ObamaCare Lies

From Your ObamaCare Watchdog

Who Says There’s No Bipartisanship On ObamaCare?

The House of Representatives today voted to repeal ObamaCare by a vote of 245-189. Three Democrats voted with all 242 Republicans. The ironic aspect of the Obama-Pelosi-Reid Regime’s call for bipartisanship during the push to  enact ObamaCare was that there was plenty of bipartisanship — all on the “no” side. While several Democrats voted with Republicans against ObamaCare last spring and nearly combined to defeat it, no Republicans voted for it. 

Although fewer Democrats than expected voted to repeal it (based on the 19 Democrats who withheld their vote for Nancy Pelosi for Speaker a couple of weeks ago), the fact remains that one of the lies of ObamaCare is that there is no bipartisanship on the issue.

In fact, there is plenty of bipartisanship on ObamaCare. It’s just that it’s in opposition to it!

Advertisements

January 20, 2011 Posted by | Health Care Law | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Brevity Is The Soul Of Repeal

This morning the House resumes business. Specifically, it takes up its ObamaCare Repeal bill. It may have taken more than 2,700 pages (that no one read) as well as a pile more in the follow-on “Reconciliation Bill” to socialize our health care system, but only two to return us to the status quo ante. That’s the entire length of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-Va.) “Repeal Bill,” (see The Hill.com) which stands in stark contrast to the gargantuan ObamaCare bill. Two pages (click here to see) — and it will work a lot better than the 2,700-page method, too. It should also please environmentalists everywhere. Here’s our favorite part:

A BILL

To repeal the job-killing health care law and health care related provisions in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.

 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. … This Act may be cited as the “Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act.”

That pretty much sums ObamaCare. Brevity may be the soul of wit. It’s also the sword to slice and dice big government.

January 18, 2011 Posted by | Health Care Law | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Congressional Twilight Zone: Repealing ObamaCare Increases The Deficit!

Congressional ObamaCare supporters entered the minority January 5 the same way they ran the House of Representatives the last four years: In the political version of the Twilight Zone. In an astonishing claim, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said repealing ObamaCare would “increase” the chronic budget deficit (see David Limbaugh at Townhall.com).

More absurd than that was her defense of the “pay as you go” rule which the new Republican majority expedited to the capitol dumpster (see Emily Miller at Human Events). Billed as a way to keep spending in check by mandating any new program be paid for, it was a subterfuge for increased spending — just raise the money to pay for it. Then she seriously (or at least acted serious) lambasted the Republican “cut as you go” reform that mandates any new spending must be paid for with a commensurate cut in another program. Pelosi and her colleagues remarkably said this would increase the deficit. (Her way worked so well, it added $5.1 trillion to the national debt in four years.) Which brings us to ObamaCare.

Ms. Pelosi and other loudmouth libs such as Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-Fla.) (see Andrew Marcus at BigGovernment.com) and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) (see Washington Times) said that a successful GOP repeal of ObamaCare would increase the deficit (see Conn Carroll at The Heritage Foundation’s The Foundry blog). Only in Nancy’s Washington World of Political Paranormal does spending more than a trillion dollars bring down the deficit.

Elected officials are supposed to be public servants, thus the vocation of public service. But in Nancy’s bizarre perception of how things work, Washington is the master and we serve it, which is why she now finds herself in the minority — and in her own little world. It’s one screenplay Rod Sterling didn’t think of. But the next time Nancy speaks, someone should cue the music.

January 13, 2011 Posted by | Health Care Law | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

   

%d bloggers like this: