Paul Ryan actually has a plan to save Medicare. And he explains it on the interwebs with colorful graphs.

Everybody seems to realize that Medicare is driving our economy into the ground long-term.  Few seem to have the guts to tackle it though.  Paul Ryan has taken up the mantle of being the only adult in the room, and has actually provided a detailed plan that works. Except he’s losing the messaging battle.  The Dems have convinced America that Ryan’s plan amounts to throwing granny off of a cliff.  It doesn’t though…in fact, it doesn’t affect Medicare benefits to anyone 55 or over at all.

The problem with Ryan’s plan: it involves too many numbers.  As such, Americans are falling asleep, only to be awakened to the sound of lefties yelling about grand-dad being left to die alone in the dark somewhere…while surrounded by lots of laughing-and evil-oil executives.  Fortunately, Ryan has realized the nature of Americans, and created a video with handy graphics.  I’ve embedded it below.  After you’ve watched it, and reviewed your copious notes, you can educate your parents and grandparents.

Government to ban religion in effort to stop obesity

In case you didn't already know, this is not healthy.

Two recent articles have popped up in the news these past couple of days about fat people and the government’s continuing effort to try and educate them on the reasons they’re fat.  The articles also reveal the government’s continued effort to both waste my money and annoy me at the same time.  The most alarming part of the articles, however, is the obvious implication for religious folks. 

Yesterday, the LA Times provided everyone with yet another example of the FDA having way too much time on its hands. 

The nation’s cinema operators are fuming about proposed federal rules that could require them to disclose the calories in their concession food — including popcorn, a highly profitable item for theater chains.

Uh oh, now everyone is going to find out that their giant popcorn covered with salt and that liquid butter stuff is unhealthy.  Honestly, does anyone think popcorn isn’t bad for your health?  Anyone?  Hello?

‘If a movie theater is going to be serving people with 1,000-calorie tubs of popcorn, the least they could do is tell people about it,’ said Margo Wootan, director of nutrition policy at the Center [for Science in the Public Interest]. ‘Just because you happen to be doing something else while you’re eating doesn’t mean that those 1,000 calories won’t stop going to your waistline.’

No.  The only reason you would need to tell someone that they’re eating 1,000 calories is if there’s also a sign that says, “of course it’s low in calories.  it’s made from corn.”  And then it would be better to simply remove the sign. 

Oh, and what does “Happen to be doing something else” mean?  Unless we’re talking about one of those theaters in the not-so-nice part of town, I’m pretty sure that the ”something else” is limited to using your other hand to raise the Icee to your mouth, and then put it down again; and no one thinks that activity is going to keep those 1,000 calories from going to their waist.  Right?  Is this country really full of that many stupid people?  (Obviously a rhetorical question.  Afterall, some guy did actually convince a jury of his peers that he was completely unaware that inhaling smoke into his lungs for decades, while coughing, was a bad idea).

By the way, did you catch the insane profits movie theaters make on their popcorn?   

‘We sell a bucket of popcorn for about $6. Our cost in that $6 bucket of popcorn is about 15 cents or 20 cents. So if that cost doubles, it doesn’t really hurt me that much.’

Holy crap!  Liberals should stop whining about monopolies in the oil industry, and start whining about monopolies in the movie theater popcorn industry. 

Even more disturbing than the stupid calorie disclosure, however, is the government’s new-found obsession with fat people, and the effect it just might have on the religious folks out there.

[A]n unusual new study has found that people who regularly attend religious activities are 50 percent more likely to battle obesity by middle age.

Don’t panic (yet).  Scientists don’t know why religious people are more likely to add a spare tire (or two).  But they have their suspicions:

‘We don’t know why frequent religious participation is associated with development of obesity,’ said Matthew Feinstein, the study’s lead investigator and a fourth-year student at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. ‘It’s possible that getting together once a week and associating good works and happiness with eating unhealthy foods could lead to the development of habits that are associated with greater body weight and obesity.’

Stinkin’ happiness.  It looks like those cookies during fellowship are training our minds to associate happiness with eating high calorie treats.  Jeez, I wonder how much government funding that study received?  In any event, the reasoning seems a little less than air-tight.  However, I do have a message to all of my brothers and sisters: watch out, because the government is coming for your ham buns.

Feminist hopes Gosnell doesn’t put crimp on abortions.

Whenever something bad happens, it elicits all kinds of responses.  In the case of the butcher of Philadelphia, most of the response has been disgust.  There are always some, though, that are so severely tone deaf, that complete lunacy ensues.  Take lefty feminist Carol King (no, not that Carole King), for example.  Her response to Dr. Kermit Gosnell: Gee, I sure hope this doesn’t impact the right of women to have more abortions.

The fact is that existing laws limiting access to abortion created this horror. This is what happens when we deprive women of affordable and accessible reproductive health care. When we force poor women who want to terminate unwanted pregnancies to wait until they can raise enough money to pay for a legal procedure, we force their abortions later in the pregnancy. And we force them into the hands of disreputable clinics. Of course, that’s the goal of these restrictions – they want to make it as difficult and challenging for these women as they can. This is what happens when we marginalize women’s health.

Reading the foregoing paragraph made me wonder if I’d just been kicked in the head by a donkey.  There are so many things wrong (morally wrong that is) with Ms. King’s statements that I’m feeling a little woozy. 

This is what happens when we deprive women of affordable and accessible reproductive health care.

I’m sorry, what?  How much do condoms cost?  Ever been to a Planned Parenthood?   They hand birth control out like it’s candy.  How about your local public school?   Simply put, it’s difficult to conceive of making “reproductive health care” any more affordable and accessible than it currently is.  Oh yeah, one could always try not having sex.  That’s free.

When we force poor women who want to terminate unwanted pregnancies to wait until they can raise enough money to pay for a legal procedure, we force their abortions later in the pregnancy.

I wasn’t aware that we were “forcing” women to do anything with respect to abortion.  A woman doesn’t have to have an abortion.  She doesn’t even have to get pregnant.  And I’m not going to apologize for lacking one little bit of sympathy for anyone trying to terminate an “unwanted” pregnancy.  It’s pretty easy to not get pregnant. 

Now, this is the moment when my mother gives me one of those “not everything’s black and white” or “walk a mile in her shoes” nonsense.  Maybe on a different day.  But not today.  Not after reading this liberal, feminist drivel about a mass murderer being the natural result of not providing federal funding for abortions.  Carol King, and those like her, lower the collective I.Q. of this nation while, ironically, giving women everywhere a bad name. 

And she left her best for last.

We are watching the disintegration of a fundamental right–the right to choose whether and when to become mothers.

You should read that again, because that’s where we are in this conversation.  To the Carol King’s of the world, pregnancy has become similar to the common cold; an inconvenience that is simply acquired.  Newsflash: every woman has the right to choose whether and when to become mothers.  It’s called life-planning.  And it’s free. 

How many waivers will it take before Obamacare considered failure?

It seems everyone with any shwag is getting a waiver for Obamacare now-days.  What is a waiver from Obamacare you ask?  Well, in its effort to create awesome health care benefits out of pixie dust and rainbows, the new health care law compels  privately-owned insurance providers to give at least $2 million in annual benefits to insureds by 2013.  Well that sounds like a great idea!  Unlimited insurance benefits for all! 

It turns out that there’s a small problem with requiring companies to provide a certain level of coverage to all insureds though.  It’s called reality.  A company like McDonald’s, for example, provides some health benefits for its low-wage workers because the premiums aren’t terribly high…so it’s affordable.  Do you think $2 million a year is going to be affordable?  Probably not.  Hence the waivers.

The waivers allow health insurance plans to limit how much they will spend on a policy holder’s medical coverage for a given year. Under the new health care law, however, such annual limits are phased out by the year 2014. (Under HHS regulations, annual limits can be no less than $750,000 for 2011, no less than $1.25 million in 2012 and no less than $2 million in 2013.)

So far, 222 organizations have been granted waivers from having to comply with Obamacare.  The most recent: three local chapters of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).  No, this isn’t about unions per se.  Fact it, lots of large companies and charitable organizations have been issued waivers.  The purpose of this post is to simply inquire into whether Obamacare can be defined as a good thing if no one can afford to comply with it (I know, this question often vexes liberals)?

Let’s face it…the new health care law is an entitlement program whose purpose is to provide good healthcare, at a cheap cost, to those deemed most at risk.  Unfortunately, good healthcare at a cheap cost doesn’t exist in the real world.  So, what needs to happen?  Well, first, the big political donors need to be satiated.  Hence specifically exempting them from the law.  Second, those low-wage employees of the big political donors will need to be subsidized in some way by the government.  Why?  Because if Obamacare results in janitors not receiving the same annual insurance limits of everyone else, even the libs will admit failure.

You see, there is no such thing as a free lunch.  A company can’t survive by offering cadillac plans to everyone, and not charging appropriate premiums to everyone.  An insurance provider can’t afford to offer  insurance to someone with heart disease who smokes five packs a day, while only requiring the premium of a healthier person.  But the government doesn’t exist in the real world, and that’s why the end result of Obamacare will be a lack of private insurance providers offering benefits to everyone else. 

But that’s the point, isn’t it?

 

Honesty is the best policy. Unless you’re a communist

No doubt about it…honesty is the best policy.  Thus, we should all give Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius a healthy pat on the back after she said this:

‘Simply stated, we will not stand idly by as insurers blame their premium hikes and increased profits on the requirement that they provide consumers with basic protections,’ Sebelius said. She warned that bad actors may be excluded from new health insurance markets that will open in 2014 under the law. They’d lose out on a big pool of customers, as many as 30 million people nationwide.

While her honesty is refreshing, her message is not.  In fact, her message is something we could expect to hear in Cuba.  “Hey private insurance companies…if you criticize obamacare, I’ll make damn sure you go out of business faster than the other insurance companies.” 

And what is the insurance industry’s response to Ms. Sebelius’ outburst:

‘Health insurance premiums are increasing because of soaring prices for medical services, the impact of younger and healthier people dropping their insurance during the weak economy, and additional benefits required under the new law,’ said Karen Ignagni, president of the insurers’ trade group. ‘It’s a basic law of economics that additional benefits incur additional costs.’

Hold the phone!  More services cost more money?  What?  I’m not sure I understand.  In Obama-land, everyone will get all the state-of-the-art healthcare they want for free!  And while they’re getting their totally bad ass healthcare that’s free, they’ll also get to tickle a govt-issued leprechaun until he craps gold coins.

Yes, ladies and gentleman, these are the people who our president has selected to run our government.  They threaten private businesses that have the nerve to criticize the government, while at the same time, not understanding the concept of stuff=money.  Even my daughter knows that the Barbie with the makeup mirror and strawberry-scented poodle costs more than the Barbie a la carte.  This confusion is a prime example of why people who spend too much time in government become quite similar to those who have undergone a frontal labotomy.  Just sayin’

Even the Feds admit Obamacare will increase costs.

That thud you hear is yet another obamacare fantasy falling to earth.  This time it comes with fancy charts, courtesy of the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, via the Wall Street Journal:

 

What’s fun about about this thud is that it directly refutes the primary justification for Obamacare: to cut the rising costs of medical care.  Not only does it not cut costs, it’s projected to increase them!  And it isn’t just those with private insurance that it affects either.  As you can see, everyone’s costs will go up.  The only exception is medicare, and that’s only because the feds are going to under-reimburse doctors for their services (which sounds like a great way to secure quality care).  And keep in mind, this isn’t a Wall Street Journal study; it’s a federal government study. 

The dems are right about one thing: Obamacare will certainly go down in history. 

Govt. Healthcare Rules: VA Hospital Possibly Infects 1800 with HIV.

It appears that a Missouri Veterans Administration Hospital may have inadvertently exposed 1800 veterans to HIV and Hepatitis.

John Cochran VA Medical Center in St. Louis has recently mailed letters to 1,812 veterans telling them they could contract hepatitis B, hepatitis C and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) after visiting the medical center for dental work, said Rep. Russ Carnahan.

This post isn’t about the abhorrent manner in which we treat our veterans; that’s a separate post for another day.  This is about providing a snapshot of the inevitable result of Obamacare.  Government price-fixing and healthcare rationing, both of which are either contained in, or are the logical result of, the recently-passed healthcare law, will destroy the private healthcare industry.  Eventually, the government will be providing healthcare to everyone, just like it does to veterans.

Simply put, if the law isn’t repealed, or at least significantly amended, we should all be prepared for substandard healthcare.

Obama to fix health insurance prices

Facing health insurance premium hikes, Obama administration eyes price controls

In news that should surprise no one, and concern everyone, the Obama Administration is looking at controlling the cost of health insurance by fixing prices.

Backing up his rhetoric behind the scenes, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is quietly working on a new regulation to determine when insurance price increases are “unreasonable” and potentially prohibited by law.

The part that continues to confuse me is the implication that this price-fixing idea is new.  It’s not.  It was in the bill.  Even if you didn’t read the bill however, the fact that price controls were going to be necessary isn’t rocket-science.  If health insurance is going to be made “affordable” for everyone, then it had better be cheap.  And if it’s going to be “fair,” then everyone had better be receiving the same level of care.

Of course, price fixing isn’t the same as cost fixing, so Obama’s grand scheme will ultimately come true: private insurers will go out of business.  Why?  Because the cost of a MRI won’t change, while the money insurance companies can charge customers will.  Without private insurance, we all get to run into the waiting arms of the government.

Look, at the end of the day, we’ll all get the same crappy healthcare if Barry isn’t stopped.  Why?  Because smart people aren’t going to sit through the amount of school that doctors need to sit through, and incur significant loans, to be paid like an employee at the DMV.   Rationing will thus be necessary.

And for all of you out there who want give me the, “but we’re the only country in the industrialized world without nationalized healthcare” meme, save it.  If nationalized healthcare is so great, why do those with the means come here when they get really sick?  Just as an aside, we’re also the only industrialized country (well, except Canada) that doesn’t riot because we tied during the World Cup (well, maybe L.A. would).

HHS spokeswoman Jessica Santillo said under the health care law “insurers will be required to publicly justify the kind of unreasonable rate increases that have made coverage unaffordable for so many American families.  Reviewing rate increases will go a long way toward ensuring that consumers finally get the value they deserve for their premium dollar and this new transparency in the health insurance market will encourage insurers to do more to control health care costs.”

Awesome.  This is all about the government helping American Families.  What a bunch of liberal b.s.  There won’t be any justification for rate increases that satisfies the HHS.  Thus, all rate increases will be denied.  Thus, private insurers will go out of business.  And the proof?  The whole damn thing is based Massachusetts’ health care plan.  How are private insurers doing in Mass?

Massachusetts was forced to put three insurance companies under oversight due to concerns about their financial health.

You can’t tell a company they can only charge $5.00 for procedure X, when it still costs them $10.00.  To quote our esteemed president, “it’s not sustainable.”

I’m shocked, SHOCKED to learn that Obamacare will suck.

BREAKING NEWS!  In what has to be the “we told you so” news of the decade, it appears that everyone will likely lose their private healthcare plan under Obamacare.  Also, the unelected Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, will get to use her swarm of unelected bureaucrats to determine what coverage we all get.  I can hear it now: “I don’t understand…how could this have happened?  Obama said we could keep our plan if we like it?!  I feel like someone killed a kitten.”  As the reader should be able to recognize by now, the only thing that irritates me more than this apparent revelation is the fact that IT’S NOT ACTUALLY BREAKING NEWS!!!!!

"I will not always believe Barry."

Hey New York Post, and every other complete and utter MORON who thought Obamacare was good for one, some, or all of the following reasons:

1.  It will insure everyone, and that’s “fair;”

2. It will only raise taxes on those mean rich people;

3. Hey, we’re the only industrialized nation without single payer;

4. It’s better than the status quo;

5. There really is such a thing as a free lunch when the govt. pays for it; and/or

6. See No. 2…

…if you had pulled your head out of your People Magazine for literally two seconds during the healthcare debate, you would have realized that Obamacare actually required Health and Human Services to determine what type of insurance had to be provided to everybody, and at what cost.

Indeed, the draft regs envision more than half of all policies having to change within three years — an unmistakable break with President’s Obama’s oft-repeated promise, “If people like their insurance, they will be able to keep it.”

By now, I would hope that everyone would simply accept that what Obama says is true only if, by “true,” you mean the exact opposite.  His “oft-repeated promise” doesn’t really matter when (a) he didn’t write (or read) the bill; and (b) the bill signed into law actually says the only plans that can be offered by private insurers must be approved by the government and must only cost what the government says they can cost.  That’s what’s called nationalizing insurance companies without the government actually taking them over.

One must always view Obama’s domestic policies through the prism of Obama.  With respect to healthcare, Barry repeatedly told supporters both before and during his campaign that he supported a single-payer system.  Those that crafted the final bill–pelosi, reid, frank, etc.–have all said the same thing at one time or another.  Finally, they’ve all admitted that the goal of the bill was to eventually get to single payer.  There’s only one way that’s going to happen in this country: find some way to force private insurance companies out of business.  How does that happen?  Tell them they have to provide a fantastic insurance plan to every man, woman, and child, while telling them they can’t charge for it.

I have adult ADHD…but only when i’m doing stuff that sucks

Quiz: Do You Have Adult ADHD?

Thanks to a quiz at Health.com, which I’ve linked above, I now realize why I’m so bored and/or distracted at work…I have adult ADHD!  I took the quiz and scored off the chart.  Now when the boss asks why I’m constantly playing Bejeweled Blitz at work, I can provide him with a totally legit medical diagnosis.  Fortunately, there wasn’t a category for “how long can you sit around playing xbox” or “how often do you get distracted while watching football.”  That would have totally ruined my score.