Stephen Colbert's Hilarious Take On "Adorable Care Act" Tweets

Recently, the White House began using its Twitter account to promote the Affordable Care Act/Obamacare with cute animals touting the "Adorable Care Act":

Stephen Colbert couldn't resist and promptly fired up this comical parody:

Literally LOL!!

What If The Tables Were Turned?

[Another snarky online comment to Boehner and Tiberi.  I'm sure I'm on their shit list by now.]
_________________________________________


You guys are like a really bad comedy act.  With your chuckle-headed attempt to trade 6 weeks of funding for the death of an existing law, you blithely shut down the government, threaten default, create real hardships for real people, then claim to be shocked -- shocked! -- that no one will "compromise" with you, no one will "negotiate".  You sit in conference rooms all by yourselves and wonder why nobody else showed up.  It'd be funny if it weren't so pathetic.

You should have learned a long time ago, gentlemen, that most adults don't respond well to threats, blackmail, and ultimatums.  That's just what you're doing, and it won't work.

What if the tables were turned?  What if, during routine budget talks, a Democratic House majority said to a Republican Senate majority and a Republican President, "We'll agree to all your numbers, but only if you agree to an assault weapons ban and universal background checks.  Oh, by the way, we also want to repeal and replace the 2nd Amendment.  And if you won't accede to our demands, we'll just shut down the government."

Democrats would claim they just want to "negotiate", but both your party and the American people would howl in outrage and vilify the Democrats for their despicable hostage-taking tactics.  The people would be well-justified in their anger and would never forget who slipped the turd into the punch bowl.

You might want to step outside your echo chamber and think about that.

Love Thy Neighbors, But Don't Vote With Them

We have a neighbor, K--, who we've known for decades.  He's retired now and stays busy by bitchin' full-time about the gummint.  At two recent neighborhood social occasions revolving around food, drink and OSU football, K-- saw fit to harangue us, unprompted, on the upcoming Columbus school levy and urge us to vote against it, because it would raise his taxes.  On the second occasion, he even worked in the N-word to describe our mayor.  Classy.  I'm here for the beer and the Bucks, K--, so please shut the fuck up!

Our friend and neighbor T----- was there and overheard K--'s charming comments.  T----- doesn't usually go controversial, but she let slip that she has never, ever voted for a school levy anywhere.  That's because she sends her kids to Catholic schools and therefore has never seen a need to support the public school system, wherever she has lived.

Of the two, I can more easily excuse K--'s viewpoint, offensive as it is.  He's just a paranoid, fear-mongering eccentric.  He's beyond help, a true Tea Bagger who opposes all forms of taxation.  (At our homeowners association meeting, he once insisted that our modest annual fee was a "tax".  Whatever, K--.)

T-----'s reasoning is more bothersome to me.  It seems selfish.  She's happy to live in Columbus so she can enjoy lower taxes than in most of the 'burbs, but refuses to support Columbus public schools at the ballot box, even though a quality public school system is a benefit to the entire community.

Paying parochial tuition is her choice, but in the property tax-based model we have, all adults pay one way or another (even renters pay indirectly) to support public education, and that includes T----- and K--, whether they like it or not.

Buster is a proud product of the public education system, from 1st grade through college, and I have plenty of company.  I believe it's incumbent upon all of us to do all we can to maintain the best public schools possible.  It's a "greater good" principle.

Although I might disagree with them, I love my neighbors.  I don't know if the Columbus levy will pass in November, but I'm gonna vote for it for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is it'll piss off K-- and T-----!

Here are a few other reasons to support public education:

• Having more educated and informed citizens is a good thing.
• Education helps reduce social costs like welfare, teenage parenthood, and prison.
• Public education doesn't turn away anyone.  All are welcome.
• Its essential diversity promotes understanding and tolerance.
• If you think tax-supported public education is expensive, try ignorance!
• Public education is a necessary and worthwhile investment for some of our public funds.
• Without widely-available free public schools, then access to education devolves into a strictly financial proposition.

"Compromise"? Puh-leeeze!

[My online comment today to Boehner and Tiberi]
_______________________________________________

What's that you say?  The House has "done its job" and now it's up to the Senate and the President to act?  You'd like them to delay/defund/kill/repeal an existing law, and if they do, only then will you agree to a routine procedural matter.  You call that a "compromise".

What kind of dictionary are you using?  Are you insane?  That's not a compromise, it's a hijacking!  It's extortion.  And everybody knows it.

Your plan is doomed and you guys are toast!




(Sorry I keep re-running the same old cartoon, but it's just too perfect.)

How 'Bout Dat Tribe!!

The Cleveland Indians just clinched a wildcard spot in the post-season.  Yes!!  GO TRIBE!

One of my dreams is an Indians-Reds World Series.  Long odds, but it could happen.  If I can't get that, I'd settle for Indians-Pirates.  :)

Cleveland Indians’ Michael Bourn, right, welcomes Nick Swisher, left, at home plate after they both scored on Swisher’s 2 RBI home run off Minnesota Twins starting pitcher Scott Diamond (58) during the first inning of an MLB American League baseball game in Minneapolis, Sunday, Sept. 29, 2013. ANN HEISENFELT — AP Photo

Item 1 of 3

Read more here: http://www.heraldonline.com/2013/09/29/5256516/indians-clinch-wild-card-with.html#storylink=cpy

Seven Big Lies About Obamacare

With the health insurance exchanges set to open in a few days, many Republicans are still ranting and raving about Obamacare, even though it was signed into law three and a half years ago and was found to be constitutional over a year ago by the Supreme Court.  And early indications are it's going to do some good for a lot of people.  A friend is self-employed with a family of four.  He has an individually-issued health insurance plan.  He told me that his preliminary search of the exchange offerings indicates he'll be saving about $400 a month.

Yet the far right sticks with its curious tactics of willful ignorance, shut-down threats, and Dr. Seuss recitations.  As a "tribute" to those foamy-mouth loonies, Buster gives you Seven Big Lies About Obamacare:

1.  We Don't Need Obamacare Because U.S. Health Care Is The Best In The World.  Only if you're wealthy.  For the rest of us, it's over-priced and under-delivered.  Compared to the rest of the developed world, the U.S. is an outlier -- we pay much more and get much less.

2.  Death Panels.  C'mon, man!  Voluntary advance care planning for Medicare recipients is not the Kevorkian "Time To Go" Club, unless you're a moron like Sarah Palin who's always ready to believe and repeat misinformation.

3.  It's A Jobs Killer.  If you're in today's GOP, anything connected to Obama is a jobs killer.  His dog, his breakfast, his haircut -- all jobs killers.  But honestly, if an additional 20-40 million people enter the health insurance system, that ought to increase demand for all manner of health care services, which in turn increases employment.

4.  It Will Increase The Deficit.  This false claim is attributable mainly to Mitt Romney, who installed pretty much the same health care reforms in Massachusetts with success, but predicted total failure on the federal level.  The CBO has said repeatedly since 2010 that Obamacare will have a net effect of reducing the deficit, by as much as $1.4 trillion over the next 20 years.  This is accomplished by a combination of spending cuts/waste reduction in Medicare, higher taxes on some plans for some people, and penalties for non-compliance.  It will extend Medicare solvency and reduce the Medicare growth rate.

5.  The IRS Will Audit You.  A load of crap relating to the individual mandate and employer mandate.  There are penalties for individuals for failure to carry insurance and for employers for failure to offer insurance.  There are also tax credits for low-income people and for small employers.  IRS involvement in Obamacare is mainly in administering the credits/subsidies.  The IRS Commissioner has testified that they will not be auditing to determine if individuals have insurance.  In fact, the PPACA explicitly prohibits the IRS from using liens and levies against those who don't obtain coverage.

6.  Obamacare Means Your Health Insurance Premiums Will Rise.  With employer-provided group plans which will continue to cover most of us, rates will continue to be affected by normal factors, not by Obamacare.  If you don't like your premium costs, blame your employer, your insurance company, or your state's insurance department, but don't blame Obamacare.  It is true that, under Obamacare, if you're a high-roller with a costly "Cadillac" plan, you'll eventually pay an excise tax/fee on your premium.  But hey, you're a high-roller!  Quit bitching.

7.  It's A Big-Government Takeover Of Health Care.  It is not single-payer, universal coverage.  The state and federal exchanges established by Obamacare offer options through existing, privately owned and operated, for-profit insurance companies who will compete for our business.  That's about as free-market as you can get!  Government isn't taking over a damn thing (although one of these days it sure as hell should!)

Tiberi Response, My Reply

Rep. Pat Tiberi's response to my email of 9/23/13:
_______________________________________________________

Thank you for your letter regarding your concerns with a potential government shutdown.  I appreciate this opportunity to correspond with you.

As you know, on September 20, 2013, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.J.Res. 59 by a vote of 230-189 with my support.  If enacted, the bill would fund the government through December 15, 2013 while also fully defunding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), also known as Obamacare.  It is currently awaiting consideration in the Senate. 

What I've heard over and over again from multiple employers, providers, and patients in my district is that Obamacare does nothing to lower the cost of health care, to increase access to quality care, or to encourage companies to offer health care, expand their businesses and hire more people. I believe PPACA, enacted in 2010, is making things worse. Bottom line, the Supreme Court ruling to uphold the law on June 28, 2012 does not change the fact that PPACA is unpopular, unaffordable, and overreaching. I am sorry if we do not agree on this matter. 

While I remain committed to overturning Obamacare, I do not believe shutting down the government is a responsible or effective way of accomplishing that goal.  According to the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, in the event of a government shutdown, Obamacare funding and major pieces of the law – including premium tax credits and the individual mandate – would continue to be implemented. Much of the funding for Obamacare is mandatory funding that was authorized when the law was passed in 2010, and even in the event of a government shutdown, this money would be spent and substantial implementation would continue. 

H.J.Res. 59 is the only legislation currently passed by either the House or the Senate that would continue to keep the government funded and would avert a government shutdown.  As negotiations on a continuing resolution continue, I will certainly keep your views in mind. 

As your representative, constituent input is a vital element in best serving the 12th Congressional District of Ohio. Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. If I may be of assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to contact me.

                                                                                    Sincerely, 

                                                                                    Patrick J. Tiberi

                                                                                    Representative to Congress

____________________________________________________________________________

Dear Rep. Tiberi:

Thanks for responding.  It's good to know you don't want to shut down our government.  Yet you still voted for HJ Res. 59 knowing it could very well do just that with its ridiculously unrelated combination of "funding" the government (thru 12/15/13) while simultaneously "defunding" Obamacare (forever).

I'd like to make a couple follow-up points:

HJ Res. 59 is not "awaiting consideration in the Senate."  It's a dead duck in the Senate and everybody knew it beforehand, just like the 40+ useless House votes to repeal Obamacare.  These divisive "symbolic" votes are just a waste of the people's time and money.

As you mention, most of Obamacare funding (80-85%) is mandatory, so HJ Res. 59 doesn't come close to "fully" defunding it.  Whether it's defunded or not, government shut-down or not, Obamacare will continue to be implemented.  So-called defunding is a pernicious myth.   

Since you don't believe a government shut-down is responsible or effective, then when Ted Cruz finally shuts up and the Senate strips out the House GOP's irrelevant defunding nonsense and returns a clean government funding bill to the House, I trust you'll happily vote for it.  And after 12/15/13, let's put an end to these short-term CR shenanigans.  Deal with one issue at a time and vote to keep our government operational with a traditional budget.


Regarding your "commitment" to overturning Obamacare:

From what you say you've "heard over and over again," you must be listening only to uninformed people.

Obamacare will reduce health care costs for a great many people.  Exchange premiums are expected to average $328 a month.  Many low-income or currently uninsured people will pay $100 a month or less.

It most certainly does increase access to quality care.  That's really the main point.  Obamacare will make coverage available to tens of millions of previously uninsured people.

It does "encourage" companies to offer health care.  In fact, it requires it of all employers with 50 or more workers.  Even those exempt companies with less than 50 employees are encouraged to offer coverage via 35-50% premium tax credits.

Where do you get the notion that health care reform must somehow be expected to "expand businesses"?  That's totally apples and oranges.  But the good news is that with 20-30 million new customers entering the system, business in the health care service and health insurance industries ought to expand rather nicely!

Obamacare affordably expands access to coverage for millions, including the uninsured, low-income folks, and young adults.  It ensures coverage for pre-existing conditions and mental health services, and ends many insurance industry abuses.  And you say you're committed to getting rid of it.  What an odd and heartless commitment you've made.

Yes, we disagree on this matter, completely.  However, as my representative, you may indeed be of assistance to me and many others by changing your misguided position on this important issue.

Sincerely, 
Buster Gammons