Laughing at ObamaCare – and a snarl for Dem Senators who won’t enroll in it

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

The issue itself isn’t funny, but the claims made by Rep. Russ Carnahan (D-MO) in the below short video are, so much to the point that even the audience he is speaking to laughs out loud at some of his claims:

Video via Kevin Jackson, who asked – without getting an answer – if the plan is so good, why don’t members of Congress get on it, and Michelle Malkin.

Here’s more on how Senate Democrats reacted to Sen. Coburn’s amendment to the healthcare bill that would have required all Senate members and their staffs to enroll in whatever government healthcare plan that may come out of the debate:

In the health debate, liberals sing Hari Krishnas to the “public option” — a new federal insurance program like Medicare — but if it’s good enough for the middle class, then surely it’s good enough for the political class too? As it happens, more than a few Democrats disagree.

On [last] Tuesday, the Senate health committee voted 12-11 in favor of a two-page amendment courtesy of Republican Tom Coburn that would require all Members and their staffs to enroll in any new government-run health plan. Yet all Democrats — with the exceptions of acting chairman Chris Dodd, Barbara Mikulski and Ted Kennedy via proxy — voted nay.

In other words, Sherrod Brown and Sheldon Whitehouse won’t themselves join a plan that “will offer benefits that are as good as those available through private insurance plans — or better,” as the Ohio and Rhode Island liberals put it in a recent op-ed. And even a self-described socialist like Vermont’s Bernie Sanders, who supports a government-only system, wouldn’t sign himself up.

Of course, they also qualify now for generous Congressional coverage. Most Americans won’t have the same choice. Some will be transferred to the new entitlement as it uses its taxpayer bankroll to dominate insurance markets. Others work for businesses that will find it easier to dump their policies and move employees to the federal rolls. Democrats also know that the public option will try to control health spending by squeezing payments made to doctors and hospitals, and by not paying for treatments that Washington decides are too expensive, which will result in inferior care.

No doubt Mr. Dodd acceded to the Coburn amendment to blunt such objections, and in any case he’ll strip it out later in some backroom. Judd Gregg was the only GOP Senator to oppose it, on humanitarian grounds. As he told us in an interview, the public option “will be so bad that I don’t think anyone should be forced to join.”

‘Nuff said

Bad news for the far left: Obama wants Dick Cheney to live

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

The NY Daily News reports that, at Dick Cheney’s request, President Obama has extended his Secret Service detail for another six months:

WASHINGTON – Former Vice President Dick Cheney’s Secret Service protection has been extended for at least another six months, beginning Tuesday.

Normally, ex-veeps only get six months of protection at taxpayer expense. But Cheney asked for an extension, and President Obama – whom Cheney has excoriated in several interviews since leaving office – recently signed off.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano signed the order extending Cheney’s security detail, her spokeswoman Sara Kuban confirmed Monday.

If the Obama administration hadn’t gone along with Cheney’s request, he would have been forced to hire his own security agents – or go without.

Cheney’s friends have said he has become more concerned about his privacy and personal safety in recent years.

Gee. I can’t imagine why.

Jimmy Carter proves once again why so many liberal Christians just don’t get it

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

James Joyner pretty much has the ultimate takedown on Jimmy Carter’s recent reaffirmation that he has “left” the Southern Baptist Convention because, essentially, he believes that the SBC is no better than Islamofascists when it comes to the “subjugation of women.” Why? Because the SBC still believes that it’s against scripture for women to serve as pastors and deacons in the church.

Read Carter’s moral equivalency fest (the typical screed of a moral relativist, as I noted yesterday) first to see the true depth of his warped reasoning behind leaving the SBC some 8 years ago (why he felt the need to reaffirm something he did nearly a decade ago is beyond me, but whatever), and then read Joyner’s takedown, which he approaches from the secular perspective – perfect for liberal Christians like Carter who judge Southern Baptists from that exact same perspective.

Of course, we also have to keep in mind that moral relativists like Carter don’t view truly oppressive, repressive, thuggish and brutish outfits like the terrorist group Hamas as an actual terrorist organization, rarely if ever see fit to condemn those groups harshly (understandable, if you consider they don’t view them to be seriously bad apples in the first place) and also believes that they – and the Palestinians – could “peacefully” co-exist with Israel if those danged Jews would just leave them alone, so his opinion really doesn’t matter much anyway, except in the minds of liberals – Christian or otherwise – who seek validation of beliefs and opinions on a variety of issues that are at odds with not only basic human decency and morality but also, for believers, the Word of God.

In the scheme of things, I find those inconvenient (to the left) facts far more troublesome than the continuance of the SBC to not allow women to serve as pastors in the church. Women are equals in the Christian church in a way that is understandable if one simply picks up their Bible and reads it cover to cover (read here for more). On the other hand, there is no justification in the Bible for the types of “progressive” preachings commonly found being expressed by many liberal Christians like Jimmy Carter today.