Obama Might Just Be On To Something

In an interview with Jake Tapper of ABC, Barack Obama discussed the health care debacle that is working its way through Congress. Tapper asked him about the provisions in the bill for people to go to jail if they do not get insurance and refuse to pay the tax that will be levied on them for the refusal. Obama danced around the jail issue and said that everyone had to buy insurance. He likened it to car insurance, an argument that I have already destroyed. People are only forced to buy car insurance if they own a car. People do not have to have a car. Here is a part of Obama’s answer that shows promise:

“I think the general broad principle is simply that people who are paying for their health insurance aren’t subsidizing folks who simply choose not to until they get sick and then suddenly they expect free health insurance. That’s — that’s basic concept of responsibility that I think most Americans abide by,” Mr. Obama said, “penalties are appropriate for people who try to free ride the system and force others to pay for their health insurance.” [emphasis mine] ABC

This is interesting indeed. I think Obama might be on to something. Let me change that last sentence to this [select one or more of the options]:

“penalties are appropriate for people who try to free ride the system and force others to pay for their [welfare, abortions, tuition, tax liability, home heating fuel, electricity, cars, and other social programs].”

Barack has hit the nail on the head. We have far too many people in this country who are on welfare and who do not pay any income taxes (not including the people in his administration). We have people who expect the government (read the taxpayer) to pay for abortions. There are programs to pay for electricity and heating fuel and all of these come from the taxpayer. Cash for clunkers was nothing more than taxpayer money going toward a vehicle for another person.

If all these people abode by the idea of basic responsibility then we would not have them running around with their hands out looking for more taxpayer money. We should have an appropriate penalty for those who are getting money, a free ride, while the rest of us do what is right.

The other interesting thing is that Obama said that it is not right for these free loaders to expect someone else to pay for their health insurance but the government plan is nothing more than taxpayers paying for people’s health insurance. Isn’t that a bit ironic?

I wonder why so many people fail to see the contradictions.

I wonder how long it will be before the liberals tell me that it is different…

Big Dog

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

47 Responses to “Obama Might Just Be On To Something”

  1. BD, it was not Obama who hit the nail on the head.
    It was you. And the blow is well struck.

    This is exactly what the Democrats and psudo-Republicans don’t want the populace to see, \much less understand.

    It is what liberals refuse to see.
    It is the dark under-belly that liberals promote, what they base their value system on; Ultreuism based on taking money from one man and giving it to another.

    It is robbery, but in the case of the governemnt, it is backed by the threat of jail and/or fines.

    I hope everyone notices Obama’s huge slip, as you did, and thank you for posting it.

    How long will it take for the liberals to notice? Are they awake yet? Oh, they will will tell you.
    This is to big-a-screup on the part of their God Obama for them to admit the logic of it.

  2. Darrel says:

    “penalties are appropriate for people who try to free ride the system and force others to pay for their health insurance.” –Obama, referring to freeloaders like, you know who.

    Bigd: “Obama said that it is not right for these free loaders to expect someone else to pay for their health insurance…>>

    And he’s right. Unless they’re too poor, then we help them out a bit.

    Bigd: but the government plan is nothing more than taxpayers paying for people’s health insurance. Isn’t that a bit ironic?”>>

    No, the irony is you have an astonishing inability to comprehend basic information and have it upside down again.

    When people pay for health insurance, either directly or via taxes, they are obviously paying for *their* health insurance. Now, when people fail to do this, they will face a penalty (and thus will be paying indirectly).

    When Blake is taxed and thus forced to be responsible and pay for his health care, his freeloading days will be over. And that’s a good thing.

    I bet he’s gonna be on medicare soon (if he isn’t already). 40-50% of US health care dollars are already feeding socialized systems (military medicine “best in the world,” VA, medicare, medicaid etc.). All programs very popular with the populace.

    “Everyone in Japan is required to sign up with a health insurance plan. This is a “personal mandate,”…. Every nation that relies on health insurance has that requirement (except the USA), and in Japan the mandate is not controversial at all. “It’s considered an element of personal responsibility, that you insure yourself against health care costs,” Dr. Ikegami told me. “And who can be against personal responsibility?”
    –The Healing of America, A global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care., pg. 87

    • Big Dog says:

      Freethinkers loaders include those on welfare and other social programs. We need to penalize them as well.

      Should Bill Gates be required to buy insurance?

      • Darrel says:

        Bigd: “Should Bill Gates be required to buy insurance?”>>

        Yes. But being a responsible citizen, like myself, he already has health insurance.

        (pssst. he’s an atheist too)

      • Darrel says:

        BLK: “Dar- taxing me is illegal- it is against the fifth amendment”>>

        Why am I not surprised to learn that you have bought into that line of crap.

        Observe (notice this was decided in 1927):

        “In United States v. Sullivan, 274 U.S. 259 (1927), the United States Supreme Court ruled that a taxpayer could not invoke the Fifth Amendment’s protections as the basis for refusing to file a required federal income tax return. The Court stated: “If the form of return provided called for answers that the defendant was privileged from making[,] he could have raised the objection in the return, but could not on that account refuse to make any return at all. We are not called on to decide what, if anything, he might have withheld.”


        BLK: “And just because Japan does this it is better?”>>

        No, as anyone can see, Japan does this “better” based upon the objective fact that their costs are far lower and their results are better.

        Let’s review some basic facts about their system, from: “The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care”

        • Doc’s most competitive and capitalist in the world. –ibid, pg 83

        • Care for everyone, minimal fees, no waits, excellent results and… 8% of GDP. (1/2 of U.S. cost) –ibid, pg 85

        • Costs are capped at $650 per month. You cannot, by law, pay more than that. –ibid, pg 86

        • MRI of head, $105 (vs. about $1,200 in US) –ibid, pg 92

        • Maternity is not covered but you receive a $3,000 maternity grant –ibid, pg 94

        • Doc’s earn about 1/3 of what US Doctors do. –ibid, pg 92

        • Supply exceeds demand, patients just walk in. Fee for hospital bed (not private), with food, is $11. –ibid, pg 96

        The US is 19th in “Death from curable diseases.” Almost twice as high as France, Japan and Spain. –ibid pg. 32

        Anyone who says you don’t have to pay taxes because of something in the Constitution, is lying to you. No exceptions. I encourage you to try it and see.

        • Blake says:

          What has been proposed is not, I REPEAT, NOT, an Income Tax- thus is covered by the fifth amendment.
          And I will be trying it- along with many of the tea party attendees- lets see how many they can put in jail before there is a real revolt.
          Thomas Jefferson once advocated a revolution every 25 years or so- I think we might be overdue, don’t you?

    • Blake says:

      Dar- taxing me is illegal- it is against the fifth amendment, and I am willing to fight this and take it as far as I am able, and so should everyone else- what are they going to do- jail us all?
      The Republican bill, while not perfect, was far better than the obese monster that is the Demmie healthscare bill, and the two basics in that bill, tort reform, and buying insurance across state lines, thus encouraging competition, are by themselves, better than the whole bill that has been NARROWLY passed by the house.
      And just because Japan does this it is better?
      I don’t think so.

    • wtf says:

      must be a b1tch to be right all the time
      how can you live make it through each day

  3. Big Dog says:

    Who can be against personal responsibility? You liberals are. That is why we have social programs.

    If you like what the Japanese do go live in Japan. You obviously did not like what the Canadians were doing or you would still live in Canada.

    I comprehend very well. The government systems you discuss are overspent and inefficiently run. And they are not as well received as you like to believe.

    Military care is not socialized medicine. People have to actually do something to get it. In a socialized system, people are just given it.

    No Darrel, if it was a matter of just helping people then we could afford to buy health insurance for the 12 million who do not have it, want it but truly cannot afford it. This is a matter of making taxpayers pay for the insurance of those without. It is the government telling me how much I have to spend on health care.

    It is not Constitutional for the government to require someone to buy health insurance and there will be many court cases.

    Government equals waste.

    As for Blake, he has told you, he pays for all of his own health care with cash no one pays his way.

    That is a lie and I am tired of hearing it.

    I am willing to bet you that Blake will never pay the taxes, he will never buy insurance that is mandated and he will never go to jail.

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: You liberals are [against personal responsibility]. That is why we have social programs.>>

      The welfare states are with one exception all RED states. The largest recipient of welfare in the US is wealthy corporations (and recently, Wall Street). So you have it backwards.

      Bigd: If you like what the Japanese do go live in Japan.>>

      That Island is a little full and when they speak it doesn’t make any sense to me. So, even better, I will work to make the US system better and reflect the best aspects of systems around the world. Obama is working toward that.

      Bigd: Military care is not socialized medicine.>>

      Military care is 100% government run and government financed. It’s a perfect model of socialist care, as is the VA. If that isn’t socialist, the word has no meaning. More likely, you don’t understand what the word means. Big surprise!

      Bigd: People have to actually do something to get it.>>

      Completely irrelevant to whether it is socialized (which it is). You can make socialized medicine be served to group a, or b, or c. This is not relevant to whether it is in fact socialized in it’s delivery and operation (it is). In Britain, the category (group) receiving socialized care is “citizen.” In the US, the categories (groups) receiving socialized care are, at least:

      Veterans (who qualify)
      older (medicare)
      poor (medicaid)

      Bigd: In a socialized system, people are just given it.>>

      That’s false. You have some bogus understanding of the word. Too much Rush perhaps?

      Bigd: “This is a matter of making taxpayers pay for the insurance of those without.”>>

      Which is MUCH preferable to what we have now which is taxpayers paying (in a terribly wasteful, expensive and unfair manner) to patch people up after the fact. Better that everyone has insurance and responsibly pays their own way (some exceptions may apply).

      Bigd: It is the government telling me how much I have to spend on health care.>>

      I wish that was the case, because the cost would be FAR less (see Japan, etc). No, instead it is the private for profit system telling you how much you will spend. And it’s a lot.
      Insurance will be required however.

      Bigd: “there will be many court cases.”>>

      They’ll lose.

      Bigd: Blake pays for all of his own health care>>

      Blake doesn’t pay for jack. He couldn’t possibly pay for his health care risk, even if he was a millionaire (and he’s not). That’s why he needs to pay to insure his risk.
      Texas is a real mess in this regard:

      “Texas ranked 46th in the Commonwealth Fund’s 2009 scorecard of state health care performance. Among the poster children for the failure of red state health care, Rick Perry’s state brought up the rear across the five areas measured. And when it comes to health care access and equity, Texas is dead last.” Link

      Bigd: I am willing to bet you that Blake will never pay…>>

      That may be. But if he gets sick, he’ll come begging like the rest of the mooches that like to pretend they are a “rugged individualist.” That is, until they’re not. Time to grow up and start paying their way.


      • Blake says:

        I will bet you I do not come begging- but that is not the question-the question I have is how can a government that has allowed Social security and Medicare to become bankrupt and non- viable think that it can take what amounts to one sixth of our economy and do better with it- it cannot, because they are idiots, and I will never allow them to do this to me- I suggest that others do the same.

        • Darrel says:

          BLK: “government that has allowed social security and Medicare to become bankrupt”>>

          Neither are bankrupt and neither will be as long as the US is solvent. The US is far from insolvent. As a percentage of GDP, we’ve had far higher debt in the past.

          BLK: “what amounts to one sixth of our economy”>>

          This is a profound misunderstanding (again, when you start with a bogus premise, your conclusion is unlikely to be true).

          The OVERALL US spending on medical care is indeed very large. Almost half of it is already completely socialized and functioning quite well. The band-aid bill in play right now is not going to capture a large part of the system and make it government run (this is a rightwing talking point lie). Making it government run will be what we will have to do the next time around (if we’re lucky) when this greed based system fails even further (and more of you crazies have moved on to your heavenly reward).


        • Blake says:

          You are really such an idiot, Darrel- how can you even draw a breath with as little brainpower as you have? SS and Medicare are insolvent, simply because our government is insolvent- what part of no money don’t you understand?

        • Darrel says:

          BLK: “SS and Medicare are insolvent, simply because our government is insolvent”

          Neither SS, or Medicare or the government are insolvent. Words have meanings. Please learn to use them correctly.


          1. not solvent; unable to satisfy creditors or discharge liabilities, either because liabilities exceed assets or because of inability to pay debts as they mature.

          2. pertaining to bankrupt persons or bankruptcy.

        • Darrel says:

          Blake, if you would like to learn about the debt and deficits we have now, where they came from and Obama’s degree of responsibility, you should read this article. It’s quite informative:

          America’s Sea of Red Ink Was Years in the Making -NYT’s.


          “The story of today’s deficits starts in January 2001, as President Bill Clinton was leaving office. The Congressional Budget Office estimated then that the government would run an average annual surplus of more than $800 billion a year from 2009 to 2012. Today, the government is expected to run a $1.2 trillion annual deficit in those years.

          You can think of that roughly $2 trillion swing as coming from four broad categories: the business cycle, President George W. Bush’s policies, policies from the Bush years that are scheduled to expire but that Mr. Obama has chosen to extend, and new policies proposed by Mr. Obama.

          The first category — the business cycle — accounts for 37 percent of the $2 trillion swing. It’s a reflection of the fact that both the 2001 recession and the current one reduced tax revenue, required more spending on safety-net programs and changed economists’ assumptions about how much in taxes the government would collect in future years.

          About 33 percent of the swing stems from new legislation signed by Mr. Bush. That legislation, like his tax cuts and the Medicare prescription drug benefit, not only continue to cost the government but have also increased interest payments on the national debt.

          Mr. Obama’s main contribution to the deficit is his extension of several Bush policies, like the Iraq war and tax cuts for households making less than $250,000. Such policies — together with the Wall Street bailout, which was signed by Mr. Bush and supported by Mr. Obama — account for 20 percent of the swing.

          About 7 percent comes from the stimulus bill that Mr. Obama signed in February. And only 3 percent comes from Mr. Obama’s agenda on health care, education, energy and other areas.”

          Take care to note that last sentence.

          • Big Dog says:

            And therein lies the issue. The CBO based its estimates on the budget that Clinton and Congress passed. IF they had done what they said we would run a surplus (there was no actual surplus because we still had a deficit but it was no where near what it is now). The CBO can only grade what they are given. They graded the pie in the sky stuff that they were told and, as is always the case, the government (both parties) failed to do what was right.

  4. Adam says:

    You preach personal responsibility because you don’t want to face reality. Why should you have to give up your hard earned dollars to folks who haven’t earned it, right? How often do we see “compassionate” conservatives telling that joke?

    Unfortunately life is a lot more complicated than that kind of simplistic conservative dogma wants us to believe.

    You like to focus on two groups it seems: The very richest like Bill Gates who shouldn’t be forced and the lazy freeloaders who haven’t earned help. You’re conveniently leaving out the millions in between and the reason for the bill: All those folks that work their butts off to support their families but still go broke because of things like health care bills.

    • Big Dog says:

      You have no idea how much of my money I give FREELY to help people so zip it with the compassionate conservative talk.

      The people in between who are unable to afford health care because they decide NOT to sign up for it. That and their cell phones, cable TV, broadband internet, two cars, and on and on.

      There are about 12 million who are uninsured who would like to be and cannot afford it. Let’s concentrate on them and leave everyone else alone.

      • Adam says:

        You’re forgetting the folks who have medical coverage that is practically useless to them. This is not the black and white issue many of you conservatives to pretend it is.

        A health care bill similar to what went through the House would ensure coverage to 95% of Americans without somebody like yourself deciding whether they’ve earned it or not.

        Furthermore, the CBO predicts the bill will actually lower the deficit. If you have a better way of measuring the impact than the CBO is using then let’s hear it.

    • In on it not says:

      Life isn’t that complicated.
      You are born and you die, and in your case, not soon enough, but aside from that, it is you and the liberals that want us to believe it is “too complicated for you to take care of yourself, so we are going to strat doing it for you!”
      And then people not only pay for their own care, but yours as well.

      Frankly, I don’t feel I am obligated to pay for your health care, nor for “the poor,” who as far as I am concerned, if they lack the means to stay alive, can crawl in to a hole and die. It isn’t my problem, no matter how much YOU want ME to take care of them.

      If you want to help them, then use your money to do so. I wont stop you, not will I call you any name other than “fool.”

  5. Big Dog says:

    You seem to have this idea that I care what religion Gates is?

    He can afford to buy a hospital so I don’t think he should be required to buy insurance if he does not want it.

    As for responsible, the responsible ones buy insurance which leaves out the huge portion of those uninsured. They can afford it and it is offered, they just do not want it.

    We can insure the 12 million without and not damage the entire system.

    Adam the CBO can only make estimates based on the information Congress gives it. Congress withholds information or puts vague items in the bill that are unfunded but will cost money.

    Massachusetts is a great example of what the country will get.

    95%? They promised everyone would be covered.

    As for whether they earned it or not, one thing they have not earned is MY money. I do not want to pay for their care.

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: “They can afford it and it is offered, they just do not want it.”>>

      Whether they want it is irrelevant. They need to be responsible citizens and begin paying for their own health care risk rather than passing it along to everyone else.

      Lot’s of people don’t want to buy car insurance but in my state (and yours) it’s required. I, like most people (it may even be required), buy insurance just in case one of these uninsured people hit me. Typically they are the poorer people who need the insurance the most because they couldn’t pay a big bill (i.e. Blake).

      The day is coming, and coming very soon, when it will be just as unacceptable to live without health insurance (and not pay for your own health care risk) as it is to drive without car insurance (and not pay for your vehicle liability). Change is hard. You’ll get used to it.

      Bigd: “They promised everyone would be covered.”>>

      When did “they” do that?

      Bigd: “I do not want to pay for their care.”>>


      Someday, probably in a decade or two, the US will embrace a much more inclusive, socialist system to deal with the medical mess, if only through strict cost controls (like Japan). It’s kind of inevitable.

      “Health care is generally worst in those red states where the Republican political leadership is most opposed to reform.” Link.

      Big surprise there.

    • Adam says:

      Your objection to the situation in Massachusetts?

      • Blake says:

        Oh Mass- goodness, it is such a FUBAR that noone could possibly ever detail ALL that is wrong there, but lets begin with skyrocketing cost overruns, and rationing because they haven’t the money to pay for all of this.

        • Adam says:

          I know Mass. has been hit by falling revenues because of the economy but the health care system isn’t exactly a “FUBAR” from what I can tell. By all means it’s not perfect but it’s only about 3% of the budget of the state even as it grows. It’s insuring about 96% of the state and that’s pretty important. The fact that healthcare costs are rising for many folks there is a problem they are trying to tackle.

  6. Darrel says:

    Over 2,200 veterans died in 2008 due to lack of health insurance

    “According to a study released by the Harvard Medical School, 2,266 veterans under the age of 65 died last year as a result of not having health insurance. Researchers emphasize that “that figure is more than 14 times the number of deaths (155) suffered by U.S. troops in Afghanistan in 2008, and more than twice as many as have died (911 as of Oct. 31) since the war began in 2001.”

    The 1.46 million working-age veterans that did not have health insurance last year all experienced reduced access to care as a consequence, leading to “six preventable deaths a day.”

    Like other uninsured Americans, most uninsured vets are working people — too poor to afford private coverage but not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid or means-tested VA care,” said Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, a professor at Harvard Medical School. […]

    Dr. David Himmelstein, the co-author of the report and associate professor of medicine at Harvard, commented, “On this Veterans Day we should not only honor the nearly 500 soldiers who have died this year in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also the more than 2,200 veterans who were killed by our broken health insurance system. That’s six preventable deaths a day.”


  7. victoria says:

    Yes, If anyone deserves for the government to take care of them properly its the veterans and the Native Americans. And the government can’t even handle that. But you Darrel and Adam trust them with the rest of everybody.

    • Darrel says:

      Victoria, as you probably know, many people who have served and are “veterans,” do not qualify for medical benefits with the VA system. In fact, probably most veterans don’t qualify (I just confirmed this with a friend who is a veteran).

      The article I refer to above would be referring to those who weren’t career military, or weren’t injured in the service and are now poor and without insurance (there are millions, including hundreds of thousands of homeless veterans). The article above was not referring to those who are (or were) career military and qualify for excellent care by the (completely socialized) VA medical system.


      • Big Dog says:

        Not sure I agree that most veterans do not qualify. The VA says eligibility is based solely on active military status:

        You may be eligible! Below are some of the basic factors that go into determining your eligibility for health benefits:

        Eligibility for most veterans’ health care benefits is based solely on active military service in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, or Coast Guard (or Merchant Marines during WW II), and discharged under other than dishonorable conditions.
        Reservists and National Guard members who were called to active duty by a Federal Executive Order may qualify for VA health care benefits. Returning service members, including Reservists and National Guard members who served on active duty in a theater of combat operations have special eligibility for hospital care, medical services, and nursing home care for five years following discharge from active duty.
        Health Care eligibility is not just for those who served in combat.
        Other groups may be eligible for some health benefits.
        Veteran’s health care is not just for service-connected injuries or medical conditions.
        Veteran’s health care facilities are not just for men only. VA offers full-service health care to women veterans.
        Click here to get started in determining your eligibility for VA health care benefits or click on a menu button to the left to learn about specific programs and benefits.

    • Adam says:

      Why Native Americans?

      • Blake says:

        Well, if you knew history, you might not be so ignorant.
        Native Americans have been lied to even more than the rest of us, if you can believe that- I know, that is hard to swallow, but politicians began trying out their lying skills on the indians before they moved on to the rest of us.

        • Adam says:

          Well, thanks for wrapping a non-answer in an insult, but what I want to know is why Victoria wants the government to “take care of them properly” and what that details exactly.

        • Randy says:

          and because of that, the Indians (Native Americans) deserve reparations? I just want to be clear that this is what you are advocating.

        • Adam says:

          I think Victoria may be ignoring the question for that very reason. I would still love to hear her clarify her position on that.

        • Blake says:

          I believe that victoria might be saying that Indians were the first people to have adverse contact with liberals who wanted to “civilize” the poor savages, and they know better than even the blacks how the road to hell is paved with government interference disguised as “help”- Witness all the blankets loaded with smallpox that liberals doled out- witness the “reservations” that liberals forced people who didn’t know that country to live on.
          I could go on and on, and every time it is the liberals, the “ones who know best” that attempt to alter people’s behavior, and ALWAYS GET IT WRONG.

        • Adam says:

          Revisionist Republican History: The genocide of the Native Americans…yes, it was all one big liberal government intervention gone terribly wrong. Of course this is all Obama’s fault as well.

  8. Adam says:

    So, after I’ve wasting my time watching those useless attack videos I’m still wondering what you mean by “take care of them properly.”

  9. Dieta says:

    Obamas first priority to smoothen halthcare seems to be failed

  10. Adam says:

    Let’s hope at least mental health reform passes. There’s too many right-wing nuts on the lose in America. It’s time to throw out political correctness, call a spade a spade, and lock up these crazies once and for all.

    • Darrel says:

      Recovery is possible. This fellow got better:

      Hi, I’m Marty, and I’m a recovering Republican.


      “I am a former Republican. And I wasn’t merely the libertarian, live-and-let-live, fun-at-parties kind of conservative whose primary concern is balancing the budget; I was a spiteful, narrow-minded, fire-breathing paranoid lunatic who questioned the patriotism and morality of my liberal fellow citizens. Recognizing the error of my ways has done wonders for my mental health but left me with constant, unremitting remorse; I really want to go back in time and kick my own ass.”

      • Blake says:

        Sounds like the man went terminally insane- you have to be to be liberal these days- and yet I understand the disappointment with the Republican party.
        That is why I am a conservative. And sane- and happy, too.

        • Adam says:

          Yes, because sane people brag about how they want to see people tortured to death.

        • Darrel says:

          BLK: “Sounds like the man went terminally insane”>>

          No it was temporary. If you read the article you will see it is about his recovery. Maybe someday you will get well too?

          “It’s not getting any smarter out there. You have to come to terms with stupidity, and make it work for you.” — Frank Zappa