Friday, November 29, 2013

Mandatory Muslim Indoctrination at British School

How long before it happens here?

Get this. A letter to parents of eight year old children at one school in Britain threatened that if parents did not permit their child to attend a workshop highlighting the Muslim religion the following would happen:
Refusal to allow your child to attend this trip will result in a Racial Discrimination note being attached to your child’s education record, which will remain on this file throughout their school career.
Is it any wonder Europe is in such a mess with rampant Islamofascism?

Tell me again why Obama would have the U.S. be more like Europe?

A Reminder of True Leadership: 10 Years Ago, Bush's Secret Thanksgiving Visit to Troops in Iraq

What a contrast with the way things are now!

In November 2003 President George W. Bush took the extraordinary step of sneaking out of the country in secret to visit the troops in Iraq for Thanksgiving. Had the trip become known, Air Force One would have become a target for insurgents. The mission was top secret and a real nail biter. But it was worth it. When the President appeared at the Thanksgiving dinner for our troops the place went wild.

C Span has the video.

President Bush serves the troops Thanksgiving dinner in Iraq 2003.
In response to Bush's extraordinary effort the left accused him of parading around with a plastic, prop turkey. They're still doing it. I guess the iconic image of a real leader is too much for them to handle.

Sadly, all we get from Obama are hectoring, hyper partisan speeches with all the warmth of a slap in the face. What a contrast with a true leader and Commander in Chief who cares about ALL Americans, not just his political allies! Which President is the real plastic turkey?

If Wal Mart Can Handle Millions of Customers in a Black Friday Dash, Why Can't ObamaCare Web Site Handle More Than 5,000 Before Crashing?

The title says it all!

I would only add that ObamaCare has spent hundreds of millions and more on the way all for the most colossal dud in history.

Now team Obama is saying that the expected web site "fix" means 80% of people will be able to get through. How long do you think Wal Mart or any retailer would stay in business if it turned away 20% of it's customers?

The lesson here? Never underestimate the willingness of big government liberals to do the stupidest thing and then try and tell us how great it is!

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

If the Pilgrims Had ObamaCare They Would All Have Died!

I published this post a few years back but the damage Obama has wrought is even more apparent!

The Pilgrims learned early on that redistribution of wealth spreads only misery, poverty and hunger. What a shame that many refuse to learn that lesson!

Obama has spent the last months going around the country attacking millionaires and billionaires and demanding that the rich "pay their fair share." It's the classic class warfare politics designed to support Obama's socialist policy of redisributing the wealth. Remember what he told Joe the Plumber in Ohio in 2008 right before he had the Democrat hit squad investigate the man and leak his private records to the press? Obama told Joe that his plan was to "spread the wealth around."

Well three years later and we see what a mess that policy has made of our economy. The cost through unemployment and lost wages has been particularly hard on the lower income workers who Obama claimed to want to help.

So, in this time of Thanksgiving let's review the lesson from the first Thanksgiving:
PhotobucketWilliam Bradford was one of the leaders of that group of persons we call "The Pilgrims." They settled in what is now Massachusetts in 1620 after a long and perilous sea voyage. Bradford became Governor, a post in which he served off and on for over 30 years. He completed "History of Plymouth Plantation" in 1650 (text here).

The first months after their arrival half the Pilgrims died of disease, starvation or exposure to the elements. At first, they banded together to share the fruits of labor equally among themselves. Here's Bradford's report of the success of the collective "redistributive" approach:
The experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Plato's and other ancients applauded by some of later times; and that the taking away of property and bringing in community into a commonwealth would make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this community (so far as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For the young men, that were most able and fit for labor and service, did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children without any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals and clothes than he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalized in labors and victuals, clothes etc., with the meaner and younger sort, thought it some indignity and disrespect unto them. And for men's wives to be commanded to do service for other men, as dressing their meat, washing their clothes, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brook it.
Three years later "after much debate of things" they decided to try things differently and let everyone work the land for themselves:
This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means the Governor or any other could use, and saved him a great deal of trouble, and gave far better content. The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression.
The lesson here: socialist "redistributive" policies "breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment." Labor free to reap it's own reward provides an abundance for all to enjoy!

Happy Thanksgiving!

Thursday, November 21, 2013

Video: Obama and Dems Once Embraced the Name ObamaCare but Not Now

Do they really think it makes a difference what this incompetent, corrupt, stupid fiasco is called?

Watch these ninnies make fools of themselves!

Watch out. If this train wreck gets any worse they might start calling it GOP Care!

Democrats Break Centuries of Senate Tradition with Nuclear Rules Change

Further weakening our constitutional system of checks and balances!

In 2007 Senator John McCain visited Mike's America's community for a small party meet and greet. I had the opportunity to have a lengthy exchange with him in which I expressed conservative's concerns for his predilection to join with Democrats in what amounts to one way bipartisanship (Democrats get what they want, Republicans get a press conference).

In particular we discussed the 2005 Gang of 14 deal in which McCain and Sen. Lindsey Graham and others agreed to drop any discussion of the nuclear option which would have changed Senate rules regarding judicial filibuster if Democrats accepted three judges and rejected others.

McCain was very vocal in defense of this deal and in a rather testy voice told me:
"I shudder to think what would happen if we had pulled the trigger on the nuclear option and one day Hillary Clinton was appointing judges." He asked me: "would your blogging friends still want to blow up the Senate if Hillary Clinton was in charge?"
Well now Obama is in charge and Senate Democrats have rejected every appeal by McCain to preserve Senate traditions and changed the filibuster rule to require only a simple majority for judicial confirmations. I'll be writing to both Senators McCain and Graham to remind them of their past efforts and ask them how they defend their past action to restrain Republicans in light of this event.

What's more is the lack of positive results in other areas where Sens. McCain and Graham have taken a lead. Both were very committed to finding out the truth of what happened in Benghazi yet there they were in an Oval Office meeting with Obama and National Security Advisor Susan Rice discussing Syria and neither took the occasion to turn to Rice and ask who told her to repeat the big lie that an Internet video was responsible for the attack or ask Obama why he failed to send help during the attack and why additional security prior was not sent.

I can only imagine that when Republicans do retake control of the Senate both McCain and Graham will request that the old rule be restored in yet another vain attempt to demonstrate bipartisanship. It’s clear from results that both McCain and Graham are more concerned with their own ego and less with protecting the interests of their constituents. It’s time both were replaced with new faces unwilling to be used as pawns by Democrats!

Let's remember what Democrats said then and now:

Then and Now: In 2008 Obama Complains Bush Rewrites Laws; Promises to Follow the Constution

He's the worst offender of any President in living memory!

On May 19, 2008 Obama complained about George Bush and his limited use of what is called a "signing statement" effecting the implementation of a particular bill passed by Congress. A questioner at this campaign event asked Obama "do you promise not to use signage to get your way." Obama answered with an emphatic"yes!" But, as soon as he became President he broke that promise and set a new standard for ignoring the law Congress passed with multiple signing statements. Later he would go further by unilaterally modifying ObamaCare several times. Last week he issued an executive fiat which told insurance companies it was OK to break the law and offer plans that remain no longer legal. The constitutionality of that move is  hotly protested by Democrats and Republicans.

Here's the clip from 2008:

OBAMA: "We got a government that was designed by the Founders with checks and balances. You don't want a president that is too powerful, a congress that is too powerful, a court that is too powerful. Everybody's got their own role. Congress's job is to pass legislation. The president can veto it or sign it. But what George Bush has been doing as a part of his effort to accumulate more power in the presidency is he's been saying well I can basically change what congress passed by attaching a letter that says I don't agree with this part or that part. I'm going to choose to interpret it this way or that way. That's not part of his power, but this is part of the whole theory of George Bush that he can make laws as he goes along. I disagree with that. I taught the Constitution for 10 years. I believe in the Constitution and I will obey the Constitution of the United States."

Notice he didn't say "period!" at the end of that statement.

Funny thing is that most liberals don't seem at all bothered by Obama's unconstitutional (by his OWN definition) acts. But by god they'd raise holy hell and demand impeachment if ANY Republican did what Obama has done!

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

Thoughts on the 150th Anniversary of Gettysburg Address

Why did Obama skip the event and drop God from the address?

It is perhaps the most sublime political speech in American history. As a document it stands alongside the Declaration of Independence but manages to do something that even the Declaration could not. In only 272 words, ten sentences in all, it encapsulates the American experience; our sacrifice for freedom and the definition of our core democratic principles. Who can forget the words that government must be "of the people, by the people, for the people?"

Obama did not attend the anniversary as his predecessors have done on important anniversaries in years past. Though it would have taken him less time to go and return by helicopter than his weekly golf outing he sent recorded remarks instead. That's the equivalent of Lincoln sending a telegram to the original event. Perhaps Obama didn't go because, unlike most of his events, this one wasn't all about him. Maybe he doesn't realize the significance of this speech. After all, he grew up in Indonesia and has never had much education in American history. Or could it be that he knew anything he might say would look small in comparison to Lincoln.

Either way, Obama did a recitation of the speech for a PBS special. But in the speech he read the words "under God" were omitted. Only Obama would dare edit Lincoln.''

Illinois students don't know Lincoln was a Republican

Turning Point USA, a conservative student organization went to Northeastern Illinois University to ask students whether they knew which political party Abraham Lincoln belonged to.  With all the left wingers at universities rewriting history I guess we shouldn't be surprised that only two knew Lincoln was a Republican. In fact, he was the first Republican president and led a newly formed party that was founded in no small part in opposition to slavery. Democrats were the pro slavery party and some might say they still are with their promotion of big government programs that keep the poor poor.

The Gettysburg Address

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate... we can not consecrate... we can not hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government : of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
--Abraham Lincoln, November 19, 1863

Saturday, November 16, 2013

Despite His Pronouncement, Obama Cannot Unscramble the Health Insurance Egg HE Broke

He twice said he was "not stupid" so why is he doing this?

Last Thursday, in a desperate bid to stop the political panic leading to desertion by House and Senate Democrats, Obama unilaterally announced that the provision of the ObamaCare law requiring insurance companies to cancel any plan the Obama Administration considers substandard would not be enforced for another year. He made it clear that he wished insurance companies to continue offering these plans to the people who currently hold them.

Apparently no one told him, nor did he stop to ask, if this was possible. Unlike the developers of the malfunctioning ObamaCare web site insurance companies had been preparing for this transition for three years. It's nothing short of an administrative nightmare to think they can turn on a dime and recreate the old policies in 30 days. Avik Roy, writing at Forbes, describes the challenge:
For the President’s “fix” to work, insurers will have to do something that is near-nigh impossible: reassemble the old insurance product within 30 days. That involves (1) negotiating 2014 reimbursement rates with doctors and hospitals; (2) figuring out how much such a plan should cost, given changing participants; (3) submitting the plan to state insurance regulators and gaining their approval; (4) marketing the plan to victims of cancellations; and many other things. I haven’t spoken to a single insurance executive who thinks that insurers are going to be able to get all that done.
Obama's declaration on Thursday is sure to introduce more chaos into the nation's health insurance marketplace, not less. But then, it will be easier for Obama to blame the insurance companies for the mess that he created. He said as much on Thursday:
OBAMA: “The key point is, is that it allows us to be able to say to the folks who’ve received these notices, look, you know, I, the president of the United States, and the insurance model of the Affordable Care Act is not going to be getting in the way of you shopping in the individual market that you used to have.”
He failed to mention that "the individual market you used to have" no longer exists. It was outlawed by ObamaCare. And just because Obama has dictated that the government will delay enforcement of that provision it does not make these policies legal. Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy addresses that problem in a column at National Review Online. What kind of health security does it give knowing that the plan you buy is "illegal?" What risks does this entail for insurance companies knowing that these plans have no legality? Imagine the legal headaches this is going to cause. Would you buy a policy that was not legal and might not protect you?

McCarthy went on to question whether Obama has the authority to make this kind of sweeping declaration at all. But then, by now we're used to Obama unilaterally reinterpreting legislation enacted by Congress. If any Republican President had taken this many liberties with the Constitution Democrats would be marching in the streets demanding impeachment. (Well, they will probably do that no matter what. It's what they do).

Also on Thursday Obama said:
"I’m accused of a lot of things, but I don't think I’m stupid enough to go around saying, this is going to be like shopping on Amazon or Travelocity a week before the website opens if I thought that it wasn’t going to work."
This was shortly after he admitted that his administration didn't realize how "complicated" the ObamaCare web site would be to build. This raises another set of questions. Presidential speeches are not simply typed up and read. Ask anyone who has been there. Speeches are reviewed by multiple offices in the White House and by the agencies under discussion. Surely someone at the Department of Health and Human Services informed the White House things were not going well with the web site.

If Obama didn't know, why not? If Obama's "not stupid" it's hardly reassuring to admit he's incompetent. Remember that Obama was supposed to be "the smartest guy ever to become president," whose I.Q. was "off the charts." Obama once bragged that “I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors.” Oh Really?

Republicans have offered a legal way out of this mess with the Upton bill that passed the House with 39 Democrat votes on Friday. It would have removed the legal tangle for insurance companies and insured for one year. Yet, the Obama Administration called it "sabotage" and threatened to veto it if it became law. They failed to explain why Obama's dubious declaration would be an improvement over the legitimate legislative process.

So what's Obama up to? Andy McCarthy suggests:
Obama is a charlatan, but not a stupid one. He knows what he did on Thursday was a legal charade. His “waivers” are no more about law than Obamacare is about delivering quality health care. Thursday was a performance contrived to set the insurance companies up. With Americans boiling over coverage cancellations, Obama publicly called on the insurers to offer policies that he well knows his own law makes illegal and that his “waiver” is powerless to legitimize. He desperately hopes Americans will be gulled into blaming the insurance companies for the catastrophe he has wrought. He would have gotten away with it a year ago. He won’t get away with it now.
The only real "fix" short or long term is the repeal of ObamaCare. Two more newspapers came out with editorials requesting just that. First, the Chicago Tribune said to "scrap" ObamaCare and "start over" while the Las Vegas Review Journal warns: "The Obamacare debacle is just getting started — and it only gets worse from here. Repeal and replace."

Wednesday, November 13, 2013

Promoting Promiscuity and Alcohol Abuse to Sell ObamaCare: One of the reasons ObamaCare costs so much more!

What's next? Ads telling you it's OK to drive without a seat belt?

Remember all the grief the left dumped on Rush Limbaugh when he called contraception activist and Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke a "prostitute" for wanting others to pay for her birth control? Obama phoned Ms. Fluke to offer his support while the left tried to get Rush's advertisers to dump his show.

Well, even Rush couldn't have imagined how far the left would take this free birth control nonsense. With ads to promote ObamaCare running in Colorado it's suggested that it's quite all right to abuse alcohol and hop into bed with any hot guy you see.

The ads are ironic since most liberals are trying to control what they deem risky behavior. You can't smoke, eat trans-fats or salt but somehow you can drink to excess and be promiscuous?

Here are two of the ads (full batch here):

Well, at least they added that bit at the bottom about STD's. But when you consider the load of abuse directed at Limbaugh for suggesting Sandra Fluke was a "prostitute" for free birth control, what does it say when an ad describes Susie as "hot to trot?"

Then there's this model of sensible behavior:

Who is footing the bill for these ads? While, they are part of a Colorado campaign to sign up people for ObamaCare you don't need to be a rocket scientist to understand that federal taxpayers will be picking up the tab. But then, in the famous words of Hillary Clinton "what difference does it make?" In so many ways we're already paying for the Obama's ridiculous and damaging policies every single day!

Saturday, November 09, 2013

How Deep Will Obama Dig His Hole?

Speeches and campaigning won't overcome Obama's credibility gap until he can be honest with the American people!

Most Americans are trusting people. They take someone at their word until they have reason to believe that person is not being honest with them. The same applies to the President of the United States who by virtue of the office he holds commands a degree of respect and trust. But only if he upholds the highest standard of veracity. Obama has consistently failed to meet that standard. Thus, it's no surprise respect and trust in him are rapidly declining.

Twenty nine times on recorded video Obama made the sweeping and emphatic promise “if you like your health-care plan, you will be able to keep your health-care plan, period.” The total number may be as high as 40. And, on the White House web site, in a post titled "Facts are Stubborn Things" Obama's broken pledge is still prominently displayed. Responding to intense criticism Obama is took the old Washington sidestep and revised history last week when he said "what we said was you could keep it if it hasn’t changed since the law was passed.”

The problem is that he never said that and millions are finding out the hard way that what he said was not true. That includes many supporters of Obama like Cathy Wagner in Colorado:
Wagner and her husband retired early. She was a nurse for 35 years and championed Obamacare, until she received a letter from her insurance company saying it was canceling her policy.

“I was really shocked … all of my hopes were sort of dashed,” Wagner said. “’Oh my gosh President Obama, this is not what we hoped for, it’s not what we were told.’ “

She was shocked further to learn that for the same coverage she would pay 35 percent more and have a higher deductible.

“Our premium for next year is going up to over $1,000 a month for two of us and we’re two fairly healthy individuals,” Wagner said.
In response to the furor Obama told Chuck Todd of NBC News: "I am sorry that they are finding themselves in this situation based on assurances they got from me." Not good enough says the editorial in the Hartford Courant:
President Obama lied, misled, misspoke — however you want to frame it — when he said that if you liked your health care plan, you could keep it, period, under his Affordable Care Act.

In fact, plans are getting canceled that are not compliant with the ACA's requirements of certain minimum benefits. This is a cruel surprise to many policyholders.

Mr. Obama said Thursday that he's sorry Americans are losing their insurance plans he'd assured them they could keep, but he didn't say he was sorry for making those promises.
Readers may recall the utterance of then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who famously declared "we have to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it." Thanks Nancy!

Squirming through the uncomfortable interview on NBC, despite the softballs of reporter Chuck Todd, Obama added:
PRESIDENT OBAMA: We tried to find a proven model -- we've seen it work in Massachusetts -- that would be as undisruptive as possible, and in good faith, tried to write the law in such a way that people could keep their care. Although, we really believe that ultimately, they're going to be better off when they're buying health care through the marketplaces. They can access tax credits, and they're benefiting from more choice and competition. But obviously, we didn't do a good enough job in terms of how we crafted the law.
Readers may recall the utterance of then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who famously declared "we have to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it." Thanks Nancy!

But both Obama and Pelosi were warned before the law was passed about the consequences we are now witnessing. In the big dog and pony show called a "White House Summit" on health care GOP Whip Rep. Eric Cantor (VA) warned Obama in very clear and direct terms. Cue the video to the 1:38 mark:

Notice Obama's rude and dismissive body language and how he talks to other people during Cantor's presentation. When Obama responds he chides Cantor for presenting the bill text as a prop. But it was that very point Cantor was attempting to make about the unknowns in the bill that are now coming back to bite Obama. It's a shame he didn't actually listen to what Cantor had said.

Obama is in trouble and he knows it. The latest Pew survey matches what polls are showing across the board. On issue after issue his approval is taking a deep slide.

What's Obama's reaction to all this? Will he start actually listening to Republicans? Nope. In a recent column Charles Krauthammer reports that Obama's strategy is to go out and campaign hard to defend himself. As if Obama hasn't already given enough speeches (54 and counting) on the subject of health care. From Krauthammer's column:
“I’ve got one more campaign in me,” [Obama] told grass-roots supporters Monday — a series of speeches and rallies, explains the New York Times, “to make sure his signature health care law works.” Campaigning to make something work? How does that work? Presidential sweet-talk persuades the nonfunctional Web portal to function?
Krauthammer asks at what points does "rhetoric trump[] reality" in Obama land and concludes: "Who will tell Obama that lies so transparent render rhetoric not just useless but ridiculous?"

Wednesday, November 06, 2013

The Moment Mike's America Interrupts President Reagan

Keep the memory of Reagan alive and we can win again!

I've told the story of working in the Reagan White House many times. But this is the first time I have shared this memory. 25 years ago on Wednesday, November 9, 1988 White House staff gathered in the Rose Garden to cheer the President as he walked to the Oval Office in the morning after the big win for George H.W. Bush in the presidential election which cemented the legacy of the Reagan Revolution.

The people had spoken. They liked what Reagan did for them and they wanted more. And who could blame them? It wasn't just that Reagan clearly expressed a sincere and genuine concern for the American people. His conservative polices actually ended up helping people. Compare that to the "I care" rhetoric and negative results from today's incumbent.

Then serving in the White House Political Office, Mike's America was there that cool fall morning. And remembering many of the campaign events where President Reagan implored the crowd to "win one more for the Gipper," I gave a shout out "that's one for the Gipper" to the President at the 2:40 mark in the video below:

The moment Mike's America gives shout out to President Reagan, 
"that's one for the Gipper." Presidential reaction? Priceless!
Despite all the disappointments over the past few years, the spirit of the Reagan Revolution remains alive today. To restore what's been lost over the past few years won't be easy. But it is necessary and we must and will ultimately prevail and "WIN ONE MORE FOR THE GIPPER!"

Thank You Third Party Types, You Just Elected Another Corrupt Democrat in Virginia

When will these people learn that going third party only makes thing worse!

And surprise, surprise, Dems foot the bill to boost third party turnout....

From The Blaze:
A major Democratic Party benefactor and Obama campaign bundler helped pay for professional petition circulators responsible for getting Virginia Libertarian gubernatorial candidate Robert C. Sarvis on the ballot — a move that could split conservative votes in a tight race.

Campaign finance records show the Libertarian Booster PAC has made the largest independent contribution to Sarvis’ campaign, helping to pay for professional petition circulators who collected signatures necessary to get Sarvis’ name on Tuesday’s statewide ballot.
Memo to libertarians: stop being used by socialists and seeing your cause set back even further!

Mike's America Joins Political Realities

Spreading the message of conservative governing principles one step further!

L.D. Jackson invited me to become a contributor at Political Realities. By way of introduction I offer the following short biography. I'm sure regular readers at Mike's America will also find it informative.

Why Mike's America?

Before I began blogging after the 2004 presidential election I would send out stories I found interesting to friends and family via email. Invariably, someone would lose one of the emails and ask me to resend it. I thought, there must be a way to have all the news I notice in one place as a reference for me and anyone else who might be interested. Blogging was a new way to achieve that while offering a creative outlet for me following several years writing columns for a local magazine.

I choose the name Mike's America after 2004 Democrat vice presidential candidate John Edwards and his "two Americas." Unlike Edwards' reformulation of America as a nation in dire need of liberal correctives, Mike's America celebrates and respects the history and traditions which make this the greatest country on earth. If Edwards'  America was so rotten, why do millions risk their lives to come here?

Mike with William F. Buckley Jr.
I blog from the perspective of my personal experience in politics and government which runs from the Court House to the White House. I've sold dog licenses as a Deputy Auditor in small town Ohio and I've worked in the White House Political Office under President Reagan. I'm the veteran of two statewide campaigns in Ohio, the second of which was working with the late Congressman John Ashbrook, a founder of the modern conservative movement, in his ill-fated bid for the U.S. Senate. Also, I got a first hand education in how the federal government really works (or rather, doesn't work) by working with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in Washington, DC.

Over the years I have met many of the great and good conservative leaders. Does anyone remember Congressman Phil Crane or Phyllis Schlafly? I stood on the platform of the GOP Convention in Detroit in 1980 while Barry Goldwater spoke. But of all these, my favorite moments were those with Ronald Reagan.

I first met both Ron and Nancy Reagan as they arrived for a campaign event in Cincinnati, Ohio before the 1980 primary. Four years later, I organized one of the largest student groups in the country and was rewarded with a Presidential visit to my hometown. Four years later, in 1988, I was working in the White House Political Office.

I have three favorite Reagan photos, all of which I took myself.

The President spoke from the rear platform of U.S. Car One of the "Heartland Special" during a Whistlestop train tour of Ohio, October 12, 1984. The speech (sixth item here) was one of those great "take off the gloves" and tell it like it is speeches. I was lucky to get a front row seat and snap the following scene dramatically lit by torch bearers.

U.S. Car One is the official designation given the Ferdinand Magellan when the car was purchased by the U.S. Government in 1946 for the exclusive use of the President of the United States. Tour U.S. Car One at the Gold Coast Railroad Museum in Miami, Florida.

It was at the White House that I was also privileged to witness the arrival of one of the greatest British leaders that ever lived: Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, on her last state visit to see President Reagan, her partner in so much good work, before he left office. I took the following photo on the White House lawn, November 16, 1988. (the program cover may be viewed here).

Finally, when my boss in the Political Office asked for ideas for presidential visits, I mentioned how successful the visit to my hometown had been in 1984. So, Reagan returned again and I took the following photo outside the Wood County Courthouse in Bowling Green Ohio. No longer just a spectator, I was a key aide in planning the trip.

President Reagan visits Bowling Green, Ohio,
October 19, 1988. Speech here.

The story of my time in the White House appears in a column published in a local newspaper shortly after the death of President Reagan in 2004.

Now Fighting for the Right in South Carolina

Sen. John McCain, and his mother (at left)
visit Mike's America in 2007.
I left Washington in 1996 and moved to Hilton Head Island, South Carolina. But I still kept up my political activity. Living in South Carolina I have the good fortune to meet many of the presidential GOP candidate wannabes as they visit before the crucial SC primary. The most memorable was a rather testy exchange with John McCain where I took conservative criticism to him very directly in a small group event in 2007. True to form, McCain doesn't like criticism from the right. It appeared then, as it does now, that he's far more comfortable trying to make nice with Democrats than his fellow Republicans. The same is true for his best buddy, Senator Lindsey Graham who also serves our state. Sadly, I doubt we'll be able to replace Lindsey in 2014.

I likely won't post everything from Mike's America at Political Realities. Besides, it would be hard to keep up with L.D. Jackson who always seems to post on a particular topic while I'm still mulling it over. But I will invite Mike's America readers to visit Political Realities and vice versa. You can also follow me on Twitter and Facebook.

Monday, November 04, 2013

Cancer Patients Forced to find New Doctors Because of ObamaCare

The sickest, most vulnerable among us are at greatest risk because of ObamaCare!

Let's just repeat this again:
"No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. (Applause.) If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan, period. (Applause.) No one will take it away, no matter what." -- Barack Obama
Millions are now finding out how untrue that statement is. Democrats have responded by saying that somehow the health plans these millions had wasn't good enough. Really? Is that what the sickest patients think? The answer in many cases is an emphatic NO!

This story is but one of the millions of victims of ObamaCare's indifference to the consequences of big government meddling. There are many more.
You Also Can't Keep Your Doctor
I had great cancer doctors and health insurance. My plan was cancelled.
Now I worry how long I'll live.

Wall Street Journal
Nov. 3, 2013

...For almost seven years I have fought and survived stage-4 gallbladder cancer, with a five-year survival rate of less than 2% after diagnosis. I am a determined fighter and extremely lucky. But this luck may have just run out: My affordable, lifesaving medical insurance policy has been canceled effective Dec. 31.

My choice is to get coverage through the government health exchange and lose access to my cancer doctors, or pay much more for insurance outside the exchange (the quotes average 40% to 50% more) for the privilege of starting over with an unfamiliar insurance company and impaired benefits.
Two things have been essential in my fight to survive stage-4 cancer. The first are doctors and health teams in California and Texas: at the medical center of the University of California, San Diego, and its Moores Cancer Center; Stanford University's Cancer Institute; and the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.

The second element essential to my fight is a United Healthcare PPO (preferred provider organization) health-insurance policy.

Since March 2007 United Healthcare has paid $1.2 million to help keep me alive, and it has never once questioned any treatment or procedure recommended by my medical team. The company pays a fair price to the doctors and hospitals, on time, and is responsive to the emergency treatment requirements of late-stage cancer. Its caring people in the claims office have been readily available to talk to me and my providers
You would think it would be simple to find a health-exchange plan that allows me, living in San Diego, to continue to see my primary oncologist at Stanford University and my primary care doctors at the University of California, San Diego. Not so. UCSD has agreed to accept only one Covered California plan—a very restrictive Anthem EPO Plan. EPO stands for exclusive provider organization, which means the plan has a small network of doctors and facilities and no out-of-network coverage (as in a preferred-provider organization plan) except for emergencies. Stanford accepts an Anthem PPO plan but it is not available for purchase in San Diego (only Anthem HMO and EPO plans are available in San Diego).

So if I go with a health-exchange plan, I must choose between Stanford and UCSD. Stanford has kept me alive—but UCSD has provided emergency and local treatment support during wretched periods of this disease, and it is where my primary-care doctors are.
Anyone who has ever had a serious illness or known someone who has knows how important it is to find the right doctor(s) that best meet their needs. But now, because of ObamaCare, those options are being reduced and the consequences will be deadly for some. The writer sums up her feelings this way:
For a cancer patient, medical coverage is a matter of life and death. Take away people's ability to control their medical-coverage choices and they may die. I guess that's a highly effective way to control medical costs. Perhaps that's the point.
If ObamaCare were a Republican program Democrats would say it was a "war on women" like Edie. I say ObamaCare is just a war on average Americans everywhere. Obama's rich friends will still get quality care!

Friday, November 01, 2013

Next Big Shoe to Drop: Over 100 Million to Lose Insurance When ObamaCare Exemption to Employers Ends

Ted Cruz may be hailed as the hero who tried to stop this mess!

The biggest lie in American history. From the White House web site:
"So let me begin by saying this to you and to the American people: I know that there are millions of Americans who are content with their health care coverage -- they like their plan and, most importantly, they value their relationship with their doctor. They trust you. And that means that no matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. (Applause.) If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan, period. (Applause.) No one will take it away, no matter what. My view is that health care reform should be guided by a simple principle: Fix what's broken and build on what works. And that's what we intend to do." -- Barack Obama, Address to the American Medical Association, June 15, 2009

Prior to making the sweeping and emphatic statement above Obama recognized that there's "a worry that we may lose what works about our health care system while trying to fix what doesn't." Remember again that the goal here was to help those who didn't have insurance. Not to destroy the system that worked for millions. Yet now, as a consequence of the Dem's ill considered, intensely partisan law many millions more who previously had health care insurance are about to lose it.

It started with individual policy holders whose policies Obama and the Dems deemed not to be good enough. Apparently, if 60 year old men don't have maternity coverage that's a bad thing. That market may be as high as 16 million. But the bigger shoe to drop is when the employer mandate is implemented after the current exemption expires. That means 93 million more may face the crisis of going without healthcare coverage or signing up for new plans that they may not want, OR NEED! And that's not the end of it.

In total, the number of people put into this dilemma may total 129 million according to this analysis at Forbes.com! 

Of course none of this is news. Those who have followed this issue have known about it for years. One of the videos in my You Tube account getting intense viewership recently is the Fox News report I uploaded in June 2010 describing this exact problem. Yet, as we saw from White House videos these reports were attacked with the claim that they were somehow spreading disinformation when the exact opposite is true. It's the White House, which surely knew as much as opponents of ObamaCare knew, that has spread disinformation and misled the American people for years.

Question: Is a law that was passed on the basis of fraud still valid?

The Washington Post Fact Checker gives Obama Four Pinocchios, the equivalent of a pants on fire lie for his continued insistence that  if you like your plan you can keep it.

Why is Obama doing this? Again, at the Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen writes:
It was Obama’s objective from the start to destroy the market in order to fund Obamacare. He wants these people to lose coverage so they have no choice but to sign up for the exchanges. Obama all but admitted this in his Boston speech. “If you’re getting one of these [cancellation] letters, just shop around in the new marketplace,” he declared. In other words, don’t worry if the plan you’re happy with is being cancelled, just join Obamacare! That was the plan all along.

All of which suggests that Obama’s 16 words were no accident.

Or, put another way, “Obama lied and the individual market died.”
The following editorial in the San Diego Union Tribune spells it out:
It’s quite possible that the president said this so many times that he came to believe it. But it is a matter of fact that three months after the Affordable Care Act was signed into law in 2010, the Obama administration issued rules that will force the cancellation of vast numbers of policies. This is from the administration’s own words in the Federal Register: “The Departments’ midrange estimate is that 66 percent of small employer plans and 45 percent of large employer plans will relinquish their grandfather status by the end of 2013.”

So three years and four months ago, the Obama administration anticipated that some 90 million Americans would be forced to change their coverage. Yet as recently as last month, the president once again said, “If you like your plan, you can keep it.”

This is White House dishonesty on an epic scale. And on Wednesday, instead of apologizing, the administration made things worse. Press Secretary Jay Carney continued to dismiss the cancellation issue, saying only “5 percent” of Americans would be affected. And the president, in a display of epic denial, said that it was the critics who were being “misleading” because they didn’t point out that the policies being canceled were bad policies.

This is surreal. For years, Barack Obama constantly told Americans that if they liked their health coverage status quo, they had nothing to fear from Obamacare.

Then Obamacare begins to roll out, and millions of Americans learn they’re going to lose the plans they like, and how does the president respond? By telling these Americans they should realize they have bad plans that they shouldn’t want.

So the truth isn’t that if you like your health plan, you can keep it. Instead, if the president likes your health plan, you can keep it.

This bait-and-switch isn’t just appalling. It’s obnoxious.
How long will it be before Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and other brave Republicans who stood up to try and stop this mess are hailed as heroes? Not long now. Not long. 

Finally, the cover from the latest edition of New Yorker Magazine:

fsg053d4.txt Free xml sitemap generator