Big Dogs House

More Trouble With Government Numbers

Jan 19, 2011 Political

The claim from the left has always been that there are 45 million people in this country who do not have health insurance. This number is an inflated number that counts illegal aliens and those who can afford or are offered health insurance but choose not to buy it. The real number is probably less than 20 million.

We had this health care takeover in order to accommodate these people and there will still be quite a few uninsured while we are spending trillions of dollars on an unsustainable program (refer to UK). But that is a discussion for another time.

The Democrats are not happy the GOP is going to hold a vote on repeal. They have been claiming that this is a waste of time and that the Republicans should be working on the economy and job creation instead. After two years of ignoring jobs and the economy in favor of the progressive socialist agenda, these people are now saying we need to focus on jobs and the economy.

Since the health care takeover is a job killer (yes I wrote killer) then repealing it will help with the job situation. It will also cut unnecessary and wasteful spending.

While Democrats are squawking about focusing on jobs they are also indicating that repealing the takeover will cost us money. Only in their twisted world can cutting a program that spends trillions be adding to the deficit.

The latest ploy is for the Democrats to claim that between 50 and 120 million non-elderly people will be uninsured in a few years due to preexisting conditions if the takeover is repealed. I am having a bit of trouble with this math.

Where did all these people come from? How does the regime know that this many people will have conditions that will cause the denial of health insurance? If we accept the grossly inflated number of uninsured as 45 million (or even 30 million as has been the case in some discussions) how did we get to 50-120 million?

Surely these people are here now and are insured. Since we are not getting 50-120 million people dropped every three years how can we now claim that this will be the case. There is no history to support this and since there are, according to the regime, 30-45 million uninsured, how on Earth do that many more people suddenly end up uninsured?

This is another scare tactic using information from some regime friendly report (that might have been produced by the regime) in order to scare people into opposing the repeal. This is why Democrat friendly media outlets are producing polls that over sample Democrats when asking about the repeal issue. They want to give the appearance that the folks are OK with the takeover.

The people are against this monstrosity and want it repealed. This has been shown time and again in accurate polls and it is part of the reason the Democrats suffered a historic defeat last November.

Now they are working to spin anything they can to keep the vote from taking place.

Though this will not be repealed as long as Democrats control the Senate and the White House the vote is important because the Republicans promised they would do it.

Imagine that, politicians keeping their word.

Unless the repeal is attached to the bill raising the debt ceiling there is little chance of it being repealed but we can make sure it is not funded.

Regardless of how all this takes place there is no way in hell that there will be 50-120 million people dropped from insurance due to preexisting conditions.

The Democrats lied about the takeover bill, lied about what was in it, lied about how things would take place, lied about it funding abortion and lied about death panels.

Now they expect us to believe them when they make an obviously outrageous claim about the number of people who will be uninsured.

Never trust a progressive/Socialist/liberal/Democrat.

They lie whenever they speak and they are only interested in controlling people.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: control, health care, lies, Obama, repeal, takeover, taxes

Nanny Pelosi Knows Best

Jan 5, 2011 Political

The nanny state is alive and well. Nanny Pelosi spoke after a group of Democrats presented their views on repeal of Obamacare. They gave the standard lies and some said how much it would cost to repeal, standard stuff one expects from the nanny state but Nanny Pelosi took the case.

In this video from The Blaze (linked from WBAL Radio) Pelosi states that even if everyone in America was happy with their health care and it was affordable for all, the government takeover was necessary because the system was not sustainable.

Listen to what this moron is saying. She indicates that even if EVERYONE had health care and liked it and it was affordable she and her nanny state Democrats would have had to take it over because it was not sustainable.

Excuse me while I laugh. OK, I am back. If everyone has what they want and they can afford it then the system IS sustainable. The system is and has been sustainable but according to Pelosi even if the system was completely ideal and everyone had coverage they liked and could afford, the government would need to take it over.

This is more proof that the takeover had nothing to do with the stated goals and everything to do with involving government in our lives.

It is absolute proof that this is about one thing and one thing only. CONTROL! They want to control us and they know it will be easier if they control our health care.

I have an idea. Government as we know have it is unsustainable. Spending is out of control and we are 14 TRILLION dollars in debt. We have a bloated government that is simply unsustainable.

So let’s take it over. It is necessary and, according to Nanny Pelosi, the proper thing to do.

We started today and if the Republicans don’t do the right thing we will fire them and replace them with people who will. We will keep replacing these people until we get folks who will do what is right by this country and the people who make it work.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: control, democrat, lie, nanny pelosi, nanny state, obamacare

Terrorism

Nov 24, 2010 Political

So, what is terrorism? How about we check old Webster’s:

the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

Hmm. Okay, how about “terror”:

: 1 a state of intense fear
2 a : one that inspires fear : scourge b : a frightening aspect c : a cause of anxiety : worry d : an appalling person or thing; especially : brat
3: reign of terror
4: violent or destructive acts (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands

So, logically, a terrorist is one who uses terror to coerce people into doing things they don’t want to do, right?

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: control, domestic extremist, obamanazi, secret memo, terror

TSA: About Control

Nov 22, 2010 Political

So, while there still are people who claim the TSA is doing what they’re doing for safety, this story makes it very, very clear that this has absolutely nothing to do with safety.

In the story, a man strips instead of submitting to a groping. He strips down to his underwear. At the point, it is obvious to everyone that he has no explosives. So, at this point, Mr. Wolanyk is no danger to anyone. So what does the TSA do? They arrest him.

Again, after making it very obvious that Mr. Wolanyk has NO weapons or explosives or ANY kind of prohibited item, the TSA arrests him. On what charges? Failing to complete the security scan and — get this, it’s a new one — illegally recording!

The TSA is making this clear — they are NOT going to back down. Instead, they have identified the enemy, and it is people. The TSA has increased the odds. If you now refuse to follow their orders — any orders — you will be jailed and fined. If you do not submit, or attempt to record them, you will be jailed. This, very clearly, has absolutely NOTHING to do with anyone’s security. You are guilty beyond any reasonable doubt if you enter an airport, period. Oh sure, they’re just “following orders.”

I found this post interesting. In it, various TSA officers are reported as saying how sad they are for the comments they get from people. My response? Too bad they’re not getting more comments. Nope, sorry, I have NO PITY for these people. They are scum (and I really don’t say that lightly). If your job is really that bad, quit! I’m serious. Maybe that’s the only way to get these bastards to stop — keep insulting them until enough of them quit that the TSA just can’t do their “job” any more. The TSA agents are NOT “people like everyone else.” They’re people who are molesting and arresting others.

On the good side, perhaps this will be enough to finally wake people up and start a revolution for freedom. Hey, I can dream.

Tags: control, freedom, tsa

Lesson: Don’t Depend On Government For Retirement

Oct 15, 2010 Political

Social Security was never supposed to be a complete retirement plan. It was a plan that provided insurance to those who retired so that they would have some income after their working years ended. There have been revisions along the years and they have expanded the scope of Social Security to something it was never intended to be. One of the provisions enacted was to index cost of living allowances (COLA) to inflation. When there is inflation the COLA goes up and when there is no inflation there is no COLA.

The government has announced that, for the second year in a row, there will be no COLA because there is supposedly no inflation. Prices are rising but there is not yet a measured inflation.

One would think that since there are rules in place that they would be followed. This is a pipe dream when it comes to Washington DC. Last year the politicians passed a law to give Social Security recipients a $250 check to make up for not getting a COLA. If the mechanism in place determined that there should be no COLA then why did they circumvent that mechanism and pay the money anyway?

When I originally wrote about this recent COLA news I indicated that it would not be long before Congress worked to send another check to people who did not get a COLA. Keep in mind that they did not get a COLA because of the law that Congress passed, but that makes no difference.

After all, it is an election year.

As I predicted, the Congress is working to pay another $250 to offset something to which Social Security recipients are not entitled (in accordance with the law).

Representative Earl Pomeroy (Democrat, North Dakota), who introduced the legislation, had this to say:

“Seniors who rely on their modest Social Security payments need these cost-of-living adjustments for their day-to-day survival,” Pomeroy said. “Passing this bill will ensure that the lack of cost-of-living adjustment will not jeopardize seniors’ ability to survive on their benefits.” My Way News

The message here is that Seniors are DEPENDENT on government. Seniors, according to Pomeroy, rely on the payments from government which means that they are at the mercy of the government when it comes to the amount of money they will receive. He also is saying that the laws the Congress passed dealing with COLA jeopardize senior’s ability to survive.

In other words, seniors depend on government to survive. This is not a place anyone should EVER desire to be.

By any measure, money paid to Social Security would have returned much better profits than government if invested in the market. The claim that seniors would have been wiped out is wrong. First of all, the most recent legislation would have exempted people over a certain age so they would have been unaffected. Those who are younger would have had plenty of time to recoup the loss. Second of all, if the money had been invested the return would have been higher so the amount lost would not have been as devastating.

In addition, had the system been set up that way decades ago, people would be much better off and not waiting for government to hand them a few more scraps. If those accounts belonged to the people (it IS their money) they would control it, it would not be taken by the government to spend on worthless endeavors and the money could be passed to heirs thus ensuring growth of wealth in this country.

But government can’t have people being wealthy and independent in their senior years.

How else will government control the people if they are not at its mercy?

The lesson is to save as much as you can. The old saying about paying yourself first is great advice. Decide how much you can save and then invest it in a vehicle that pays good interest. A balance between interest and risk is a good idea.

If people fail to save they will be at the mercy of government, which is just where they want you.

They need that to pander for votes.

And to control the population…

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: bankrupt, bondage, control, lies, social security