell to pay for their incumbents during the primaries now.
No matter how retarded it may sound, there is a clique of Liberals that will say the most outlandish things and the News media reports it with a straight face. Just look and read some of the stupid 180’ distorted things Pelosi say’s on a regular basis, and the media doesn’t scoff at it.
“The difficult part, for me, is understanding just why its that important to them.”
That’s easy, actually. It is one of several nexuses (nexii?) that combines several of their bumper-sticker-deep thoughtlines into one multi-channel thoroughfare of “forget about the consequences/don’t complete the sentence” liberal initiatives. Google “Evan Sayet” on YouTube for some good talks he has given on this point.
To be a winning liberal thought, simply expressing the thought must assume the character of coming from a higher moral place than, well, you. To want universal healthcare is (for them) to wish unbridled health on all members of a society regardless of their ability to pay for their treatment or their own lifestyle choices as drivers of their illnesses, and as a bonus, to prevent economic hardship for those cases where med bills have bankrupted people or indebted them excessively. How could anyone not want everyone else to be healthy?
A core liberal thought must also be fair, by wanting to even out any mis-distribution of whatever big pot of stuff there is out there that they can see where someone has more than another. It’s unfair that the US has these gluttonous people who consume 25% of the world’s energy even though we’re only 5% of the world’s population. Man, more importantly the individual, has no hope of ever creating for himself new wealth out of nothing, without somehow gouging it out of someone else. By working with a profit motive. Even the farmer, who does, arguably, create something out of nothing, must in some ways be working to extract more money then he really needs over and above providing for his family by raising his crops and greedily selling his surplus to those who should really be getting it for free. The profit motive is evil, predatory, better to be altruistic towards your fellow man.
If you keep going, you see these characteristics with all their jihads: the morally superior platform, the need to trust the experts instead of relying on this amorphous slimy mass of supposedly experienced people looking out for themselves instead of working to elevate society as a whole. And so great and mighty is their cause, why, if it means shutting you up despite your God-guaranteed and Constitutionally-guaranteed right to free speech, that is but a small price to pay for the benefits they and only they have the vision to know you will really, really like once you accept them. But if you resist accepting them and force authorities to forcibly impose them, well, then you’ll get what you deserve for being so stupid.
Global warming/climate change is exactly the same. Minimum wage, exactly the same. Transgendered military, very similar. Illegal immigration/amnesty, exactly the same. If only a scant one percent minority is offended, then an injustice has been done that cannot be allowed to go “unaddressed” (as they are so fond of saying. Because then some egghead can come up with yet another goofball theory why everything before has been so wrong and everything new (especially if it has a cool new name) is going to be so cool, because it will right wrongs and let people write the poetry they were meant to write. No matter what the topic matter, they are the ones who cloak themselves in this ephemeral moral high ground theoretical thing, and from that high ground, your ideas aren’t even worth listening to. Doesn’t matter your experience, your knowledge of some industry, even your knowledge of human nature. Those are prejudices and mental shortcomings only they and their superior knowledge should make you abandon with glee. But if not, they’ll kill you, mmmkay?
All of their core issues are formulated with this precise recipe. All of them.
That goes for the electorate. As for liberal politicians, they are just rent-seeking and job-security seeking pigs at the public trough wanting to attract supporters so they can stay in office by giving away money that isn’t theirs. They may or may not see the liberal so-called thought process, but they’re just interested in being the well-paid heads of the gaggle of dimwits with all the trappings of office.
I would like to note, all you braying jackasses, who tried to use my Mom as the example of why ObamaCare is the bestest idear ever and she is the prime example of why Obamacare is necessary:
“You have totally and thoroughly Fk’d up her retirement!”
She pays so much more now for medical care that she has missed her mortgage payment and nothing about her health has changed.
FU A-holes who called me a racist and ever other name under the sun.
I hope to God he unleashes Karma on your family.
We now find ourselves sending money to help her and she never asked us for money in my life.
Whatever disease eats you up, for your blind “faith, in Obama , I won’t take gratituded in it but, it will seem fitting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.