Lindy’s Blog: Where Mom is Always Right

March 24, 2010

Straight from the horse’s mouth…

Filed under: health care,politics — by lindyborer @ 8:19 am
Tags: , ,

Or maybe I should say “jackass’s” mouth?

Rep. John Dingell (D-MI), on how it will take time for DemCare to “control the people”:

Of COURSE this is all about power and control!

March 23, 2010

RIP, liberty

Filed under: health care,limited government,politics — by lindyborer @ 4:14 pm
Tags: , ,

Obama got his health care reform bill signed today and it only took a year, the opposition of a majority of Americans, bribery, arm-twisting, back-room deals and zero transparency to get it done.  I’ve never claimed to be a genius, but given the shady nature of this whole process I don’t understand why this is a “good thing” for America.  (Plus, guess who’s exempt from ObamaCare mandates?) 

I’ve simply had it.  I am actually scared for our nation.  If this thing goes, it’s game over.  I am beyond the point where I care about alienating anyone–including family–because of this.  This is my childrens’ future. 

What a small shred of people cannot understand is that this is not about health care!  I will say it again:  This is not about health care.  It is about the expansion of government.  It is about creating a welfare state from the cradle to the grave.  It is about Big Brother holding sway over even the minutest aspects of daily living.  Arguably, everything we do affects our health.  If (when) the government is suddenly the one in control of divvying out health care, they will do so solely upon the basis of controlling costs.  As such, they will see each of us as nothing more than a dollar sign.  And certain segments of the population will be more “cost effective” than others.  For example, it’s cheaper to have an abortion than a baby.  It’s easier to pull the plug than to give someone life prolonging treatment.  The unborn, the disabled, the elderly, the chronically ill–all these groups will be the hardest hit.  This legislation will drive doctors away in droves, and rationing will inevitably occur.

Reform is needed, but this leviathon of a bill addresses none of those things that would have truly reformed our system without taking over 1/6th of the economy and sacrificed our individual liberties.  (Tort reform?  Being able to purchase insurance across state lines?  True competition among insurance compancies would lower premiums faster than anything.  It would solve the problem for those who can’t get insurance because of a preexisting condition.)

With the signing of this bill, the Democrats have effectively taken the first step in turning our nation’s healthcare system into the DMV.  Break out the champagne!

One of the most interesting aspects of this entire issue to me is the one of liberty and self-determination.  ObamaCare undoubtedly will put a bureaucrat in the middle of patient and doctor.  It will do more to erode these basic, foundational American ideas than anything else we have seen. 

Give me liberty or give me death!  This is America!  

One comfort?  We will not go down without a fight.  This legislation and its mandate to buy insurance is unconstitutional.  It is a direct violation of state sovereignty and states’ rights.  It will be challenged in the courts.

January 20, 2010

A turning point

Filed under: health care,politics — by lindyborer @ 7:23 am
Tags: , , , ,

Republican Scott Brown wins the “Kennedy seat” in Massachusetts.   Rasmussen reports that he won over independents 73/25.  Democratic heads are exploding all over the fruited plain.  I can’t wipe the silly grin off my face.

I could go into great detail about how completely unprecedented this is, but those who are paying attention already know.  Interesting to me will be how Obama/Pelosi/Reid but especially the Blue Dogs in the House and Senate will respond. 

Scenario A:  They will continue, kamikaze-style, to push through with their ultra-liberal policies (govt. run healthcare, cap and trade) by passing the Senate version of healthcare or delaying Brown’s seating.  They’ll claim that the MA election defeat of Coakley is due to the voters’ “misunderstandings” or their “oppositon for opposition’s sake.”  To which I say, go right ahead and do just that.  Further insult the intelligence of We the People.  Continue to call us “teabaggers” and characterize us as ignorant and uneducated.  Because the more they do, the more they imperil themselves in midterms and in 2012.  Recall, just last week our own Ben Nelson faced the wrath of NE voters as they booed him out of a pizzaria in Omaha.  I’m sure he’s remembering that about now, too.

Scenario B:  Obama will come to his senses and move to the middle, scrap this wildly unpopular piece of crap healthcare legislation, and start over.

I have a hard time envisioning Obama moving to the middle.  I simply don’t know if he’s capable of it.  I think he’s so innately statist and ideological that it would almost be humanly impossible for him to do it.  But think for a moment what must be running through his head right now.  

Here he is, on the one year anniversary of his Inauguration, with the big State of the Union speech looming, and he just got b***h-slapped by voters in traditionally blue MASSACHUSETTS.  While the state-run media will attempt to spin Coakley’s defeat soleley on Coakley herself (of which she did play a tremendous part), they will suddenly forget that it was Obama himself who went to MA to campaign for her and to himself make the election, in large part, about healthcare and a referendum on his agenda.  (Scott Brown, too, made his opposition to this version of healthcare reform a central tenet of his campaign–something the voters obviously approved.)

The far-left is angry with him for a variety of reasons (one of which being he’s not left enough), and he’s completely losing independents because he’s too far left.  Unemployment is still in double digits, and virtually every industry in the private sector has a big target painted on its back by the Obama administration, and by extension, anyone who works in the private sector.  The Blue Dogs are already running scared, and the Republicans (thanks to the huge grassroots Tea Party movement) now have the momentum.  Every shred of reason in a person’s brain would be shouting, “Reverse course!  Steer to the middle!”  That’s what Clinton did.

But something tells me that this won’t happen with Barack Obama.  (I will eat my words if I must.)  Never, I don’t think, have we had as President such a complete and total narcissist.  Obama has placed all his chips on healthcare reform (with the full-blown, statist power and control that would come with it), and to scrap it now would irreparably damage his ego, and he knows it.  Govt. run healthcare is the easiest and best way for him to implement his statist goals for this country, and he will cling to it for as long as he is able.   It goes beyond saving face for him; it is a matter of self-preservation.

But for now, let’s all bask in the glow of this huge victory of liberty over tyranny.  Thank you, people of Massachusetts.

UPDATE:  A simply devastating rebuttal to the David Brooks’ of the world.  A must-read.  (It’s quite short and to the point.)

UPDATE 2:  Here’s a good post-election analysis, courtesy of Ed Morrissey.

December 20, 2009

Ben “Dover” Nelson

Filed under: health care,politics — by lindyborer @ 8:58 am
Tags: , , , , ,

Lone Senate healthcare holdout Ben Nelson of NE, (that’s my state) has sold out the 67% of Nebraskans who strongly oppose govt. run healthcare by signing on for cloture.  Every man has his price, and it looks like Ben is joining Mary Landrieu in accepting a huge chunk of change in exchange for a gigantic pile of crap.  Thanks, Ben.  Oh, and by the way, you’re history.  Nebraskans will not forget this next election. 

The worst part?  The abortion language can easily be overturned by Congress should they fail to renew the Hyde amendment for just one year.  (The Hyde Amendment, you’ll recall, prohibits federal funding of abortions.)  Bart Stupak vows he’ll fight for the same wording as in the House bill, but I’m growing ever more cynical.  I’m sure Reid’s coming up with another huge windfall for MI as I write. 

An interesting proposition I’ve seen a few other places:  How stupid do the other on-board Democrat senators feel for not holding out for large amounts of money for their respective states?

December 10, 2009

Right analogy, wrong application, Mr. Reid

Filed under: health care,politics — by lindyborer @ 11:26 am
Tags: , , , ,

GOP opposition to ObamaCare is not like supporting slavery in the 19th century, as Mr. Reid contends.  (Those were, after all, Democrats.) 

Rather, it’s about opposition to being enslaved by the federal government, who would have the ability to control every aspect of our lives should nationalized healthcare become a reality. 

Another gem from editorial cartoonish Michael Ramirez, who once again captures the truth of the matter perfectly:

September 11, 2009

Common sense questions on healthcare

Some common sense questions for Barack Obama (via and Gateway Pundit):

President Barack Obama: “Our collective failure to meet this challenge – year after year, decade after decade – has led us to the breaking point.”
Common Sense Question: If we are at the “breaking point,” then why doesn’t your government-run insurance plan start until 2013?

President Barack Obama: “There are now 30 million American citizens who cannot get coverage.”
Common Sense Question: On August 20, you said 46 million Americans were uninsured. What happened to 16 million Americans?

President Barack Obama: “And every day, 14,000 Americans lose their coverage.”
Common Sense Question: Does that mean 15 million Americans will lose their health care before your government plan starts in 2013?

President Barack Obama: “We spend one and a half times more per person on health care than any other country, but we aren’t any healthier for it.”
Common Sense Question: Then why do people travel from around the world to receive health care in the United States?

President Barack Obama: “Put simply, our health care problem is our deficit problem. Nothing else even comes close.”
Common Sense Question: Didn’t the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office say that the health care plan you have endorsed will add $239 billion to our annual deficits over the next ten years?

President Barack Obama: “Reducing the waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid will pay for most of this plan.”
Common Sense Question: If we can pay for “most” of health care reform by controlling waste and inefficiency, then why does a $900 billion health care plan include $820 billion in tax increases?

President Barack Obama: “…no federal dollars will be used to fund abortion.”
Common Sense Question: Do you object to House Democrats defeating an amendment in the House Energy and Commerce Committee markup that would have explicitly prohibited federal funding of abortion under a government-run health care plan?

President Barack Obama: “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits – either now or in the future.”
Common Sense Question: Do you oppose the House Democrat health care plan, H.R. 3200, which the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office said will add $239 billion to our annual deficits over the next ten years and “would probably generate substantial increases in federal budget deficits” thereafter? If so, which Democrat plan are you going to support?

President Barack Obama: “Reducing the waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid will pay for most of this plan…the plan I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over the next 10 years…”
Common Sense Question: If there is so much “waste and inefficiency” in Medicare and Medicaid – two government-run health care plans – then won’t further government involvement in health care lead to further “waste and inefficiency”?

President Barack Obama: “And I will continue to seek common ground in the weeks ahead. If you come to me with a serious set of proposals, I will be there to listen.”
Common Sense Question: Will you agree to meet with House Republican leaders to discuss health care reform, as they requested almost four months ago?

August 14, 2009

Sarah Palin: taking no prisoners, UPDATED


Ridiculed for her critique on Obamacare and for using the phrase “death panels” in describing section 1233 of House Bill 3200, it appears that her criticism was well-founded.  Yesterday section 1233, which authorized end-of-life counseling for elderly patients, was stripped from the bill by the Senate Finance Committee.  

Dr. Ezekial Emanuel (brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel) loudly criticized Palin for her words and denied section 1233 existed.  Palin said on her Facebook page:

The rationing system proposed by one of President Obama’s key health care advisors is particularly disturbing. I’m speaking of the “Complete Lives System” advocated by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the president’s chief of staff. President Obama has not yet stated any opposition to the “Complete Lives System,” a system which, if enacted, would refuse to allocate medical resources to the elderly, the infirm, and the disabled who have less economic potential. [1] Why the silence from the president on this aspect of his nationalization of health care? Does he agree with the “Complete Lives System”? If not, then why is Dr. Emanuel his policy advisor? What is he advising the president on? I just learned that Dr. Emanuel is now distancing himself from his own work and claiming that his “thinking has evolved” on the question of rationing care to benefit the strong and deny the weak. [2] How convenient that he disavowed his own work only after the nature of his scholarship was revealed to the public at large.


Kudos to Palin, and the general public for being so informed on what is actually in the health care bills and for not allowing themselves to be silenced by the bullies.  Democracy in action is a beautiful thing.

It doesn’t strike me as a particularly “good idea” to allow a government panel of bureaucrats–whose main stated purpose in this instance is to cut costs–to counsel Grandma on her end-of-life decisions.  It strikes me as a conflict of interest; and, as Obama himself stated, wouldn’t she just be better off taking the pain medicine?  Pain meds are considerably cheaper than life-saving surgery, to be sure. 

I call it a bad idea. 


Guiliani agrees.

The mainstream, state-run media is continuing their quest to portray the Americans showing up at townhalls with their questions and concerns about the healthcare bills as fringe, swastika-wearing, racist mobs.  In light of this, I–for once in my life–agree with something Hillary Clinton has said:

The hysteria by the leftist media is hilarious, especially considering the fact that they made a movie that advocated the assassination of Bush, among many actually documented instances of leftists carrying Bush=Hitler signs decorated with swastikas.  The hypocrisy is palpable.  Oh, how they forget…

The media is also busily blaming Rush Limbaugh for, well, everything, but amazingly fail to recall that it was Ms. Nancy Pelosi who first compared the townhall protestors to Nazis.  This was last week.

A must-read article:  Nazis for Me, but Not for Thee

An excerpt:

[In responding to Pelosi’s statement, Rush] repeatedly and explicitly qualified that no one was saying Obama was Hitler, that Pelosi was Goebbels, or that the Democrats were engaged in the genocidal barbarity of the Third Reich. The comparison he drew was a substantive one: between the Democrats’ proposal for socialized medicine and the German installation of socialized medicine beginning with Bismarck and reaching its shocking apotheosis with Hitler’s National Socialism. (A transcript of what he actually contended is here, and his website has other relevant transcripts, since the argument was reiterated other times during the week.) The point was to show that if Pelosi wanted to engage in Nazi comparisons, the health-care policies of Nazi Germany had far more in common with the health-care policies of the Democrats than with those of the conservative opposition, which wants health care kept private and reforms to be market-based.


August 8, 2009

“Keep doing what you’re doing”

Filed under: health care,politics — by lindyborer @ 3:34 pm
Tags: , , ,

Two Obamas, one speech

Filed under: health care,politics — by lindyborer @ 8:59 am
Tags: ,

Completely unbelievable.

It’s quite short, only two minutes.  I say this because I generally cannot stomach listening to even short clips of Obama’s hypnotic, lilting speech patterns and continual, disingenuous rhetoric.  But this really has to be seen to be believed.

Commentary from Allahpundit:

This clip really is exactly as advertised, showcasing both the myth of Obama that the media’s happily carried forth and the reality of what kind of politician he is when his agenda’s threatened. Amazing that with his approval rating slipping and anger getting hotter every day, he’d still feel confident enough to contradict himself this blatantly in the same speech.

Message to the opposition:  Shut up and get out of the way.  Thugocracy.

August 5, 2009

A round-up

Filed under: health care,politics — by lindyborer @ 9:04 am
Tags: , , , ,

There’s been so much in the news to blog about of late, and owing to my blogcation, I really don’t know quite where to start.  How about Obama’s “non-quest” for socialist healthcare.  I cannot sugarcoat this; Obama is plainly lying about  his end goal for healthcare.  Of course, the White House issued a statement yesterday, claiming that his comments are being isolated and taken out of context, but I really can’t see how this is taken out of context:

Or, especially, this:

Cherry-picking, indeed.

As Hot Air’s Allahpundit said:

Turns out the same guy who became a tax-cuttin’, traditional-marriage-supportin’ centrist just in time for last year’s election was also a fan of socialized medicine back in the day, before he needed independents to win the office he was after. Who knew?

And blue-dogs are in the hot seat as they return to their districts for various townhalls on healthcare for the August recess.  They are being asked excellent and informed questions by an angry and fed-up public, which they either cannot or do not answer forthrightly.  Keep it coming, I say. 

Here are some questions you can ask, if you so desire.

Of course, liberals are claiming “mob rule,” of which Michelle Malkin responds:  THIS is what mob rule looks like.  A timely reminder for them, I say. 

And I’m sure you may have seen this Obama/Joker poster floating around the internet lately:


There are the usual hysterical cries of racism (?), but as Drudge gently pointed out, Vanity Fair did the exact same thing to Bush a year ago.  Oh, the hypocrisy!  (I must say, though, that the artist’s rendering of Obama to the joker is of a much higher order artistically than the Bush one.  IMO.) 

And, perhaps most astonishingly, the White House is actually asking for snitches:  Anyone who might be making “fishy statements” about Obamacare, either via email or in “casual conversation”, should be reported to at once.  This falls into the category of “You just can’t make this stuff up.”  I actually heard of this first through an incoming link to my own dear old blog (you can see it at the top of the comments section on the right).  Perhaps I’m now officially on a watch list.  Seeing as I haven’t done anything wrong, I believe I’ll simply raise my middle finger in a brazen virtual salute to proponents of such thuggery.  

Call me crazy, but isn’t it a little disturbing for the White House to be calling for informants?  What is this?  Statist East Germany? 

Here is a PDF/screenshot of the White House page.  As to the “facts?”  Read the damn bill, morons!  The questions people are asking come complete with citations from the very bill these representatives have apparently not read.  Unbelievable.

Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at