Ezra Klein sneak previews Obama's upcoming flip-flop on individual health care mandates.
For folks whose memories have blessedly erased any recollection of the endless Democratic candidates debates, let me toss in a brief reminder. Obama claimed that he would offer health insurance subsidies so generous that most folks would volunteer to sign up. Hillary mocked that, insisting that the young and healthy would decline to subsidize the rest of us, especially since they could not subsequently be denied coverage on the basis of pre-existing conditions; her plan included a mandate obliging everyone to buy health insurance, like it or not (as in Massachusetts). Hillary then diligently ducked the "or else" question of what penalties she would inflict on the young, helathy and recalcitrant who would prefer to hold off on buying insurance until they were sick. As a nostalgia piece here is a link to a lefty wondering why his party was so committed to forcing young, healthy members of the working class to subsidize the rest of us on health care; that seems like a good question but I am long resigned to not being smart enough to be a lefty.
And now it is on to mandates, which was always inevitable since lefties are never happier then when telling the rest of us what to do. As the great Warner Wolf might say, if you thought that during the campaign Obama was just tossing up a lot of happy horseshit about individual choice... YOU WIN!
Let's see, government control of your house, your body, your money. Did we leave anything out?
=========================================
Posted by: kim | February 24, 2009 at 03:53 PM
Kim, you overstate the matter. A woman's womb is still her castle.
Posted by: bgates | February 24, 2009 at 03:58 PM
The WaPo (second section) today has a piece up about local providers of low cost govt subsidized health plans shocked that the people for whom it was designed have failed to utilize it.
Shocked i tell you.
Do we have to send out engraved invitations to the uninformed?
Posted by: clarice | February 24, 2009 at 04:07 PM
In other news--proof that the US House of Representatives is on its toes. a bill has been introduced banning chimps as pets.
Posted by: clarice | February 24, 2009 at 04:12 PM
... YOU WIN!
OMG, I never won anything before! I win! I win!
Posted by: Jim Ryan | February 24, 2009 at 04:22 PM
a bill has been introduced banning chimps as pets.
No big whoop. A lot of people are prepared to tell the stormtroopers at the door, "My guns were stolen last week. And my chimp. Yeah, stolen, that's the ticket, my chimp was stolen."
Posted by: Jim Ryan | February 24, 2009 at 04:28 PM
Clarice, I recall during the S-CHIP expansion debate (the bill that actually got debated, as opposed to what just went through), it was reported in several places that S-CHIP was underenrolled in many (most?) states where it was available. Some states were offering benefits to parents in order to boost enrollment.
Can't we spend a little money educating people about the available benefits, and getting them on the rolls, before we spend a lot of money to expand the program (and have the expansion also be underenrolled)? It is infuriating.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 24, 2009 at 04:29 PM
Kim: you forgot energy. Also the climate, don't forget that one--it is a rel crisis I am told.
Posted by: Amused bystander | February 24, 2009 at 04:30 PM
Yeah, stolen, that's the ticket, my chimp was stolen.
"Goddamn chimp collected all my firearms and ran away into the woods last week. Left a note mentioning he was going off to look for Dr. Zaius.
Worst of all, he took my completed tax forms with him."
Posted by: Soylent Red | February 24, 2009 at 04:39 PM
If we can't get people to prepare for TV digitation, we'll never get them to sign up for insurance coverage.
Posted by: bad | February 24, 2009 at 04:48 PM
Hmmm... This will be fun. I wonder how many of those 20 something "I want my free lunch" Obama voters will turn sour when they get stuck having to pay a few hundred bucks a month for Mom an Dad's health care?
Posted by: Ranger | February 24, 2009 at 04:48 PM
"a bill has been introduced banning chimps as pets."
Tarzan's gonna' be pissed!
Posted by: daddy | February 24, 2009 at 04:49 PM
End of Patients, indeed TM.
Think of the SS and Medicare savings...
Posted by: bad | February 24, 2009 at 04:51 PM
Here's the beauty of expanding the services which are underenrolled--you put more credentialed mopes on the fed payroll to interface with and coordinate programmatically and assist the underenrolled.Since these new hires are neither smart enough nor diligent enough to qualify for jobs which actually provide health care actual health care we follow the community organizer model. The slums in Chicago did not get fixed but the organizer made it to the WH.
Posted by: clarice | February 24, 2009 at 05:03 PM
Red, you first have to gag the chimp and put him and the guns in a clothes hamper. Er, separate hampers.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | February 24, 2009 at 05:05 PM
clarice-
Do we have to send out engraved invitations to the uninformed?
They are too stoned and too stupid to figure it out, which why there are community organizers to make sure the uninformed "get their rights".
Posted by: RichatUF | February 24, 2009 at 05:06 PM
Clarice, do you think he'll figure out that even with the power of the presidency he isn't going to do a thing to change those Chicago slums?
Not that he won't bankrupt us trying....
Posted by: bad | February 24, 2009 at 05:13 PM
Red, it's the perfect crime. With Holder telling everyone we've been too reluctant to go to Sharpton rallies, what police department is going to put out an APB for "a monkey with a gun"?
Posted by: bgates | February 24, 2009 at 05:17 PM
Speaking of previews, Jennifer Loven of the AP (I tried for a minute to come up with something insulting, but couldn't think of anything worse than "Jennifer Loven of the AP) has a review of the speech, written in the past tense. It includes this line:
Comments on Obama's address came in early from Republicans, many hours before he had uttered a word.
That does seem unfair.
Posted by: bgates | February 24, 2009 at 05:34 PM
Speaking of health care, I had to go to the emergency room today because I had a reaction to a procedure I had yesterday (I'm fine) and they have now added a new mandatory question to "Do you feel in danger at your home" and the other litany of questions they ask - and it is:
"Do you feel that anyone is taking advantage of your financial situation?"
I answered. "Yes, Congress and the President, and I want you to write that down."
I'll probably be arrested tomorrow.
Posted by: Jane | February 24, 2009 at 05:34 PM
I hope voters will remember what federal subsidies did to college tuition--push it out of sight. I bet that's the Dems' evil plan--insurance becomes so expensive, the government must take it over completely and ration care.
Posted by: Ralph L | February 24, 2009 at 05:37 PM
Way to go Jane!!
Posted by: bad | February 24, 2009 at 05:40 PM
LOL, Jane! Glad you're okay.
Posted by: centralcal | February 24, 2009 at 05:44 PM
LOL bgates (how many times have I posted that?)
Good for you, Jane, on both counts!
Posted by: Porchlight | February 24, 2009 at 05:47 PM
via Hot Air:
I confess I never see or hear anything about Holder without thinking of BBSG....
Posted by: bad | February 24, 2009 at 05:48 PM
Yes bgates. That would be racialist.
Posted by: Soylent Red | February 24, 2009 at 05:48 PM
Jane, they better not ever house us in the same old folks home.
Posted by: clarice | February 24, 2009 at 05:48 PM
By the way, I only pointed out the latest on BBSG because I would feel like a coward if I didn't.
Posted by: bad | February 24, 2009 at 05:51 PM
bgates that is even funnier than usual. A pre-speech news account including pre speech critiques.
Posted by: clarice | February 24, 2009 at 05:51 PM
Jane,
Very happy to hear you are okay and still giving them hell.
Re schip, an acquaintenance of mine made an extremely good business out of providing hospitals the service of registering patients for the incredible host of benefits they were entitled to medicaid, schip, other programs. Most were unable or unwilling to sign up due to the usual litany of problems, illiteracy, alcohol and drug dependence, fear of legal interventions etc. She would walk them through the process and get the hospital their money.
Posted by: Laura | February 24, 2009 at 05:57 PM
Your insult of Jennifer Loven was just hysterical! Priceless, even!
Posted by: centralcal | February 24, 2009 at 06:03 PM
sorry, my post was addressed to bgates, obviously.
Posted by: centralcal | February 24, 2009 at 06:04 PM
Somebody asked on another thread about games for Obama's speech tonight.
Here, via AmSpec blog, is a fun packed O-bingo game to listen and play along with.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | February 24, 2009 at 06:05 PM
CC, unless bgates created a fake Bretbart site that I'm too stupid to catch, there is a review just as he says.
Even comments where people are noting the speech hasn't happened yet.
Posted by: bad | February 24, 2009 at 06:15 PM
it was reported in several places that S-CHIP was underenrolled in many (most?) states where it was available.
Well, there's a couple of possiblilities.
#1 The need for it is overstated.
#2 People who need it know that they'll get healthcare anyway because, no matter what the Dim's say, not kids are turned away from health care. So, I guess you could see #1 for that one too.
Posted by: Pofarmer | February 24, 2009 at 06:23 PM
"a bill has been introduced banning chimps as pets."
Some kind of Congressional empathy?
Posted by: PeterUK | February 24, 2009 at 06:27 PM
Ignatz,the Obingo game is priceless. Esp. because Obingo sounds so much like Odinga.
Posted by: MaryD | February 24, 2009 at 06:30 PM
the speech will be boilerplate bait and switch....talk moderate/bipartisan while governing to the left
Posted by: BobS | February 24, 2009 at 06:30 PM
if they outlaw chimps, only outlaws will have chimps.....
Posted by: Matt | February 24, 2009 at 06:32 PM
The best part about Loven's cattiness is that the comment she uses to try to illustrate the Republicans are unfairly criticizing the speech before it happens, one, is very conciliatory, and two, doesn't mention the speech:
" "House Republicans stand united in willingness to work with this president to try and tackle the very tough economic situation that is facing our families, to try and make some of the tough decisions together," said House GOP Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia. But Republicans would stick to their principles, he said: "One is that Washington shouldn't be spending money that we don't have. And two, we shouldn't be raising taxes on businesses and families that can't afford to pay them." "
Posted by: bgates | February 24, 2009 at 06:33 PM
where are the democrats going to get their next slate of candidates if they outlaw chimps.....
Posted by: Matt | February 24, 2009 at 06:36 PM
Clarice, do you think he'll figure out that even with the power of the presidency he isn't going to do a thing to change those Chicago slums?
As he ran for President, there was no era he could point to that had a good economy where enough people were employed.
Remember how he knocked the 90's? His community organizing days were in the 90's, and he talked about how awful it was for the mill workers who had lost work. Nobody has ever done enough for the worker.
That should have been a clue. He
Posted by: MayBee | February 24, 2009 at 06:36 PM
Are the 40 million uninsured Americans all healthy workers who have opted out?
That's kind of the vibe I'm getting as I ask around about how getting all Americans insured is going to lower health care spending.
Otherwise, I'm having a hard time figuring out why it's going to be so cheap to subsidize insurance for 30 million or so Americans.
Posted by: MayBee | February 24, 2009 at 06:41 PM
Oh, Jane..you are priceless! If they come to get you, I'll fly to MA and get you out!
Hope all is A-OK!
Posted by: glenda | February 24, 2009 at 06:42 PM
So no FWDAJ today?
Posted by: MayBee | February 24, 2009 at 06:49 PM
But is there anything about orangutans? We must not rue the mortgage crisis to the point of ignoring serious threats to public safety.
Posted by: Elliott | February 24, 2009 at 06:50 PM
Posted by: cathyf | February 24, 2009 at 06:51 PM
Glad to hear you are doing better, Jane. Great line!
Posted by: Elliott | February 24, 2009 at 06:53 PM
"Rue"
Heh, Elliott.
Posted by: Soylent Red | February 24, 2009 at 06:58 PM
So no FWDAJ today?
No and I'm bummed out about it - I so wanted to talk about Santelli's tea party.
Posted by: Jane | February 24, 2009 at 07:00 PM
Elliott are you still in London?
Posted by: Jane | February 24, 2009 at 07:02 PM
What time does "dear leader" speak tonite? These things often begin while I am commuting home from work.
I loved Tappers piece about all the "Skutniks" that will be setting with the First Lady. I could snark, but one doesn't know what might be taken racially any more, so better not.
Posted by: centralcal | February 24, 2009 at 07:06 PM
I think it is 9:00 CC - I was planning to become an American Idol fan but I think even Simon Cowell is being preempted.
Posted by: Jane | February 24, 2009 at 07:09 PM
Jane:
Do you have any idea where I could find that list of questions they're required to ask you in the emergency room? Or at least where I should start looking for it? I believe doctors -- or perhaps just pediatricians/obstetricians? -- are required to ask some of same. I think we're going to be seeing a lot more of that kind of intrusive "off topic" questioning everywhere, not to mention in the census when the White House political office finishes redesigning it. When you factor in digitizing medical records -- and the centralization that inevitably entails, I think the future is staring us in the face.
Posted by: JM Hanes | February 24, 2009 at 07:11 PM
What time does "dear leader" speak tonite?
Who cares, as long as MayBee is willing and able?
Posted by: Extraneus | February 24, 2009 at 07:13 PM
Think of the advertising dollars down the tube with all those channels pre-empted....
Posted by: bad | February 24, 2009 at 07:15 PM
What time does "dear leader" speak tonite?
Does it really matter? All I hear from this loser is more of the same: Responsibility Redistribution.
Posted by: PDinDetroit | February 24, 2009 at 07:19 PM
I'm an idiot.
Please explain "FWDAJ", unless it is an unacceptably, derogatory term for myself, then you can e-mail it to my wife.
Nice Bernanke bounce today.
Posted by: mel | February 24, 2009 at 07:22 PM
We are all sorry about FWDAJ this week, Jane.
Glad you are okay otherwise.
Posted by: caro | February 24, 2009 at 07:22 PM
Do you have any idea where I could find that list of questions they're required to ask you in the emergency room?
JMH,
I was thinking the same thing. There were 4 or 5 of them but I can only remember 2. I have no idea if it is a state mandate or a federal one. I'd start with google, or even call your local doctor's office and ask them. I was asked questions both days - so it wasn't just the ER.
Posted by: Jane | February 24, 2009 at 07:23 PM
Mel,
It stands for "Fun with Dick and Jane" which is the name of my radio show, which I usually do on Tuesdays. I post a podcast the following day, at the LUN. SO you aren't an idiot at all.
Posted by: Jane | February 24, 2009 at 07:25 PM
More Ezra Klein links; sorry TM, I'm not giving that butt brigand a web hit.
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 24, 2009 at 07:27 PM
in other news--proof that the US House of Representatives is on its toes. a bill has been introduced banning chimps as pets.
They're getting rid of Biden already?
Posted by: Barry Dauphin | February 24, 2009 at 07:31 PM
The Jennifer Loven piece is not a joke. Or rather, not a counterfeit. Or rather, not a prank. It's everywhere, from Boston.com (Boston Globe) & the Baltimore Sun, to Forbes. Karen Travers and Jake Tapper are working with excerpts from the embargoed version, over at ABC. They use the professional future tense., but why on earth do reporters waste their time reporting on what the President is supposedly going to say himself in a couple of hours? It's even worse, when they then feel compelled to tell us what he did say, immediately after we've just watched him say it.
Mark Halperin has the official White House preview release:
To date, Halperin's Page has released embargoed versions almost as soon as the starting gun goes off -- last time it meant you could actually read along with the speech. There are always a few impromptu additions or deletions which can occasionally be interesting.
Posted by: JM Hanes | February 24, 2009 at 07:36 PM
Jane, I am glad to hear you are okay. Sorry about your show.
I could snark, but one doesn't know what might be taken racially any more, so better not.
CC,
I think you should prove to Holder you are not a coward. I have decided to call the pirate looting our treasury "Black Ears".
Take that Holder!
Posted by: Ann | February 24, 2009 at 07:37 PM
Jane:
I was assuming that the questionnaire was a Massachusetts special. :-)
Posted by: JM Hanes | February 24, 2009 at 07:37 PM
About dear leader speaking . . . I didn't want to miss the commentary here. It is really hard to catch up when you come in late. If he doesn't start until 9 pm ET, then I am good to go.
Thanks for the info, Jane.
Posted by: centralcal | February 24, 2009 at 07:39 PM
Ha Ha, Ann. Black Ears . . . I like it!!!
Posted by: centralcal | February 24, 2009 at 07:41 PM
I believe Holder intended us to tell African Americans how horrible Caucasians have been and we will try and do better in the future, with the help of the courage our Dear Leader is going to give us. He never counted on the snarkettes at JOM to misconstrue his serious words. ::grin::
Posted by: Sue | February 24, 2009 at 07:42 PM
Jane,
Some of those questions are for geriatric patients. Eeek! Not sayin' anything, but they ask them in the event a caregiver is not behaving nicely.
I loved your response to the financial question.
Posted by: Sue | February 24, 2009 at 07:45 PM
JMH, My college kid says Loven should be fired for filing a false report.
She is reporting physical phenomenon from an event that hasn't happened yet.
Posted by: bad | February 24, 2009 at 07:46 PM
The weight of this crisis will not determine the destiny of this nation. The answers to our problems don't lie beyond our reach. They exist in our laboratories and universities; in our fields and our factories; in the imaginations of our entrepreneurs and the pride of the hardest-working people on Earth.
Could this be more gag-worthy? Really, who couldn't write the speech before it's given? I see no reason for Jennifer Loven or anyone else to wait for it.
Posted by: Extraneus | February 24, 2009 at 07:55 PM
Yes, in fact I am. Should I arrange the tea shipment?
Posted by: Elliott | February 24, 2009 at 08:00 PM
Ignatz:
Just want to keep your Øbingo link in view! Very funny - I downloaded a card, which anybody who wants a prefab list of drinking words should consider doing. My favorite, of course, is any variation on "as I've said before" along with a roster of things & plans that Obama has made perfectly clear -- generally on a website where you can supply your name and email address. I also predict a lot of what "I will" or "I won't" allow, and at least one ideologically-constipated-conservatives-just-want-to-burn-down-public-schools moment. The mess he inherited is a given of course, but I doubt "toxic assets" will get a hit.
The risible Robert Gibbs actually describes the speech as Reaganesque! Halperin has excerpts from the prepared version of the Jindal Response.
So, there's your pre-game show. The only thing left to decide is whether to watch the speech with the sound on or off.
Almost forgot, Eric Holder has the undisclosed location duty tonight.
Posted by: JM Hanes | February 24, 2009 at 08:06 PM
Oh gag. CNN is doing the obligatory "What does the President have to accomplish tonight" roundtable.
Posted by: JM Hanes | February 24, 2009 at 08:07 PM
Eric Holder has the undisclosed location duty tonight.
The coward....
Posted by: bad | February 24, 2009 at 08:08 PM
Never mind that he's putting the knife in the back of all that industriousness. Every time he opens his mouth moral hazard shoots out.
======================================
Posted by: kim | February 24, 2009 at 08:09 PM
Should I arrange the tea shipment?
Okay, but we are just going to throw it overboard.
Posted by: Jane | February 24, 2009 at 08:13 PM
My gawd, Alan Colmes looks terminally ill. And that suit is really atrocious.
Posted by: Jane | February 24, 2009 at 08:14 PM
The Loven article has removed this portion but is still written as an after the fact report:
"He enters the chamber to lawmakers of both parties hanging into the aisle for a chance to shake his hand or exchange a word. The gallery is filled, including a special section hosted by first lady Michelle Obama in which guests are selected to serve as living symbols of the president's goals. Cramming the floor are the leaders of the federal government: Supreme Court justices, all but one Cabinet member—held away in case disaster strikes—and nearly every member of Congress....."
Jennifer Loven sucks.
Posted by: bad | February 24, 2009 at 08:15 PM
We should probably make certain we are agreed on what brands are unworthy of such a fate. Unlike the colonists, I have no objection to jettisoning the Twinings.
Posted by: Elliott | February 24, 2009 at 08:21 PM
In other news--proof that the US House of Representatives is on its toes. a bill has been introduced banning chimps as pets.
Good to know they're on the job doing important work.
Actually, I guess it's better they're doing this than working on the economy.
Posted by: PD | February 24, 2009 at 08:25 PM
The remarks by Eric Cantor, that bgates highlighted earlier, have been removed as well.
Posted by: bad | February 24, 2009 at 08:26 PM
bad-
AP's MO.
They've done it before, and they'll do it again.
Remember Beruit, via Paris, or Sderot, via London?
We'll always have "fauxtography".
Frenchie, I gotta a feeling...
Posted by: mel | February 24, 2009 at 08:27 PM
Jane-
I'm still an idiot, just ask my.. well, you know the drill.
Glad to hear that you're fine, still spitting bullets, eating nails for breakfast, and hunting bears with a switch.
Posted by: mel | February 24, 2009 at 08:29 PM
Mel, I know I'm blowing smoke but it's fun to have stuff out there for silent readers.
I posted stuff at Tapper's site as well. Lots of traffic...
Posted by: bad | February 24, 2009 at 08:30 PM
Tom has a speech thread up and ready to go . . . just sayin'.
Posted by: centralcal | February 24, 2009 at 08:30 PM
thanks for posting the link to your place, jane...i've never seen it before.
Posted by: BobS | February 24, 2009 at 08:33 PM
Elliott,
I am go glad you are back. You were missed.
JMH,
If you want to see a terrifying questionnaire
look up THE AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY (pdf). A response to this survey is required by law.
Some of the questions include:
* How many rooms are in your house?
* How many cars do you have?
* What sort of fuel do you use?
* How much do your utilities cost?
* How much does your insurance cost?
* How well do you speak English?
* What type of health insurance do you have?
* Can you hear?
* Can you see?
* Can you make decisions?
* Can you dress?
* Can you bathe?
* Can you climb stairs?
* Can you go to the doctor?
* Can you shop?
* How many times have you been married?
* Does grandma take care of the kids?
* How far do you live from work and how do you get there?
h/t Janeqrepublican
Posted by: Ann | February 24, 2009 at 08:35 PM
Wow! Here's the subcaption on O'Reilly right now:
ALERT
President Obama departs the White House
Yeah! Yeah!!
Oh, wait. He's just departing to go make his speech.
Posted by: PD | February 24, 2009 at 08:36 PM
A response to this survey is required by law.
Okay. My response is: BLOW IT OUT YER ...!
Posted by: sbw | February 24, 2009 at 08:38 PM
It's called Laphamization, based on the moonbat from Harper who filed a future take on the 2004 Republican Convention; which was
meant to illustrate the power of the evil right wing conspiracy, but the subtext was ignored because of such a blatant gimmick
Posted by: narciso | February 24, 2009 at 08:38 PM
holders statement is more than troubling as it opens the door to this troubling fellows philosophy. i've always felt he was a dem hack and he's done nothing to lessen that. but his "cowards" comment means one of only two things. if it is truly what he beleives, it reveals a greavance-based personal agenda that will govern much of his tenure at justice. if he doesn't feel that way, he's dishonest and meerly looking to use the race card to justify his actions while there. nonetheless, its not something any ag should have been commenting on.
Posted by: BobS | February 24, 2009 at 08:41 PM
I just went to a party at David Frum's for Roger Simon. (He has a new book out "Blacklisting Myself". Frum has a very beautiful house. Very beautiful.
A lot of interesting people there you know of. I, however, have to report that I ran into my boyfriend from freshman year in college whom I haven't seen for 50 years.WoW!
Posted by: clarice | February 24, 2009 at 08:46 PM
Heck with the speech, I want to hear about the party, Clarice!
Posted by: Ann | February 24, 2009 at 09:02 PM
My lips are sealed, Ann.
Posted by: clarice | February 24, 2009 at 09:18 PM
clarice...thats completely off any wow chart i've ever seen....but i'm a huge admirer of roger simon....hope was as kind and engaging as he seems in his blog
Posted by: BobS | February 24, 2009 at 09:24 PM
say, wasn't frum invited to the obama dinner at george will's home?
Posted by: BobS | February 24, 2009 at 09:26 PM
have opted for a HOUSE rerun over the Obama speech....am i missing anything?
Posted by: BobS | February 24, 2009 at 09:28 PM
jane...did colmes really look bad....i've always sort of liked him and believed that ...politics aside...he is a decent fellow....it looked like both ailes and hannity really tried to get him to stay
Posted by: BobS | February 24, 2009 at 09:30 PM