FactCheck Opines On DNC Medicare Ad

Tweet

Fact Check says, "Senior Scare, Yet Again."
A DNC ad falsely accuses Republicans of voting "to abolish Medicare?"

FactCheck begins their defense by parroting GOP talking points. The GOP plan "preserves" the current Medicare program for anyone now receiving it or within 10 years of qualifying for it. And the proposal is similar to one endorsed a decade ago by the National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare. Does that mean Republicans don't want to dismantle Medicare?

Washington Monthly Excerpt
But did Republicans vote to "end," "abolish," and "kill" Medicare? It's provocative, but it's a supportable claim. In April, 137 Republicans voted in support of a GOP alternative budget. It didn't generate a lot of attention, but the plan, drafted by the House Budget Committee's Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) called for "replacing the traditional Medicare program with subsidies to help retirees enroll in private health care plans."

The budget bill written by Paul Ryan did not - but could have had language to defund the U.S. Navy to meet his budget objectives. If it's in the bill it can't be denied it's there. Clearly the eventual "conversion" of what everyone understands as Medicare today was part and parcel to Ryan's arithmetic to accomplish his goal. In fact it could be said, without Ryan's deliberate conversion of Medicare out of existence, his budget as written would fail to reach its' projected goals.

Just in case you didn't swallow that evidence, FactCheck then rambles on claiming Medicare spending would rise 88.5% under the GOP proposal over the next years as proof the GOP plan isn't meant to "abolish" Medicare. Nevermind that the increased cost actually proves Medicare as we know it today then would no longer exist. A very weak analysis at best.

Factcheck Excerpt:
The GOP alternative budget contained a "policy statement on Medicare" calling for gradual conversion of Medicare from government insurance to government-subsidized and government-approved private insurance.

Oh, well why didn't you say so the first time - hah! Pure semantics here. What exactly is Medicare right now? Paul Ryan insists Medicare is not a single-payer system. He said anyone can get Medicare through Aetna, Blue Cross or any other government approved private insurance providers. It is private insurance subsidized by the government. So why would Ryan and the GOP bother to make the motions to convert Medicare away from something Factcheck falsely claims it is? It's not only a government insurance program - at least according to Ryan.

Ryan should know, he's the guy who actually wrote the language in the bill. Just like his earlier idea to "strengthen" Social Security was to bait current workers with risky returns in private investment, eventually leading to less participation in the system. His plan for Medicare is nearly identical. It is meant to gradually cut a safety net away that only, and only the government can provide.

We should never forget it was Paul Ryan who actually drafted the language to deleverage future seniors during the most critical times of their lives. The folks at FactCheck can spin the facts any way they want, after all it's only their opinion.

Phony Free Marketers Want More Government Intervention

Tweet

As published in Sunday's Janesville Messenger in an article titled, "Doyle proves he's just not one of us."

Excerpt:
People are right to ask why is there such reluctance on the part of our governor to impose himself in the discussion to get a deal so the jobs can remain in Wisconsin? Where was the passion he tried to show at the eleventh hour in Janesville?

Against all common sense for the sake of the failed free markets, Doyle played into the extortion game when state and locals offered a very respectable "bribery" package to General Motors at the 11th hour on behalf of Janesville and the State of Wisconsin. We were out-extorted and lost. But it wasn't because Doyle's heart is not in saving jobs. On the other hand, Doyle and the state supposedly played a much lesser role with Mercury Marine and.....won. And despite limited details on reports indicating that state government and Fond du Lac officials "imposed" themselves into the private negotiations carried out between Mercury Marine and the union, I only hope a tax raising "bribery" package was not part of the equation.

Although all the facts are not yet known, apparently the "free market" reacted very favorably to the "nothing" role the WPRI perceives Doyle played with Mercury Marine. They bash him for it. One would think any true free-market think tank would want as little government influence as possible when it comes to corporate free market decisions.

But what kind of a "free market" do we have when its so-called risk-takers suckle on the collectivist system of government taxation to bail out their mismanaged losses?

Oklahoma's Governor and their local officials willingly sold their souls in the corrupted free market game played at Mercury Marine and lost. They now feel burned just like Doyle did by GM's decision to pull out of Janesville. Does anyone blame these folks for how they feel now?

NewsPress Excerpt:
One team member, Rep, Cory Williams, D-Stillwater, said Thursday he will look into repealing state tax credits the state gave Mercury Marine in legislation he helped get passed this spring.

The only market the folks at the Wisconsin Policy Institute are thinking about is free access into our government's department of revenue to fund their version of private enterprise. You know, they are one of them.

In a related "labor" and jobs editorial published by the Janesville Gazette, the newspaper takes a cheap shot at state Democrats "job creation" vows as hollow rhetoric while praising Republican lawmakers for "reaching out to workers." Hysterical but not surprising since the Gazette has a long history of working every angle possible to downplay any positive influence organized labor unions or Democrats have in job retention and economic development. Perhaps the most upsetting to these folks is the fact that there still is hope and strength in numbers if workers stand up and organize.

Read additional perspective: Stillwater Workers, "This was decided by someone else." No Vote, No Voice, No Union and No Jobs.

It's a Great Time To Celebrate Unions

Tweet

The labor union held their nose and reversed an earlier decision to reject concession demands proposed by Mercury Marine.

WTOP Excerpt:
Mercury Marine President Mark Schwabero said in a statement after the vote that the company will begin consolidating work in Fond du Lac this year, including moving work from a nonunion plant in Stillwater, Okla., within two years.

The states weren't so lucky.

WTOP Excerpt:
The only winner was the company, he said. "They extorted Stillwater," he said. "They extorted Fond du Lac. They extorted us."

The folks in Stillwater had no problem playing the extortion game with Mercury Marine all the way until they lost.

Merc Union Votes "Yes"

Tweet

FDL Reporter Excerpt:
Members of the union representing approximately 850 manufacturing employees at Mercury Marine in Fond du Lac have approved contract changes sought by the company.

What contract changes?

More details expected to follow.

Rip Rap

Tweet

Psycho-Babble Bachmann
“This [health care reform] cannot pass…What we have to do today is make a covenant, to slit our wrists, be blood brothers on this thing. This will not pass. We will do whatever it takes to make sure this doesn’t pass… -- Rep. Michelle Bachmann

---

What does Eric Cantor, Kevin McCarthy, Paul Ryan and Sam Brownback have in common?
According to Rep. Lynn Jenkins of Kansas, one of them could be the Republicans great white hope.

---

We'll raise our taxes to keep private sector jobs

Northwestern.com Excerpt:
"It’s a fairly significant financial commitment, but if we’re going to keep jobs here we’re going to have to fund it. My recommendation to do that would be for funding it with a sales tax rather than with the property tax," Buechel said Monday.

---

"I hope that God strikes Barack Obama with brain cancer so he can die like Ted Kennedy and I hope it happens today," -- Phoenix-area Pastor Steven Anderson, Faithful Word Baptist Church

We can appreciate he's a man of God and not like that liberal racist Rev. Wright character - huh?

---

Sarah Palin Tells Friends To Watch Glenn Beck.

Beck is an exercise in crazy. People watch him because they want to see how nuts someone can be and still avoid the looney bin...until we met Pastor Steven Anderson.

---

Bob Dole On Health Care: “We shouldn’t be debating some congressman’s bill."

---

Bill Moyers, whose comments focused on the recent health care debate, said that too many Democrats have had their spines surgically removed.

---

Sarah Palin: Lame Duck Mom and Wife

In “Me and Mrs. Palin,” Johnston’s first-person account accuses Palin of being a bad mother, of being a bad wife, of not knowing how to shoot a gun, and even -- get this! -- of not even being a real hockey mom! (She only attended 15% of her son's games, says Johnston, who was his teammate.) In short, he accuses Palin of being an all-around phony.

---

Texas Secessionists: We Hate the United States!

---

Stossel: ATM's Are Proof Capitalism Works

Capital Times Excerpt:
The real answer to the health care crisis, Stossel argues, is to "unleash the free market." Just look at how you can travel overseas and "stick a piece of plastic" into a machine and the right amount of cash comes out, he said in conclusion. "And the government can't even count the votes accurately." The audience howled with laughter and gave him a standing ovation. "Capitalism works!" he said.

Sure, capitalism works… until your life is on the line – then its’ called extortion.

---

What is Obamacare?
Here’s an article wrongly titled Obamacare could cost you $4,000 a year. After demonstrating that health care reform without the public option would cost American’s about $4,000 more, the writer continues to call the optionless plan "Obamacare." Any health care reform plan without a public option is really “InsuroCorp Care,” or "GOPcare," otherwise known as "Patients Choice."

Incentive Packages Put Tax Payers in Perpetual Hole

Tweet

In a bizarre new development, Mercury Marine has gone from “time for everybody to move on” to “Hey, we’ll bring additional work to the plant.”

Traditional news sources have reported that nothing was changed in the union contract. Only that terms were clarified. To sweeten the pot before the expected and final vote scheduled for today, Mercury Marine has pledged to move additional work from Stillwater to Fond du Lac to consolidate operations. Either somebody blinked or somebody was made an offer too good to refuse.

Malcontends Excerpt:
After the city and county of Fond du Lac and Wisconsin put together incentives to keep Mercury Marine jobs in Wisconsin, new word comes that Mercury Marine and the (IAM) Local 1947 [now updated] may strike a deal not only retaining manufacturing jobs but actually moving jobs from Stillwater, Oklahoma, to Fond du Lac.

So what’s different? Call me a skeptic, but I don't believe the statements coming from either side of the contract. Unless State and Fond du Lac officials buckled. Which obviously seems more likely to be the case.

FDLReporter Excerpt:
Aug.30,2009 -- If Mercury Marine accepts local government's incentive package to keep its headquarters in Fond du Lac, a county sales tax would likely be imposed for the first time to help pay the costs.

Since they insist the contract remains the same, did state and local officials promise to make up for the difference in the worker’s pay cuts and concessions by subsidizing them (instead of corporate MM) with collections from a new county sales tax? Or, worse yet, were the tax payers put on the hook to line the pockets and parachutes of the corporate fatcats? Is this what they meant by “Through the efforts of state and local officials”….? While MM maintains the contract is identical to the one the union resoundly rejected only a week ago?

This is only speculation on my part prompted mainly by the sketchy details and the sudden reversal by Mercury Marine. I hope that's all it is.

JSonline Excerpt:
"It's sad that we have laws allowing states to try and compete with each other like this," Michalski said. "This is all about jobs and people doing things like making house payments, buying groceries, and just trying to survive."

Touche.

Place Big Enough For Only One Partisan at a Time

Tweet

Rep. Paul Ryan was asked for an apology from Community for Change spokesperson Kelly Gallaher for his involvement in a media campaign to shut down citizen participation at his listening sessions.

Racine Post Excerpt:
At one point during his response, Gallaher attempted to break in, and Ryan said, "Don't interrupt, or I'll have to ask you to leave." That garnered a few boos from the crowd.

Read more >>> Ryan Gets An Earful At Listening session

Global Competition For Jobs Driving Health Care Reform?

Tweet

Rep. Paul Ryan's "Patients Choice" health care is little more than a long winded essay explaining why you should drop your employer-based health care plan.

Ryan Q & A Excerpt:
2. Why create a tax credit ($5,710) that costs less than the average cost of insurance for a family of four? How are individuals and families supposed to make up the difference?
Ryans answer: As a result of biases in the current tax code, Americans who receive their health benefits from their employer pay roughly one-third of the total health coverage costs, while their employer pays roughly two-thirds. For example, the average family’s annual health insurance plan cost about $13,000 last year, with an employer paying about $8,600, while the employee only paid about $4,200 in annual premiums. Under the Patients’ Choice Act, all Americans would receive a tax credit – over $5,700 for families – which can only be used to pay for health insurance or medical expenses. Individuals and families will be able to use any overages to pay for preventive care, which can be rolled over at the end of the year.

Ryan laughably implies that families receiving the $5,700 tax credit will experience overages...overages!! because after all they only pay about $4,200 in annual premiums. And he doesn’t clarify the fact that if you enroll into his “Patients Choice” plan, you will no longer be subsidized the $8,600 from your employer. He does not acknowledge that the $5,700 tax credit will defund your employer's sponsorship. Ryan knows this will happen of course because this is his primary objective to health care reform. He wants demands that employers are taken out of the equation and spends most of his time trying to convince readers of the advantages, control and empowerment individual(ity) has over employer-based (group) insurance.

Excerpt:
4. Doesn't this undermine existing employer-based health care, and push workers into the private market to fight big insurance companies on their own?
Ryan's answer: No.

But the congressman not only explains that individuals should have the power to make the decision to drop their employer health insurance, he also offers several reasons why workers should leave the system, disingenuously implying that by keeping it, they are victims of arbitrary tax rules among other things.

Excerpt:
Ryan's answer: But individual Americans should make that decision – instead of falling victim to arbitrary tax rules or staying in a job only because they can’t afford to lose their health insurance. Tax breaks should go directly to every individual with a health insurance plan.

Tax breaks, remember the $5,700 tax credit? Instead of it going to your employer to help subsidize the $8,600 portion of your insurance, he’ll give the tax credit to you. What happens to the employers premium co-pay? Poof! It disappears. Congressman Ryan of course doesn’t say it like this and consistently avoids the connection.

Except single-payer, there can be no doubt that the core objective of the other health care plans is to remove employers from the health care equation - one way or another. Ryan accuses the public option plan of sneakily dumping workers out of their employer plan over a number of years. While the "Patients Choice" plan is banking on workers (victims trapped by employer-based coverage!) taking the carrot to do the dirty deed themselves.

I believe that is what's driving nearly all of the reform. While partisans from either side of the aisle disagree on many facets of the different plans - they all however agree to separate American businesses from the unwritten responsibility of employee health care benefits. It doesn't compete in the new world order economy. This is where they share common ground.

In my opinion, unfortunately, the current health care debate is not about the 50 million uninsured Americans. It's not about lowering costs or expanding access. And it's not about socialism or undermining the free markets. Those are all tactics and diversions to undermine whatever part you might agree with just to keep the status quo. We've got about ten different reasons and their corresponding groups expressing why reform shouldn't happen and what's left over in the opposition say they like the plan they have. All the reform plans essentially offer the same care through the private American health care industry. Would patients still like it if they were on their own without employer compensation? Ryan thinks so.

Has anyone noticed how businesses are relatively quiet in this debate? While few are advocating against employer-based insurance, none are advocating for it. There's a giant void out there. Sure, some have fallen into the phony socialism scare or Ryan's Randian individual empowerment trap like Whole Foods, but even Wal-Mart has taken the side of the public option. Never mind that they have been unilaterally practicing it by dumping employees into state insurance programs at every chance they get.

Although I support single-payer first and foremost, congressional progressives have smartly drawn a line in the sand by insisting that without the choice of a public option - there will be no health care reform. Without the public option, HR3200 devolves into Ryan's "Patients Choice." If that happens, employers would be relieved of sponsoring health care benefits - and little else. It would be a failure of monumental proportions.

Note: At his listening sessions, Rep. Ryan has been gloating over Democrats voting against an amendment requiring all Members of Congress to get insurance through the proposed public option plan. However, not only does Ryan lack the same confidence in his own "Patient's Choice" plan, his plan doesn't contain the same amendment and never addresses how his employer (us!) will be relieved of sharing the payment on his (all federal employees) health care premiums.