ObamAlinsky (Political Satire/Commentary at PoliSat.Com)

August 7, 2009 installment July 17, 2009 installment

Meet the Mob Opposing ObamaCare; Meet the Mob Supporting ObamaCare and Meet Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi-- Oops, last clause is redundant.·

By Jim Wrenn,
Editor and Washington Bureau Drawer Chief at PoliSat.Com.
August 7, 2009--

Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are characterizing those who appear at "town hall" meetings to oppose ObamaCare as a "mob." Fortunately, thanks to the internet and the few elements of the media not completely "in the tank" for Obama), it's easy for American citizens to "meet the mob opposing ObamaCare."

It's also relatively easy to "Meet the Mob supporting ObamaCare"-- in fact, it's as easy as meeting Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, ACORN, SEIU, and the other "community organized" street thugs because they're all one and the same. How ironic that the real "mob" originated in Chicago, where, many decades later it morphed into the AlinskyMob before morphing again into the ObamaMob.

From that small segment of the news media not completely "in the tank" for Obama and ObamaCare comes a refreshingly informative interview with someone the ObamaMob calls a "Republican Operative." No doubt the rest of the media strongly dissent, but they can't stop other voices from being heard.

Furthermore, just as Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have launched the "Harry & Nancy" attack on all who oppose ObamaCare as being a "mob" or "right-wing extremists," a new health-care slogan emerges: "Buy American-- Don't Buy ObamaCare." This new campaign is putting "Harry & Nancy" as well as Dr. Obama in a state of panic.

And, as will be shown in a soon-to-be-released video, "Stripping Away Health Care Myths," the opposition to ObamaCare has exploded not because of "misinformation" against it by right-wingers but rather as a result of too many Americans learning the contents of the proposal which the vast majority of proponents in Congress haven't even read yet. Thus, it appears that the once seemingly unstoppable juggernaut for ObamaCare is on the verge of being cut-off at the knees.

. Indeed, a visit to the OB-Gyn exposes obfuscation of ObamaCare proposals for government-plan pre-emption of private health-care plans or insurance consistent with Barack Obama's July 21, 2009, admission that he's "not familiar" with key provisions of the plan he, Pelosi and Reid want to have enacted before the August, 2009, Congressional recess. Some sources indicate the legislative proposals for ObamaCare may be on the verge of reaching critical mass before the August recess despite "conventional wisdom" that Pelosi and Reid don't have the votes to enact it before then. Scroll down for video of a visit to the OB-Gyn exposing such obfuscation.

Despite the attempts at obfuscation, there are sources for accurate information about the status, intended effects and likely effects of proposals for ObamaCare. Among the more ridiculous aspects of the current debate over "reforming" our "health care system" is the left's mantra that one of the greatest needs is to "eliminate" exclusion of "pre-existing conditions." No one seems to be willing to counter this argument by pointing out that the problem of "pre-existing conditions" was created by the government's enactment of legislation decades ago in the form of social engineering though manipulation of the income-tax laws to discourage individuals from acquiring and maintaining their own medical-care insurance by incentivizing employers to provide health-care coverage to their employees. That's what caused the "pre-existing condition" problem in the first place-- i.e., when an employee changes from one job to another, the new insurer quite naturally doesn't want to insure a "pre-existing condition."

If the government were to have left the free market alone decades ago, competition would have generated availability of affordable medical insurance marketed to individuals as their own policies, under which circumstances an individual's change of employment would have no effect on such individual's medical insurance coverage. Are there current proposals to remedy this problem? Of course there are.

About Archives (Old Archives) Contact Search PoliticalxRay/PoliSat.Com News Troops

·View wmv version at PoliSat.Com/ObamaCareOBGynVisit-wmvHQL.htm·

Currently, too little attention is being paid to free-market proposals for transitioning to such a system under which each individual employee would become the "owner" of any insurance coverage currently being provided by an employer with the funds being paid by the employer being deemed funds owned by the employee and with income-tax laws adjustments to exclude such funds from taxable income (but sensibly treating the employer's payment of same as deductible just as any other form of income paid by an employer to an employee is deductible from the employer's gross income).

Why are none in the media focusing on such common-sense proposals? Could it be that the dominant media has a "dog in the race" in that the dominant media is as ideologically in favor of "government" health care (single-payer) as are Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest of the leftists in Congress. No wonder the dominant media don't want to shed light on common-sense proposals?

What should voters do? They should instruct their representatives and senators to "take a deep breath" and defer consideration of proposals for "health care reform" until after the 2010 elections. By then, enough people would have had enough time to read the thousands of pages in the current proposals to understand that they don't want anything remotely like what Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and the rest of the leftists in congress are currently attempting to ram down the country's throat.

--Jim Wrenn, Editor at PoliSat.Com.

Permanent links to this installment:

--Jim Wrenn, Editor at PoliSat.Com.

Permanent links to this installment:

http://polisat.com/DailyPoliticalSatire-Commentary/Archives2009/du20y09m08d07-01.htm

http://PoliSat.Com/BuyAmerican--Don'tBuyObamaCare.htm.

http://PoliSat.Com/ObamaCare.htm .

http://polisat.com/DailyPoliticalSatire-Commentary/Archives2009/du20y09m07d29-01.htm

Obama's political ideology stands at war with the "new mindset" for family values and personal responsibility he espouses to NAACP..·

By Jim Wrenn,
Editor and Washington Bureau Drawer Chief at PoliSat.Com.
July 17, 2009--

If Obama were ~~able~~ willing to apply to his own political ideology generally the "new mindset" he recommended to the NAACP on July 16, 2009 as excerpted in the CNN video below, he would be a limited-government "conservative" instead of a collectivist. He thus could become a great president rather than one attempting to drive the nation pedal-to-the-metal over the edge of the free-market/personal-liberty plateau and into the bottomless pit of collectivism.

But, of course, he's unwilling to do so. No doubt he's intellectually capable of recognizing the patent disconnect between the "new mindset" he recommends to the NAACP and his own leftist/collectivist/statist/socialist political ideology that he also naively applies internationally as Jimmy Carter on ~~steroids~~ melanin. Nevertheless, instead of embracing the limited-government principles inherent in, and intrinsic to, the "new mindset" he recommends in his July 16, 2009 speech to the NAACP, he embraces and seeks to implement a "redistribution of wealth" political philosophy in all three branches of government -- legislative, judicial and executive-- as though it were a benevolent philosophy rather than an inherently totalitarian ideology.

Since one can't reasonably doubt that he understands such disconnect, how can one explain his embrace of a political ideology that is virtually antithetical to the "new mindset" he advocates to the NAACP? Even his staunchest critics would concede that barring some "Sanford-type" secret, Obama's handling of his marital and parental responsibilities admirably exemplify the "mindset" he recommends to others. What's so sad is that a leader who appears to personify loyalty to "family values" embraces a political ideology so plainly hostile to promotion and preservation of, and respect for, such values in the form of the free-market/personal-liberty paradigm that made the country he "inherited" from George W. Bush the greatest force for human liberty in all of human history.

What makes it tragic is that he's in the process of squandering that legacy in pursuit of what seems almost indistinguishable from the long-discredited 18th Century utopian philosophies which Marx later sought to describe, and prescribe, as a form of evolutionary "science." No wonder the person Obama selected as his "science" czar is a person whose political philosophy is at home in such 18th Century Utopian thought as it would be on Animal Farm or in a fascist or Stalinist or Maoist state.

--Jim Wrenn, Editor at WrennCom.Com; also Editor at PoliSat.Com.

Permanent link to this installment:

http://wrenncom.com/CommentaryArchives/2009/20y09m07d17-01.asp

--Jim Wrenn, Editor at PoliSat.Com.

Permanent links to this installment:

http://polisat.com/DailyPoliticalSatire-Commentary/Archives2009/du20y09m07d`7-01.htm

.http://PoliSat.Com/ObamAlinsky.htm.

MotionBoxVideo 416x312 (or use x)

·EMBEDDING THIS VIDEO·

·To support this video's creator, use "embed" link below·

·Embed this MotionBox version of

"Victory By Any Other Name"