Tag: healthcare

The Single Payer Con

So yesterday, Bernie Sanders introduced his “Medicare for All” proposal. Single payer has suddenly become chic in Democratic circles with all of the 2020 hopefuls jumping on board. Because, apparently, the lesson they learned from 2016 was that they weren’t socialist enough.

I’m not going to get into the debate over single payer … ah, who am I kidding? I’ve written about it many times. Years ago, I wrote a post detailing why the claims that single payer would be more efficient were nonsense. It’s actually gotten worse since then. Medicare has tried to institute quality controls which have imposed billions in compliance costs on hospitals. Meanwhile, Medicare and Medicaid pay 80 cents and 60 cents on the dollar of what private insurers do. Switching to that would mean a lot of providers leaving the field. Which means fewer services and longer waits. It would also slow the pace of innovation, which I’ve previously identified as my biggest fear with regard to socialized medicine. I worry about the cures and miracle treatments we won’t get because our government controls the purse strings.

It would also put Congress in charge of deciding which medical procedures get covered and which don’t. This would not be based on any scientific evaluation but on politics. We’ve seen this already. Research has repeatedly shown that the guideline used for mammograms — every year or two after age 40 — is outdated. The new recommendation is that women get them every other year after age 50. The main reason is that mammography for low-risk women is more likely to result in unnecessary surgery than finding a cancer that wouldn’t be detected by other means. Congress, however, under intense pressure from women’s groups and mammography providers, overrode that decision. And this is not the first time they’ve done that.

Anyway, I don’t want to get too far into the weeds here because, in those two paragraphs above, I’ve already invested more thought into this than the Democrats have. Suderman

To call it a plan is, in some sense, too generous: Although it envisions a sweeping and generous system that would make government the primary payer for nearly all health care in the United States and virtually wipe out employer health coverage in the space of just a few years, it is not really a plan. Instead, it is a legislative fantasy built on a combination of wild overconfidence in government and an almost comical refusal to grapple with costs or trade-offs.

The likely outcome of such a transition would be massive, sustained chaos across the health care sector. Even if the chaos were somehow manageable, the easy access that Sanders promises would be swiftly undermined by service disruptions and other complications stemming from the changeover. In making his case, Sanders tends to ignore all of this. His plan exists in an imaginary world without economic tradeoffs or consequences.

Nowhere is this more obvious than in its promise of benefits. Sanders frequently argues that his preferred system would merely put the United States in line with other developed nations. On the contrary, it would go far beyond what other countries with single payer systems offer. The Sanders plan would offer a far greater array of benefits than Australia, the Netherlands, or Canada—a country that Sanders often uses as a comparison with the U.S., but where the majority of the population relies on supplementary private insurance to cover the gaps left by the government system. Many international single-payer systems also require some form of copayment from the individual seeking service; the Sanders plan would make all of its benefits available without any individual contribution.

Instead, it would be paid for entirely through tax increases. Which tax increases would those be? On who, and for how much? On these questions, the Sanders plan is silent.

This is the real tell in Sanders’ pitch. Although it is willing to imagine long lists of benefits in great detail, but it has essentially nothing to say about how to pay for them. It is a fantastical sales pitch for a luxury product with no price tag attached.

One can support universal healthcare. I’m somewhat neutral on it. But one has to acknowledge that it’s going to be expensive. You can not insure million of currently uninsured people and save money. We’ve been down this road before. For example, we were told that Obamacare would save money because people wouldn’t need to go the ER as often. But ER visits actually rose under Obamacare, as anyone with two brain cells to rub together could have predicted. When healthcare is cheap, people use more of it. As P.J. O’Rourke famously quipped, if you think healthcare is expensive now, just wait to see how much it costs when it’s free.

The Democratic “plan” doesn’t grapple with this at all. It says nothing about controlling costs or how to pay for all this. It’s just a collection of vague promises. In this sense, it’s way worse than the Trumpcare fiasco which, for all its massive flaws, at least acknowledged the tradeoffs.

To be fair to Sanders, specifically, he actually does have a plan to pay for this. He just couldn’t get any of his fellow Democrats to sign on if it was included. And it’s easy to see why. Here are the details on it. It includes an 11.5% payroll tax, the elimination of tax breaks for insurance, an income tax rate as high as 52%, capital gains taxed at income rates, a massive estate tax, a wealth tax, etc., etc. All told, the wealthiest Americans would be facing marginal tax rates of 82% — just for federal. With state and local taxes, marginal rates could exceed 100%.

Yeah, we once had 97% marginal tax rates. Very few, if any, people ever paid those rates. Bernie is almost certainly massively overestimating the revenue he’ll raise. Even with his rosy assumptions, analysts in 2016 estimated that he was many trillions of dollars short in paying for Medicare for all. In the end, as I’ve said many times, you can only pay for a welfare state with heavy taxes on the middle class. That’s how the European welfare states do it; that’s what we would have to do.

One last thing. The slogan of Bernie’s circus and of the Medicare-for-all movement is that healthcare is a “right”. This is straight garbage. You can not have a right to things. You can not have a right to people’s labor. Real rights — like freedom of speech — are unlimited. When I exercise my right to free speech, that does not preclude you from exercising yours. But if I exercise my right to healthcare, that may take it away from someone else. Doctors can only treat so many patients. There are only so many organs to go around. Yes, our healthcare system grows. But at any one moment, those resources are limited. If there’s only one heart available for transplant, which patient gets it? Who has the “right” to it?

That’s not necessarily an argument against universal healthcare. No one has a “right” to food, but we can make sure people don’t starve because we are a wealthy and generous nation. No one has a “right” to housing, but we can keep people off the streets because we are a wealthy and generous nation. That may sound like hair splitting, but it’s an important hair to split. Because the minute you decide people have a “right” to healthcare, you change the shape of the debate. It suddenly becomes a race to give away as much as possible and an effort to keep the hated evil rich from getting care that’s too good.

So apart from the Democrats having unveiled a comically incomplete plan that makes no hard choices and promises to plunge us into a bureaucratic nightmare and an orgy of spending while destroying a major industry … how did you like the play?

The Media Myth Cycle

For eight years, we heard a lot about how the anti-Obamaites were crazy. They believed crazy things, they said crazy things, they posted crazy things on social media. The fact-checkers were working overtime to stem the tide of BS.

Well, they had a point. There was a lot of garbage out there. But there was also a lot of legitimate concern about what Obama was doing and a lot of legitimate opposition to his polices.

Trump is in power now. And we’re seeing the same thing: legitimate concerns but a whole lot of BSery too. Only this time, the BS isn’t being called out. The latest was in the wake of the AHCA’s passage. Many many media outlets and liberals claimed that Republicans had made rape a pre-existing condition for denial of health insurance or claims. Elizabeth Nolan Brown — no Trump supporter she — actually looked into this.

Yeah, it’s garbage:

None of this is true. Like, not even a little bit. And the fact it’s not just being shared by shady social-media activists and their unwitting dupes but by ostensibly-legitimate media outlets is another sad indictment of press standards these days.

Nothing in the new Republican health care bill specifically addresses sexual assault or domestic violence whatsoever. What it does say is that states can apply for waivers that will allow insurance companies, under certain limited circumstances, to charge higher premiums to people based on their personal medical histories—that’s it. (States that are granted the waivers must also set up special high-risk insurance pools to try and help defray costs for these people.) Under Obamacare, no such price variances based on preexisting conditions are permitted.

So far, the only examples offered as evidence that such discrimination is common have fallen far short. In CNN’s story, a woman’s insurance application was rejected for unspecified reasons that she believes were related to her history of domestic abuse, though the insurance company didn’t actually provide any reason. She was able to get health coverage from another insurer not long after.

In the story getting much more attention, a woman who had been sexually assaulted was prescribed anti-HIV medication as a precaution. When she tried to apply for new insurance coverage not long after, her application was denied because of a company policy against insuring anyone who had been on the HIV medication recently. The insurers did not initially deny her claim because she was a rape victim—they weren’t even aware of that information at first, though she says she did later inform them. If anything, the company is guilty of not treating this woman differently based on her history of sexual assault.

Be sure to read the whole thing. Many people immediately denounced Brown as, in her words, a “lying libertarian harpy”. But all the major news outlets are now admitting — haha! — she’s right. Some have only backed down to saying, “well, the PTSD or anti-retrovirals used as treatment for rape could be a pre-existing condition”. That’s true, but that’s not specific to rape. PTSD or anti-HIV meds from any cause could be classified as a pre-existing condition, depending on what exactly the states do with pre-existing conditions.

In all honesty, the Democrats are doing a huge disservice to this country by focusing on pre-existing conditions. I don’t mean to downplay the pre-existing condition issue, but this is a small part of the problem of people being uninsured. Almost everyone with an employer plan or a government is not affected by this and that constitutes 90% of the insured. At its peak, Obama’s program for people with pre-existing conditions enrolled a little over 100,000 people. Most people who are uninsured are uninsured because they can’t afford it or because they choose to spend their money elsewhere, problems Obamacare addressed but not well.

Pre-existing conditions are important on an actuarial basis for insurance companies because some of these people can be among the most expensive to insure. My wife and I sometimes joke that we are mostly paid in anti-MS meds. This is one of the reasons the Republicans want to split the pre-existing into high-risk pools (albeit underfunded ones) because that’s a big driver of soaring health insurance premiums. But the Democrats are focusing on the wrong thing here. Of the millions the CBO thinks will lose coverage under AHCA, the vast majority will lose it because they will lose subsidies or Medicaid, not because of pre-existing conditions.

Look, I’m willing to debate healthcare all day. There are real debates to be had about whether people have a “right” to health insurance or whether we should have universal coverage or single payer or whatever. We could look at Singapore’s system, which relies heavily on private insurance. Or Australia’s system, which has a single-payer floor but where the government covers a similar percentage of healthcare cost as ours does. Or no system. Fine.

But that debate needs to on honest terms. And claiming that women will be denied insurance because of rape is not having the debate on honest terms. It’s trying to frighten millions of voters. Which, I guess, is why the Democrats love it so much. Because it covers up their lack of ideas.

Science Sunday: Why You Should Vaccinate, Part 457

One issue that I am fairly militant about is vaccination. Vaccines are arguably the greatest invention in human history. Vaccines made smallpox, a disease that slaughtered billions, extinct. Polio, which used to maim and kill millions, is on the brink of extinction. And earlier this week, Rubella became extinct in the Americas:

After 15 years of a widespread vaccination campaign with the MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) vaccine, the Pan American Health Organization and the World Health Organization announced yesterday that rubella no longer circulates in the Americas. The only way a person could catch it is if they are visiting another country or if it is imported into a North, Central or South American country.

Rubella, also known as German measles, was previously among a pregnant woman’s greatest fears. Although it’s generally a mild disease in children and young adults, the virus wreaks the most damage when a pregnant woman catches it because the virus can cross the placenta to the fetus, increasing the risk for congenital rubella syndrome.

Congenital rubella syndrome can cause miscarriage or stillbirth, but even the infants who survive are likely to have birth defects, heart problems, blindness, deafness, brain damage, bone and growth problems, intellectual disability or damage to the liver and spleen.

Rubella used to cause tens of thousands of miscarriages and birth defects every year. Now it too could be pushed to extinction.

Of course, many deadly diseases are now coming back thanks to people refusing to vaccinate their kids. There is an effort to blame this on “anti-government” sentiment. But while that plays role, the bigger role is by liberal parents who think vaccines cause autism (you’ll notice we’re getting outbreaks in California, not Alabama). As I’ve noted before, the original research that showed a link between vaccines and autism is now known to have been a fraud. This week, we got another even more proof:

On the heels of a measles outbreak in California fueled by vaccination fears that scientists call unfounded, another large study has shown no link between the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine and autism.

The study examined insurance claims for 96,000 U.S. children born between 2001 and 2007, and found that those who received MMR vaccine didn’t develop autism at a higher rate than unvaccinated children, according to results published Tuesday by the Journal of the American Medical Association, or JAMA. Even children who had older siblings with autism—a group considered at high risk for the disorder—didn’t have increased odds of developing autism after receiving the vaccine, compared with unvaccinated children with autistic older siblings.

96,000 kids — literally 8000 times the size of the sample Wakefield had. No study has ever reproduced Wakefield’s results. That’s because no study has been a complete fraud.

There’s something else, though. This issue became somewhat personal for me recently. My son, Hal 11000 Beta, came down with a bad cough, a high fever and vomiting. He was eventually admitted to the hospital for a couple of days with pneumonia, mainly to get rehydrated. He’s fine now and playing in the next room as I write this. But it was scary.

I mention this because one of the first questions the nurses and doctors asked us was, “Has he been vaccinated?”

My father, the surgeon, likes to say that medicine is as much art as science. You can know the textbooks by heart. But the early symptoms of serious diseases and not-so-serious one are often similar. An inflamed appendix can look like benign belly pain. Pneumonia can look like a cold. “Flu-like symptoms” can be the early phase of anything from a bad cold to ebola. But they mostly get it right because experience with sick people has honed their instincts. They might not be able to tell you why they know it’s not just a cold, but they can tell you (with Hal, the doctor’s instinct told him it wasn’t croup and he ordered a chest X-ray that spotted the pneumonia).

Most doctors today have never seen measles. Or mumps. Or rubella. Or polio. Or anything else we routinely vaccinate for. Thus, they haven’t built up the experience to recognize these conditions. Orac, the writer of the Respectful Insolence blog, told me of a sick child who had Hib. It was only recognized because an older doctor had seen it before.

When I told the doctors Hal had been vaccinated, their faces filled with relief. Because it meant that they didn’t have to think about a vast and unfamiliar terrain of diseases that are mostly eradicated. It wasn’t impossible that he would have a disease he was vaccinated against — vaccines aren’t 100%. But it was far less likely. They could narrow their focus on a much smaller array of possibilities.

Medicine is difficult. The human body doesn’t work like it does in a textbook. You don’t punch symptoms into a computer and come up with a diagnosis. Doctors and nurses are often struggling to figure out what’s wrong with a patient let alone how to treat it. Don’t cloud the waters even further by making them have to worry about diseases they’ve never seen before.

Vaccinate. Take part in the greatest triumph in human history. Not just to finally rid ourselves of these hideous diseases but to make life much easier when someone does get sick.

Video Monday: Takei and Hobby Lobby

I bookmarked these two video over the weekend. The first is a TED talk from George Takei. While I’m not fond of TED talks — they often cross me as smug and overly confident in their points — this one explains why George Takei still loves the country that interred him during the war:

(I’ve found this embed tends to hang. If someone has a better link, I’ll update the post.)

This comes close to my view of America. The United States, like all human institutions, is flawed and capable of doing awful things. But the principles on which our nation is founded are a beacon to humanity. And I would take the achievements of America, its role in the world and its history over any other nation on Earth. Takei’s story sounds familiar to me — and probably to many of you as well. Both of my paternal grandparents fled the “Jewish crescent” of Eastern Europe in the early 20th century. Despite the virulent anti-semitism they encountered — they vividly remembered the Leo Frank lynching — they still believed there was nowhere else in the world they would rather be.

The second I couldn’t resist. Takei is calling for a boycott of Hobby after the Supreme Court’s narrow decision last week. This completely useless gesture would accomplish little except making liberals feel better (how many liberals actually go to Hobby Lobby?) Reason, by contrast, proposes some changes to the law that would actually do some good:

The amazing thing about Obamacare is that many liberals believed — many still believe — that Obama “stood up” to the special interests and the healthcare industry. This could not be more false. He “stood up” to the insurance industry by forcing everyone to buy their product, outlawing the cheaper versions of their product and refusing to break the intra-state cartels. He “stood up” to healthcare providers by mandating coverage of expensive procedures and not even considering obvious cost-reducing measure like making birth control available over the counter.

All three of Reasons’s suggestions would be diametrically opposed by the healthcare industry lobbyists who wrote and campaigned for Obamacare. Insurance companies don’t want to offer cheap catastrophic plans. They certainly don’t want to compete across state lines. And providers don’t want more competition And so we can expect the liberal wing to “stand up for the little guy” by continuing to acquiesce to every demand of the industry they supposedly hate.

After healthcare, your savings, food, and security

I guess the best way to get everyone to want to keep around a failing government run Ponzi scheme, is to make any other kind of investment vehicle unattractive. Qeueue the idea that 401Ks should be taxed pre use. Not to mention that once government can raid them through taxes, they also find ways to justify doing what Europeans are talking about or doing to their private investment retirement vehicles – nationalizing these investment vehicles so the government can raid the big cash in them – with a lot more ease.

Just like with healthcare, if you make the system too top heavy, expensive, and unviable, you can get rid of it and have government run it all. It really isn’t a coincidence that they are going after these things. Between healthcare and private retirement vehicles, the government could grab control of trillions of new dollars. And after all, the plan is to control people through their access to this stuff. It is not a coincidence that they are also going after control of what you eat, either.

This is not accidental. And to make sure we all stay well behaved,
they are getting moar dronz! Luckily, some of us get what they are doing. If one was religious shit like this would frighten us. They are a cult.

Stimulus update

If it costs, on average and pulling it off the top of my head, over $600K per job created by the stimuluspatronage bill, then I guess nobody should be surprised that it also cost us tax payers $205,075 to ‘Translocate’ One Shrub from Path of Stimulus Project in glorious People’s Republic of San Fran, where Queen Pelosi reigns supreme:

(CNSNews.com) — The government spent at least $205,075 in 2010 to “translocate” a single bush in San Francisco that stood in the path of a $1.045-billion highway-renovation project that was partially funded by the economic stimulus legislation President Barack Obama signed in 2009.

“In October 2009, an ecologist identified a plant growing in a concrete-bound median strip along Doyle Drive in the Presidio as Arctostaphylos franciscana,” the U.S. Department of Interior reported in the Aug. 10, 2010 edition of the Federal Register. “The plant’s location was directly in the footprint of a roadway improvement project designed to upgrade the seismic and structural integrity of the south access to the Golden Gate Bridge.

“The translocation of the Arctostaphylos franciscana plant to an active native plant management area of the Presidio was accomplished, apparently successfully and according to plan, on January 23, 2010,” the Interior Department reported.

The bush—a Franciscan manzanita—was a specimen of a commercially cultivated species of shrub that can be purchased from nurseries for as little as $15.98 per plant. The particular plant in question, however, was discovered in the midst of the City of San Francisco, in the median strip of a highway, and was deemed to be the last example of the species in the “wild.”

Emphasis mine on that critical tidbit about how expensive the plant is to replace by just visiting your average Lowes or Home Depot. And yeah, this incredibly wise and noble decision comes courtesy of the same people that believe government should be running our healthcare. My bet is that given the choice between saving people or plants they will opt to save the plants, no matter the cost, over people, under Obamacare. What a freaking waste, but I am sure none of these tools can be bothered to get angry at this waste. After all, it’s not like it was the military that is all wasted money or something like that!

Think the LSM will report this nonsense? Link it to Obama and Pelosi as it should be? Yeah, me neither.

My Belly and Me

So, yeah, the last few days have been somewhat eventful. My gallbladder attacked me and I had to have a laparoscopic cholecystectomy to get it out. I’m home now, under 24 hours after the procedure, recovering nicely and perusing the last few days of Google Reader to see how stupid the Left has been while I was out (answer: very).

Just one thought I’d like to share:

And the more I think about it, the more I am amazed with modern medicine. A couple of centuries ago, my gallbladder would probably have led me to an agonizing death. A couple of decade ago, I would have had open surgery and spent weeks recovering. Now, four cuts and a day later, I’m home and should be recovered within a week or two.

When people ask me why I oppose socialized medicine, this is the reason. Medical science has advanced with incredible rapidity over the last few decades. And the century ahead is going to be filled with challenges, most notably the rise of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. I do think we can get the same innovation for less money. But I fear the heavy hand of government will retard if not end the kind of innovation that got my gallbladder out with comparatively little fuss.

Bastiat talked about what is seen and what is unseen. In the future, we may see a healthcare system that is “free” and treats us all equally. But what is unseen will be the new techniques and drugs that could have made our lives safer and healthier.

Obama economy made me do it!

This story is just too crazy to make up. here are the details.

COLUMBUS, Ga. (CBS Atlanta) — A former Columbus police officer admitted in court that he robbed a bank last year so he can get health benefits being in a federal prison. Edward Pascucci told U.S. District Court Judge Clay D. Land Thursday that he was facing “severe health problems” and homelessness when he decided to rob the Citizens Trust Bank last August, according to the Columbus Ledger-Enquirer.

“I didn’t want to be homeless,” Pascucci said, according to the paper. “I should not have manipulated the justice system, but I couldn’t think of any other way to get help.” The FBI said Pascucci walked out of the bank with more than $1,000, according to WTVM-TV. He was jobless for more than a year when the crime occurred. Pascucci – who served as a police officer for 15 years – was sentenced to five years and three months in prison.

Things are so bad you decide prison is a good alternative? And you used to be in law enforcement? In addition to pointing out how messed up things are, this whole thing tells me we should wonder if we coddle people in prison too much. Tax payer provided healthcare, three meals, roof over your head, and from what others say, sex too. Dang, and here I thought Obamacare was going to fix everything if we just passed it.

Government run Healthcare genius.

I am not at all surprised to find that the people that so love and want government controlled healthcare – because of those evil profit making insurance companies and their callous ways – would think this refusal to be genius and just:

A man from Nyköping in eastern Sweden has been denied a power wheelchair despite having had both of his legs amputated as the local health authority remained “uncertain if the impairment was permanent”. The man had his legs amputated after a long struggle with diabetes, but despite being unable get about, his application for a power wheelchair has been denied. “I was bitterly disappointed in the local authorities. I don’t feel I got the support I deserve,” Evert Stefansson told The Local. Evert Stefansson had struggled with his health for a long time. As a long-suffering diabetic his kidneys have taken a beating, as has his eyesight.

I would also not be surprised to find out that they refused him because they think he isn’t doing a good job dealing with his diabetic condition. It’s just as likely to be that as it is them callously calculating that he isn’t long for this world and a set of wheels would be wasted on him. Of course, it could also be that they think this guy has lizard DNA and will regrow his appendages or that he is slated to get bionic legs and thus not need them sweet wheels. Any way you cut it, it isn’t what they tell us it is going to be when the “right” people are in charge of this stuff.

Funny how the left wants “less democracy” when they are in power, huh?

Peter Orszag, one of those evil Wall Street types – he is Vice Chairman of Citigroup, one of the left’s biggest money bag operations -that once was the 37th director of the Office of Management and Budget, under President Barack Obama, has an article out in the New Republic where he is lamenting the evils of democracy, and all out pining for the bureaucratic aristocracy class to simply ignore the process and do what they feel is best. Here are his words:

So what to do? To solve the serious problems facing our country, we need to minimize the harm from legislative inertia by relying more on automatic policies and depoliticized commissions for certain policy decisions. In other words, radical as it sounds, we need to counter the gridlock of our political institutions by making them a bit less democratic.

Frankly, one of the things I like the most is gridlock. Whenever DC can’t agree on anything “We the people” are spared all sorts of horribly stupid, disastrously costly, massively freedom robbing, and oft time outright evil legislation – always cloaked with the mantle of that shafting being “well meaning”, “socially just”, or to protect some victimized group – from them. It is absolutely a rare occasion when these fools pass anything of real value for us the people.

I frankly wish we had had a lot more gridlock when these crooks rammed Obamacare down our throats, in a purely and partisan vote that had necessitated hundreds of billions in graft money, paid for by the US tax payer, to buy the necessary votes from members in their own party preceding it, followed by massive favoritism in the form of special exclusions for the big donors that then tried to avoid the disastrous government takeover of healthcare this bill was designed to bring forth. And let’s not forget the blatantly obvious bullshit that the OMB did when Orszag was there to pretend Obamacare would somehow actually reduce the cost of this massive entitlement. American tax payers are in dire straights already, but wait until this fisting rolls us over. I bet even democrats will wish they had failed to pass this shit sandwich.

And I remind you that it was gridlock that prevented the democrat controlled congress from doubling down on the stupid with “Cap & Tax”. Of course, people that feel like Orszag that democracy for the stupid little serfs is such a problem in getting things done and that our aristocratic political class should simply “do by committee what they feel is in the best interest of the country” – that’s in quotes to point out it is as a snark, because what they are really doing is what is in their best interests, first, second, third, anything in between, and even last – are now implementing what they found to politically unsound and costly to do in the legislature, to avoid the wrath of the US voter, by just such a committee at the EPA. And we all know how destructive it will be to our economy.

More important however is the way the left feels about this idea when the other side has power. If they really believed this whole “rule by committee instead of democracy” pap Orszag is now selling us, wouldn’t they be for it when the other side was in power too? History kind of shows us that’s absolutely and undoubtedly not the case. Remember the gyrations Bush went through to get anything? Yeah, I know the left now pretends these things never happened, but those of us that paid attention or do not suffer from the self induced amnesia the left suffers from when it comes to facts & truth, know better.

Beware these crooks. In the name of doing more for us they are yet again trying to fool us into giving up another set of freedoms and a key vehicle to prevent them from doing far greater harm than they have already inflicted on us, in a much faster timeframe, so they can rake us over the coals even harder. Do not worry much about Wall Street: fear the fucking government that tells you it wants to just steamroll its agenda even when it holds the majority of the engines of power but can not get its will done because the fucking peasants won’t shut up and let their betters do what will save the political class’ collective hide at the expense of the serfs. Fuck em all.

View Mobile Site