Blogs » Politcs Plus » Now I get it

Subscribe


Image

I have to admit that I didn't see the connection between the lawmakers having government run Health Care and their position on the health care law. I guess it's because politicians have always had government run health insurance. I didn't put two and two together when president Obama said" this issue is not about me; because I have the best insurance in the world." The media never picked up on it either. It wasn't until I read that a conservative Maryland physician,Andy Harris, ran on an anti Obama Care platform threw a fit because he had wait a month to get his government run Health Care. He then asked if he could purchase insurance from the government to cover the gap. The congressman should be charged with two counts of hypocrisy. Number one, he used RED-BAITING tactics to demonize the government run Health Care; which he now demands, and count two; buying government insurance is by another name called the "PUBLIC OPTION."- The democrats made good use of this incident by a writing a letter to the republican leaders.:

The letter was sent to Republican leaders from Democratic Reps. Joe Crowley (NY), Donna Edwards (MD),Tim Ryan (OH) and Linda Sanchez (CA), asking that anti-health care lawmakers "walk that walk" by opting out of so-called socialized government health care that they would deny to American families.

"You cannot enroll in the very kind of coverage that you want for yourselves, and then turn around and deny it to Americans who don't happen to be Members of Congress. We also want to note that in 2011, the Federal government will pay $10,503.48 of the premiums for each member of Congress with a family policy under the commonly selected Blue Cross standard plan. If your conference wants to deny millions of Americans affordable health care, your members should walk that walk," reads the letter. "It is important for the American people to know whether the members of Congress and members-elect who have called for the repeal of health insurance reform are going to stand by their opposition by opting out of the care available to them at the expense of hard-working taxpayers. We look forward to your response in the coming days about exactly how many of the members in the Republican conference will be declining their taxpayer-supported health benefits."

So far, no one has stepped up to opt out of their fully-paid government health care plans.

http://chattahbox.com/us/2010/11/17/dems-to-gopers-walk-that-walk-refuse-socialist-healthcare/

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45181.html

It took a good shellacking for my democrats to show some backbone because last night, congressman Steny Hoyer said the democrats will introduce a bill for retaining the middle-class tax cuts only ,and if the republicans want to borrow additional funds to give the top 2% eight tax cut; they can do it when they control the house in January of 2011. It remains to be seen if the administration will go along with this idea when the president meets with the republican leaders at the end of this month because there are some senate democrats that feed out the same " tax cuts for the rich" trough.

I also admit that early on, I was against the bailout of GM because of their past failures. I thought, they should have merged with Chrysler to make military vehicles. The administration took a chance on them and saved about a million jobs that might have otherwise been lost through bankruptcy. Lot of people don't know that GM received a $20 billion bailout from the Bush administration in 2008 ,and the Obama Administration kicked in an additional $30 billion. The taxpayers will probably be fully reimbursed by the year 2012, according to presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs. The stock is selling at about $34 and some change but the stock needs to reach $49.00 before the government can declare a profit. No one can deny that it was a remarkable comeback because the "Volt" is the Motor Trend "Car of the Year" and how long has it been since an American car could claim that prestigious award?

I still have a lot of questions because I don't see how the politicians could be discussing tax cuts for the top 2%; yet they vote against extending unemployment benefits', which will stimulate the economy, and have a side benefit of enabling the unemployed to make it through the holidays. It can't be the cost because extending the unemployment benefits will cost about $20 billion and tax cuts for the top 2% will cost $700 billion. I don't have the slightest idea why the republicans don't want to ratify the nuclear arms treaty with Russia. That's a National Security issue that has always been bipartisan.

Jon Stewart put it this way about the "Republicans' ongoing call to have an "adult conversation" about taxes and government spending, questioning just how mature that conversation would be."

Jon Stewart

"So, I see, by adult conversation, you mean the kind of conversation where the adult says, 'No, because I said so,' " Stewart said.

So if Republicans are the "adults," what does that make Democrats? The stepparents, Stewart said, who "will do anything to keep the peace and anything to get you to just love them."