Thursday, September 10, 2009

Listen to what a Liar Doesn't tell you

In Obama's government health control speech last night (Powerline gives it a thorough going over), he said,

"I am not the first president to take up this cause, but I am determined to be the last."

Well, that's one statement I can really get behind. I'd very much like to see that prove true - it began with our first proregressive president, Teddy Roosevelt, I'd be thrilled to see Obama be our last proregressive president - oh, and of course, with notions of govt health control fading away into discarded memories as well.

One hundred years of anti-American ideals in our presidents is quite enough, thank you very much.

Thomas Sowell has a very good column on how to listen to a liar, by comparing his words and his actions. I'd like to emphasise that you shouldn't listen to what he does say, but to what he is avoiding saying - which is the reason for the lie.

"Our collective failure to meet this challenge year after year, decade after decade, has led us to the breaking point."

What Obama didn't say here, was that it has been because of the measures that govt has passed, year after year, decade after decade, interfering in licensing, educating, mandating insurance, mandating policies, making a free market in health insurance illegal, foisting a nearly discarded medical care method, HMO's, upon us, PPO's, and so forth - all of govt's actions to 'Help us', have served only to bring us to the point that they can say we are in a crisis, and need more govt help.

This is the Modis Operandi of govt, and it can be seen in every area it has had no business whatsoever having gone into, and has worsened that market because of its presence: Education, Food & Drug, Banking, Savings, Securities, Corporate independence, Railroads... all of these industries have been either ruined, or brought to the brink of it - because of the incremental, creeping death of govt intervention... little by little making honest thought and free choice - illegal.

Is that going overboard? You tell me, between Fed, State and Local Govt, if I'd like to become a teacher tomorrow, that would be illegal, a Real Estate agent? - illegal, if I'd like to start a school tomorrow, that would be illegal, buy a gun, open most any business, drain a swamp ('wetland') from your property and build anything upon it without appeasing several layers of bureaucracy first... all of that would be illegal.

When my father was a boy, there were no drivers licenses, HIS father determined whether or not he could drive and at what age - govt is everywhere removing you, and your relevance, from your own life, by gainsaying or overriding, or disallowing you to make your own choices.

And now Obama and his statist cronies, are slavering over their next actions - if we don't stop them - they will end this Nation - they will remove it from being a nation founded upon the ideal that men should be free to live their own lives and pursue their happiness, without tyrannical intervention from the Govt.

Don't be distracted by the irrelevant issues:
- rising costs
- pre-existing conditions
- rising taxes
- worsening economy,

all of those and more are mere sideshow theatrics. The real issue is the assault on the sanctity of private property, the sanctity of contract (which means your ability to make an agreement with another), upon your right to choose your own actions, to live Your Life, they are what is under assault from all levels of govt.

When listening to a liar, don't bother trying to listen to his words to figure out what he is saying - he's a liar! The truth, is what his words are meant to conceal. You need to listen to what a liar is not saying, to figure out what the truth is that he is trying to keep from you.

It is what the liar doesn't say, that tells you what they are hoping you won't hear. Take this gem for instance:

"First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, or Medicare, or Medicaid, or the V.A., nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have."

He says the bill won't require you to change coverage - so you know that statement isn't worth looking at, what is he not saying? What he does not say, is that it does make requirements that will put either your employer, or your existing insurance plan, out of business if they don't comply with what the govt does require.

Here's what it does say, on pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer with a payroll 400k & above who does not provide a public option, will pay an additional 8% tax on all of their payroll, and together with other 'language' on pg 24, the GOVT is the one which decides what will be acceptable to be offered.

Here's how John David Lewis at Classical Ideals makes the case for this and other key claims,



"Here is what it requires, for businesses with payrolls greater than $400,000 per year. (The bill uses “contribution” to refer to mandatory payments to the government plan.) Pages 149-150, SEC. 313, EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTIONS IN LIEU OF COVERAGE

(a) IN GENERAL.—A contribution is made in accordance with this section with respect to an employee if such contribution is equal to an amount equal to 8 percent of the average wages paid by the employer during the period of enrollment (determined by taking into account all employees of the employer and in such manner as the Commissioner provides, including rules providing for the appropriate aggregation of related employers). Any such contribution—

(1) shall be paid to the Health Choices Commissioner for deposit into the Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund, and

(2) shall not be applied against the premium of the employee under the Exchange-participating health benefits plan in which the employee is enrolled.

(The bill then includes a sliding scale of payments for business with less than $400,000 in annual payroll.)

The Bill also reserves, for the government, the power to determine an acceptable benefits plan: page 24, SEC. 115. ENSURING ADEQUACY OF PROVIDER NETWORKS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—A qualified health benefits plan that uses a provider network for items and services shall meet such standards respecting provider networks as the Commissioner may establish to assure the adequacy of such networks in ensuring enrollee access to such items and services and transparency in the cost-sharing differentials between in-network coverage and out-of-network coverage.

EVALUATION OF THE PASSAGES:

1. The bill does not prohibit a person from buying private insurance.

2. Small businesses—with say 8-10 employees—will either have to provide insurance to federal standards, or pay an 8% payroll tax. Business costs for health care are higher than this, especially considering administrative costs. Any competitive business that tries to stay with a private plan will face a payroll disadvantage against competitors who go with the government “option.”

3. The pressure for business owners to terminate the private plans will be enormous.

4. With employers ending plans, millions of Americans will lose their private coverage, and fewer companies will offer it.

5. The Commissioner (meaning, always, the bureaucrats) will determine whether a particular network of physicians, hospitals and insurance is acceptable.

6. With private insurance starved, many people enrolled in the government “option” will have no place else to go
"
As one congressmen, perhaps inartfully burst out, Obama is a liar. Pay attention to what he does not say, remember, it is what the liar doesn't say, that tells you what they are hoping you won't hear. Will you hear what he and his fellow govt health control statists are trying so hard not to say?

video

"You see, our predecessors understood that government could not, and should not, solve every problem. They understood that there are instances when the gains in security from government action are not worth the added constraints on our freedom."

Sounds great... because it is meant to reassure you, keep you from seeing the lie it conceals. Find me one scrap of your life, your freedom, that this, or one of their other proposals, from Americore to Education to the Arts, from a little Acorn, to full govt Health Control; where is there is one shred of independent life they intend to leave untouched?!

What they are not saying, is that little by little, govt is inserting itself into your life, inserting itself into areas of your life that should be your own, private, principal concern, slowly but surely they are excluding you from your own life.

Fight IT!

12 comments:

lance said...

"And now Obama and his statist cronies, are slavering over their next actions - if we don't stop them - they will end this Nation - they will remove it from being a nation founded upon the ideal that men should be free to live their own lives and pursue their happiness, without tyrannical intervention from the Govt."

That sounds like you are flying the Libertarian flag, Van. haha

Van said...

Hopefully, having hosted David & my caterwauling back and forth, you know I am no Libertarian.

It is of course my contention that despite their best intentions, Libertarians would undermine the fundamentals of what is required for people to be "... free to live their own lives and pursue their happiness, without tyrannical intervention from the Govt"... but it's a deep one, and will require at least two more longwinded posts on Justice, before I can state my case well.

Be that as it may, one doesn't need to be a Libertarian or a nut job to see that the fundamental ideas that Are this nation, are being undermined, ridiculed and cast aside by the policies of this, and parts of the previous, administration.

Still untroubled by it all Lance?

robinstarfish said...

Inartful or no, Joe Wilson's outburst resonated through the land. He's paying the price at the moment, but who knows, maybe he's the straw in that old camel story.

What Obama doesn't say - yup, you nailed that one.

Van said...

Robin,

Heh, his inartful exclamation was dwarfed by my fist pumping howl of "YESSSSS!!!" in response to his outburst... I only wish it didn't occur during an address by the President of the United States of America... of course I wish it wasn't true and necessary more... but... hello world.

qp said...

I've been reading several blogger's perspectives on the speech today and I gotta say this is so superior to what others have said, I feel like I've stumbled onto the oasis.


I rarely find myself out and about in the car when Rush is on the air, but today I was lucky and heard his complete extemporaneous "translation" of Obama's speech...it's a classic telling of what Obama's not saying.
And I recommend this revealing post at Hot Air: Video: Axelrod not comprehending what “competition” means

My bottom line takeaway: This leftist administration isn’t interested in rights and competition at all, but in dictating terms to insurers, providers, and consumers, i. e. "inserting itself into areas of your life that should be your own, private, principal concern."

My one consolation in these gloomy times is if the Dems pass their hellcare bill, against the loud protestations of Americans, they will most certainly lose their seats at polling time.

Van said...

Thank you QP, and thanks for the links.

"My one consolation in these gloomy times is if the Dems pass their hellcare bill, against the loud protestations of Americans, they will most certainly lose their seats at polling time."

Since early July I've been back in a few of the discussion blogs on Amazon, this time for Levin's 'Liberty vs Tyranny', and again, it is striking how unaware leftists are of the meaning and foundations of their own positions, and also how unable they are to make an argument for them, utterly clueless about any substantial reasons for their positions, beyond 'Conservatives are meanies and hate the poor' - Nothing beyond, "There are more of us than you and we are going to make whatever rules we want!", even putting it in those words.

I don't mean that they have flawed or false reasoning (being false in it's deepest philosophical core, that is unavoidable), but that they have nor arguments beyond crude and insulting assertions - seemingly unconcerned and unaware that they should know and understand more than that about their own ideas.

It is at turns extremely depressing, and at the same time, astoundingly encouraging. If they are so unable to defend their own positions, there is nothing propping them up but conservatives distaste for coming out and arguing.

Leftism is a hollowed out, termite ridden monument to man's stupidity... and it cannot avoid crumbling.

If we will just continue to push....

lance said...

You are correct Van, I know you are not a Libertarian. In any shape of the word. Am I troubled?

That is a valid question. It goes all the way to the core of our differences I think. I am troubled by the economy. But I do not think Obama put us in this position. I think McCain would be having the same problems all as a result of the policy's of Bush. As far as Health Care goes. We have had that discussion before in terms of what I am willing to pay as a member of society and what others are not willing to pay.

But the differences that we have do not mean that I do not learn from your writings. I do learn. It is just hard for me to find the time to read them. More so now since I am working on an anti business tax initiative process in Oregon. That should make you happy. :) I just hope you are also understanding me a little bit better as well.

Van said...

"I am troubled by the economy."

Why? Seriously, why?

If the economy is something that can be fixed by govt spending money here and there, curtailing evil profit seeking, taking whatever wealth needs to be taken from one person and given to another to make things all better... well... you've got just the guys in office ready willing and able to do just that, so why be troubled about the economy? They aren't troubled by any pesky notions of right and wrong, no outdated notions of morality to hold them back, perfectly willing to demand people do things like pay taxes while they avoid them as they seek to administer, even write, the tax policies. And there's certainly no need to worry about primitive, vicious, capitalists in the white house, Van assured them he'd still work closely with them, and there's Ken and the rest, good self avowed marxists, communists and the like... all should be well, shouldn't it?

Why be troubled? That may seem flip, but I'm not. If laws of economics, of supply and demand, of inflation as a result of monetary policy, if property rights, if all of those principles are false and have been holding us back - your dream team is in power - Why. Be. Troubled?

"But I do not think Obama put us in this position."

Nor do I. But I do believe that he is making the most of the 'crisis', he's certainly not leting it go to waste, is he?

"I think McCain would be having the same problems all as a result of the policy's of Bush."

McCain is a proregressive republican, which in my book means he can be counted on only to choose killing us by slow acting poison over a sawed off shotgun. I'm sure McCain would have done only marginally better on sheer economic policy decisions, however I do not think he would have created a Pay Czar, or a Diversit Czar (Like that 'Free Speech'? Might want to take a picture, because if this guy gets his way, it'll be a memory soon. Don't know what I am talking about? WHY NOT?).

"As far as Health Care goes. We have had that discussion before in terms of what I am willing to pay as a member of society and what others are not willing to pay."

Again, you're in luck. Your people are in, and they have no qualms about discarding silly notions of individual rights having any meaning other than what most of you say you want them to mean. No one in this administration is going to let things such as property rights hold them back, let alone personal choice.

You've got the people in power who, like you, wish to see rights as transactional niceties. No one in power, and I've go to believe that includes you, thinks rights have any real basis in human life, in your life, no understandable principles which can be understood, respected, applied and defended. Just trade a little of this one, for some more of that one... spread it around.

You should be seeing exactly what you've always wanted, if not now, very soon.

I do hope you're not troubled.

Oh, but I do wonder, if any of you have stopped to wonder, if the constitution, if law, if rights themselves, lose their meaning and respect of the American people... I wonder if any of you have stopped to think what might happen when the pendulum swings back the other direction - and if you've paid any attention to history at all you know it will - what happens when an angry right wing, unhampered with concern for the rights of 'others' come into power?

Bad things have already been set into motion. How bad, and how far reaching they will be, has not yet been determined.

"I just hope you are also understanding me a little bit better as well."

I do understand Lance, I always have. You want to 'help'. You just want to believe that the shallow actions will have no consequences that might destroy all you are trying to help.

This man is lying Lance. Nearly every 'level headed' assertion he makes, is a lie. Does that trouble you?
Sorry, 9/11... not a peppy mood day.

Van said...

Ok, I had to dash out, and left that comment a bit more harsh and abrupt than intended... and I don't really have time now to add much to it.

But as far as the "You Lie!" aspect of Obama and his health control bill, take a look at the main House Bill which I linked up key passages of... down below all of my long windedness, at the bottom of the post, there are 50 key sections you can read for yourself, that they say EXACTLY what Pelosi, Obama and the rest say they don't.

What do you conclude from that?

It can't be 'oh there's another bill' or a 'Senate Bill' (and from what I've seen of that one, it is even worse) or some ideal bill of Obama's he hasn't commited to writing yet - this is what they put together, and it reflects what they want.

They want control of our lives in ever way, shape, manner and form.

lance said...

Thanks Van, I was a little surprised at the harshness of your comment. So I appreciate your follow up thoughts.

I do not have an answer for you at all. I can there that there are some fundamental differences in how we look at the job of government and what government is supposed to do for its people.

Would you have less of a problem if there was socialized health care at the State level and the feds were out of it entirely? Or what if they moved budget money around, money that the fed is already getting but they move it into health care and away from other agencies? I think some people feel like they are going to take my money anyway so why not have them spend it on something I am in favor of like health care as opposed to the military, just an example.

Van said..."I wonder if any of you have stopped to think what might happen when the pendulum swings back the other direction - and if you've paid any attention to history at all you know it will - what happens when an angry right wing, unhampered with concern for the rights of 'others' come into power?"

You are right I have thought and I do worry about this. But I think we have talked about this before. I think Obama is a pendulum swing from Bush just like he was from Clinton and the swings have just been getting bigger from probably Roosevelt onward. That doesn't excuse what you are saying I am not trying to diminish it at all. But I do not have an answer. Do we burn down the whole system and try again? Do we split America into 4 separate groups? Still working together for defense but each section doing its own thing socially and economically? Because right now it looks like the differences are so vast between the sides that I do not see how they are ever going to be able to come together in a way that would benefit us as a society.

I am all for states rights. But I would rather my state be run with a socialist model like Sweden. I truly believe that on a small scale and done with people who have chosen to live there it would work. But for that to happen would take a world changing event and I do not see that happening anytime soon.

I am sure I gave you ammunition for several shots across my bow. But please leave my main sail so that the S. S. Lunacy can still find its way to port.

Van said...

Lance said "I was a little surprised at the harshness of your comment"

I was too when I saw it whole, sorry again for that... I usually don't type a comment in the comment window, because it's so hard to see what I just said, I started off just making a quick, short (yeah, as if) couple word comment, and a couple more came to mind... then wife & kids eyeing me and foot tapping, I clicked publish and published raw blurt.

"... there are some fundamental differences in how we look at the job of government and what government is supposed to do for its people."

That of course is THE key problem, and not just of opinion or philosophy, but of fact. The Fed Govt was debated, designed, and written, as a limited nat'l govt over a federation of states, with a set of amendments, Bill of Rights, added to the constitution, specifically selected as those rights a tyrant could not successfully become a tyrant, while the people retained them. With the 14th amendment, those rights were extended down from the national level, to the state level as well.

"... what if they moved budget money around, money that the fed is already getting but they move it into health care and away from other agencies?"

Well, first I want to say the amount of money is not the issue. If the taxes necessary to fund the Fed Govt amounted to 25%, 35%, 55%, etc of my wealth on an annual basis to uphold and defend my rights from all enemies, foreign and domestic, that'd be fine. I'd of course wish it were less, would be pressing to make sure there was little or no waste in how it was being spent, but if that was what was needed, then it would be my duty, and honor, as a citizen to pay for, and help, the Fed Govt to accomplish its purpose.

Health control is not a right. Healthcare is even less of a need than housing or food, so why is it suddenly a 'crisis'? It isn't, but as a result of 50 yrs of govt tinkering, it has been damaged to the point that everyone recognizes there is a problem with it, but it is sufficiently masked by the muddle, that the source of the problem, govt, isn't readily apparent.

"Would you have less of a problem if there was socialized health care at the State level and the feds were out of it entirely?"

The Fed Govt has no business whatsoever being involved in health care. Period. If particular states wished, through their constitutions and laws, to manage health control, that would be preferable. It would still be a violation of our rights, but at least then the original idea of Federalism, as Madison expressed it, would be allowed to work as intended. I, and millions of others, would then be able to escape that state to one which had enough sense not to destroy such a vital, and important, process as the Doctor/Patient relationship.

(frickin' blogger 4,000 character limit break)

Van said...

(cont)
"Do we burn down the whole system and try again? Do we split America into 4 separate groups? Still working together for defense but each section doing its own thing socially and economically? Because right now it looks like the differences are so vast between the sides that I do not see how they are ever going to be able to come together in a way that would benefit us as a society. "

Ever read Thucydides "The Peloponnesian War"? The Founders did, and seeing that states were about to come to actual war over things like fishing rights, they realized the original confederation was going to lead us into as exact a replay of those events as history can rhyme, and so they got together and proposed a national government and wrote the Constitution.

If we attempt to divide into red/blue 'sections', there will soon after be War. More horrible and bloody than history has ever seen. Period.

I think that "...the differences are so vast between the sides ..." only because of what govt has already done and put into play. Remove the restrictions on insurance inter-state competition, what can and cannot be offered, etc, then ... forget the 'free market' label, ... then People will be able to do what they choose to do - as long as they don't 'choose' to rob Peter to pay for Paul's checkup.

"I truly believe that on a small scale and done with people who have chosen to live there it would work."

Socialism, on any scale, as the govt imposing pre-fabricated decisions from the top down, will fail, because it inevitably will not properly respond to actual real life situations and the choices that need to be made to reflect them. It quite literally mandates stupid responses to situations which require individual decisions made in response to real life criteria.

However, if people, on a local level, wish to pool together their resources and contract for medical care for all those in their co-op, they are, and should be, free to do so. I think that such HMO's would still probably go the way that most of the original HMO's did - people didn't like being limited those options, or the quality of Dr's willing to provide service within those restrictions - but you are free to do so. You should be able to form such a co-op HMO even at your neighborhood level, where you, your friends and neighbors could, could actually reach out to the indigent, homeless, or financially troubled in your area and include them in your co-op. Not only would that put the 'Human' element back into the equation, which govt bureaucracy inevitably excludes, but would also give you an actual sense of helping those less fortunate, and perhaps helping them to improve their lives in other ways as well - That would build, rebuild, an actual sense of Community.

I would venture to say that it would also, if managed well by yourselves, it would attract donations from generous more financially well off people who would enjoy contributing to something which they could see actually helping people.

That is the type of thing which has always drawn the attention of the American people, as still evidenced by the outpourings of Katrina, the Tsunami's, 9/11, etc. FREE people are eager to help people in need and peril - they enjoy exercising their generosity. People forced to 'contribute', resent it, and draw away their unseen fellows.

In short, the only thing stopping you and your fellow like minded folk from practicing what you preach - is the restrictions you have voted upon us all.

"But for that to happen would take a world changing event and I do not see that happening anytime soon"

As someone recently put it "Ask not for whom the Tea Party brews, it brews for you".

"But please leave my main sail so that the S. S. Lunacy can still find its way to port."

Fare thee well, little ship of state....

;- )