liberalism

Welcome To Our (The Real) World, Big Labor: Even Unions Threaten Dems Over Obamacare!

You know a policy is horrible when even your staunchest ally threatens a revolt over it, but that's the case now with some major labor unions and Democrats over Obamacare. Welcome to our world — that is to say, the Real Word — Mr. Labor Union Boss. As it turns out, there are several problems with Obamacare union leaders are just now realizing, despite warnings for years. Nothing like an actual hit in the wallet — not liberal Utopian theory — to gobsmack you in the head and kick you in the rear simultaneously. First, union leaders are seeing the real possibility of up to 20 million of their members losing their employer provided health insurance plans.

Second, smaller companies, that partner with unions to provide health insurance already more expensive than traditional employer-only provided insurance, are seeing their premiums balloon because of Obamacare mandates on insurance policies. Unions fear these plans will have to be dropped and force employees into the infamous state exchanges. However, while Obamacare provides for subsidies to some to buy into a plan offered through an exchange, it does not provide such subsidies for union members. (In a case of be care for which you ask, maybe the unions should've read the bill. In a delightful irony, an institution of the left now complains of "unintended consequences.")

The third union concern is, ironically, survival. If members can access health insurance without the union, then why join? It seems the Obama administration has a knack for angering its friends as well as its "enemies."

As reported by the AP via Breitbart.com:

Some labor unions that enthusiastically backed President Barack Obama's health care overhaul are now frustrated and angry, fearful that it will jeopardize benefits for millions of their members.

Union leaders warn that unless the problem is fixed, there could be consequences for Democrats facing re-election next year.

"It makes an untruth out of what the president said — that if you like your insurance, you could keep it," said Joe Hansen, president of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union. "That is not going to be true for millions of workers now." ...

But Obama's Affordable Care Act has added to that cost — for the unions' and other plans — by requiring health plans to cover dependents up to age 26, eliminate annual or lifetime coverage limits and extend coverage to people with pre-existing conditions.

"We're concerned that employers will be increasingly tempted to drop coverage through our plans and let our members fend for themselves on the health exchanges," said David Treanor, director of health care initiatives at the Operating Engineers union.

Workers seeking coverage in the state-based marketplaces, known as exchanges, can qualify for subsidies, determined by a sliding scale based on income. By contrast, the new law does not allow workers in the union plans to receive similar subsidies.

Bob Laszewski, a health care industry consultant, said the real fear among unions is that "a lot of these labor contracts are very expensive, and now employers are going to have an alternative to very expensive labor health benefits."

"If the workers can get benefits that are as good through Obamacare in the exchanges, then why do you need the union?" Laszewski said. "In my mind, what the unions are fearing is that workers for the first time can get very good health benefits for a subsidized cost someplace other than the employer."

Now, the chief of the firefighters union says "anxiety" over the law has transformed into "anger" that could spill into the 2014 elections. The United Union of Roofers, Waterproofers and Allied Workers last month called for "repeal or complete reform" of Obamacare.

The only thing worse than liberalism is incompetent liberalism. In its rush to ram through Obamacare, congressional liberals and the president didn't even look after their friends. No doubt, now, they will look to a fix that they know will be blocked by congressional conservatives and use that for political purposes to placate their union allies. Here's hoping (but not expecting) the unions, fooled once, won't get fooled again.

Obamabots Speechless When Confronted With Logic

We all know Barack Obama is the chosen one, worshipped by millions. He can do no wrong. Whatever he says is magic and transcendental, casting a spell over his following. If he says two plus two is six, it is. If you disagree, you are a racist and a hater. (Actually, he probably does believe in that calculation given his incompetence in managing the nation's finances.) Liberalism in general is not a philosophy that demands great intellectual exercise. In fact, it's not a philosophy. It's an emotion driven reaction to circumstance (for example, "free" health care to those who can't afford it, although logic tells us nothing is free). It's default answer to every problem is to redistribute wealth, expand government and restrict liberty.

A terrific illustration of this was the president's campaign rally with "free" (i.e., taxpayer funded) contraception advocate Sandra Fluke Wednesday in Boulder, Colorado (see Caroline May at The Daily Caller). After the rally, Caleb Bonham of RevealingPolitics.com asked the Obamabots who attended two simple questions. The first was a no-brainer (at least to the 'bots). The second , which introduced logic, short circuited their wires. If you look closely, you'll see smoke emanating from their ears. Enjoy.

Should the government stay out of the bedroom? "Yes!"

These interviews even caught the attention of Bill O'Reilly and Laura Ingraham:

Then why should government pay for your contraception? "Uhhhh, because Obama says so?"

While Liberals Lecture Us, Look At How They Treat Their Own

It's as if you can't turn on the television without seeing one of those very cute Progressive Insurance Company ads. You know, the one with the borderline-nutty-clerk-who's-kind-of-endearing who helps equally quirky people find the type of insurance they need at the lowest market price possible? Cute, huh? What you may not know, however, is that Progressive Insurance, which ostensibly champions free enterprise, was founded — and not coincidentally named — by a big time liberal. His son, Peter Lewis (Accuracy In Media) has taken it much, much further. Not only has he been a powerful advocate for out-there causes, such as pot legalization (RightSideNews), but in recent years has partnered with his fellow billionaire buddy George Soros to fund with tens of millions of dollars (and not always ethically, see Politico), such hyper liberal groups as the ACLU, MoveOn.org and America Coming Together. (They ante upped $10 million each for ACT). In fact, they rank as the top two contributors to so-called 527 groups (Free Republic).

Of course, the whole idea of their support of these liberal groups is to get people elected who will institute government control over our lives — health care, anyone? — and tell us what to do because government knows exactly what's best for us, right? So, if he believes top-down is best, certainly Mr. Lewis (Foundation Watchtreats his employees exceedingly well, the system works flawlessly and they love it. Well . . . as it turns out . . .  not exactly.

According to JobVent.com, Progressive rates as the worst place to work — as judged by employees themselves — and not by just a bit, either. It outranks the second worst place to work by considerable margins in several statistical categories. It seems like Mr. Lewis runs Progressive as he would his vision of government-run utopia with the same predictable results.

    progressive girl

The Progressive Insurance Girl: You'd be a bit quirky, too, if your employer micromanaged everything you did and was bent on creating a "progressive America" as well.

Of the whopping 1,425 reviews left at JobVent.com, the leading site for employee job reviews, negative comments about Progressive outpaced the positive ones by about a 2-1 ratio. Here's one comment from a California claims representative that has an uncanny parallel to liberalism in general and government-run health care in particular:

I felt more respected by my professors when I was in college. You can generally expect to be talked to like a 5 year old. The micromanaging is insane. The sad part is, they take good people and promote them to management where they become these scary corporate robot people. Basically, they drink A LOT of kool aid.

They cut the benefits last year and we were told in a powerpoint presentation by HR that they were cut to "align" our company with the industry standards. You can expect lots of lies, and propaganda.

Is the first part not quintessential liberalism? Patronizing, arrogant and we-know-what's-best-for-you — and the people lording it over you are co-opted bureaucrats following the party line for the glory of state control. The second part is exactly how government-run health care will work — start you off fine, then the steady rate of rationing and, when the people inevitably speak up, we'll be told (like we are now) it's so much better than the old way.

Progressive's ads are fun, but odd. Now, we know why. Apparently, it's an accurate reflection of the company . . . on many, many levels.

Art In The Age Of Obama

Thanks to the alert by our friend Tea Party Jim, we now know the winner of the Public Option Please propagandagraffiti, Obama adoration, uhh, "art" contest. As Jim writes us:

The sickness of this kind of thinking is what is destroying this country. The thought that Washington, D.C., is the lifeblood of the nation is simply idiotic, but not surprising.

And apart from the misattribution of the quote, the doublespeak of the supposed Jefferson quote is nearly hilarious. "Without Liberty no happiness can be enjoyed by society" as the money quote to sell government rationed health care is simply Orwellian.

I can't add much more to that. Well stated, Jim. Gabriel Malor has something to say, too, at Ace of Spades HQ.

The winners are (although we thought liberalism doesn't have winners and losers, and that it makes everyone equal and happy):

First place and People's Choice winner, to an Amy Martin, with the perfectly understandable idea that our country is great because of Washington, D.C.:

publicoption1

Second Place, to Tatyana Fazlalizadeh (there's always a Tatyana involved in socialism, isn't there?), but lacking nothing in staged propaganda heart strings, and a bone to underappreciated photographers out there:

publicoption2

Finally, a disappointing, I'm sure, third place to the POTUS, represented by a Michael Cuffe, but it's my personal favorite, as well, and takes second to nothing in human adoration, if that's any consolation to him. After all, the bronze here is better than what he got at got at on his Olympics bid:

publicoption3

The 10th Amendment Disconnect

I had the privilege of hearing Dr. Bob Holsworth (Virginia Tomorrow) speak Monday night about the recent elections. He is the best political analyst in Virginia in my opinion and his insights on campaigns and strategies never fail to enlighten. He said that one of the many aspects where the Creigh Deeds campaign (as well as the Wagner and Shannon campaigns) fell short was in its inability to respond to the federal issues — card check, cap-and-trade, nationalized health care — Republican Bob McDonnell repeatedly raised as not only an intrusion into Virginians' sovereignty, but as harmful to Virginians themselves —their prosperity, opportunity, way of life, health. In other words, upholding the 10th Amendment, which leaves to the states all powers not specifically delineated to the federal government.

Senator Deeds couldn't dis President Barack Obama, who historically carried Virginia last year, and turn off the liberal Democrat base and its newly energized voters, by opposing those signature liberal issues. So the best he could do was assert they had nothing to do with running the commonwealth. Dr. Holsworth said Deeds' inability to satisfactorily deal with this dynamic pleased no one — crucial independents, who broke overwhelmingly to the GOP, nor the base.

Who am I to disagree with Dr. Bob? But I want to add that it was more than that. Defending one's state against the onslaught of the federal leviathan is a constitutional charge. So it is a legitimate issue. But Senator Deeds, reflective of today's ingrained liberalism, at the very least couldn't respond to the issues because he doesn't understand the 10th Amendment. Doubtful. So that leaves the worst, but more likely, case — a total disregard for it. When state politicians become too comfortable accepting mandates and force-fed programs from Washington, which stunt states from their roles as democratic laboratories and distinctly different places to live, they deserve to lose. Indeed, federal issues always have and always will be integral to state issues because the constitutional relationship of states to the national government demands it.  

Backpeddling

Don't you just love all the media pundits, mainstream media types and liberal political consultants who have spent the last 10 days backpeddling faster than Michael Phelps swims to anyone and everyone who will listen that the Virginia Republican earthquake/landslide/nuking wasn't a conservative win when they spent the last two months spending millions of dollars and filing scores of stories trying to paint Bob McDonnell as a right wing Pat Robertson acolyte, Bill Bolling as an evil capitalist insurance executive, and Ken Cuccinelli as an 1860's states rightist? Not that those caricatures define conservatism but you can't say your opponents are far outside the mainstream then claim they won only because they did a better job getting to the middle than your guys did. Not to mention the six seat gain in the House of Delegates in areas of the state liberals thought they owned. When 74 percent of McDonnell voters said they were "unhappy with the direction they (Obama administration) are taking Washington and the country" there's every reason to believe they expect a good dose of Virginia conservatism to counter Washington's hyper liberalism. November 3 was a conservative upheaval.

New Term For Virginia Campaign Lexicon: "Buena Vista-Style Politics." Pictures Of Labor Day MisDeeds!

The term "Chicago thug politics" has been used to describe some events in national campaigns over the last two years or so — a conviction in the Midwest of a liberal activist who slashed tires on a conservative get-out-the-vote van on election day and all of the forged and made-up voter registration signatures from ACORN last year, come to mind. But after an eyewitness account and the pictures below were sent to me, we may have a new term for campaign misDeeds.

Although less physically intimidating than tire slashing and not quite the level as felony vote fraud, it seems liberal activists are practicing a more deft style intimidation in this year's statewide elections. It may not have started at the traditional Labor Day Parade in Buena Vista, but it was well documented there. Thus, the term, "Buena Vista-Style Politics." However, as the campaign now heats up, we're sure this kind of activity is only the tip of the Angry Left Spear.

Here is the eyewitness account:

Basically, McDonnell and Bolling's crews came in early on Saturday/Sunday to set up signs in preparation for the parade. Deeds' crew, plus purple shirted SEIU folks, acted overnight Sunday to cover those signs with Deeds' signs, sometimes stapling signs over the top of the big 4x8 foot signs. The locals said they'd never seen anything like it in all the years that they've been having this event. Chicago thug style politics have arrived in Va.

. . . . see how Deeds signs covered all of McD's signs. This was EVERYWHERE. It was truly a disgraceful display, with the Dirty Deeds crew in all their full regalia. I have started to refer to the CreighP Deeds' sign with the blue stripe with the white stripe down the middle as 'the road to nowhere' sign. Sigh.

BuenaVista2009_007

Before: This baseball backstop is dominated by signs for the GOP statewide candidates and Delegate Ben Cline. Notice that Democrat gubernatorial candidate Creigh Deeds only has signs on the second row and a few small signs (appropriately) on the left side.

BuenaVista2009_009

 After: Everything but the top row Bob McDonnell signs and one Bill Bolling and Ken Cuccinelli sign are covered with the small Deeds signs. Union muscle at work for Deeds.

Also FWIW one of the Bolling volunteers told my husband that Sunday night while they were putting up signs one SEIU type held a crowbar and shouted, 'Who wants to get their ass kicked by a liberal?' Lovely.

BuenaVista2009_010

 Here, two large Bill Bolling signs, obviously there first, were covered up by lefty union workers for Deeds and delegate candidate Jeff Price.

We also have pictures of another instance of Deeds' crew standing guard while others plant his signs in front of prepositioned McDonnell signs. We hope to get them up later.

Furthermore, thanks to Bearing Drift, we have this picture of a large McDonnell sign defaced with Deeds stickers. But what makes this distasteful is that the Deeds crew went on to a McDonnell supporter's private property in the Hampton Roads area to do their mischief — and was caught! According to Bearing Drift, one of the red-handed begged that the police not be called, while another of the perps was recognized as a paid Deeds Hampton Roads staffer.

Hampton Roads McD sign deface

Doing dirty deeds but begging for mercy. What else do you expect from liberals?   

So, as the boys from South Park would say, "We've learned something today." We've learned that despite what we're taught, the early bird ethic and initiative have no place in liberalism. Be lazy, but use your muscle, and overcome others' hard work. Then, expect a double standard, because it's due you (for no discernible reason) and not be held to account for you illegal actions. I can't think of anything better that exemplifies what we see in liberal policies than in Buena Vista-Style Politics.

Deeds Not Hoping For Hope And Change

In the 1980s, when Virginia was an electoral lock for Republican presidential candidates, and when the GOP won the presidency three successive terms, Virginia Republicans weren't nearly as successful. In fact, they lost three gubernatorial elections on the trot. One rhetorical tactic the GOP tried during those campaigns was to tie the Democrat to the rampant liberalism personified by big spenders, culture relativists, moral equivalency types and foreign policy weaklings such as Tip O'Neil, Patsy Schroder, Teddy Kennedy, Jim Wright, Tom Harkin and the whole motley crew.

The Dems here inevitably replied that "Virginia Democrats are different" and Chuck Robb, Gerry Baliles and Doug Wilder certainly lent that persona, if not actual substance, and the public seemed happy enough with them. All of which has come full reverse cycle in this year's campaign. That is to say, Democrat gubernatorial candidate Creigh Deeds won't say where he stands on what the "D.C. Democrats" are doing. Those are national issues he says, although a governor must be prepared to defend against federal the encroachment that inhibits his state's right of self government and to be a laboratory of innovation.

But Senator Deeds won't even say whether he supports or opposes "cap and trade" which would close the largest employer in his senate district! He won't comment, either, on socialized medicine, card check,  government control of the Internet and radio, or mandated abortion on demand, all of which are, or have been, put forth by the Obama administration and its uber-liberal allies in Congress.

But waaaaaaaaaaaaaaait just one minute!

 

He will comment on former President George W. Bush. That's right, Senator Deeds has new radio and television ads attacking the former president. So, who's he running against? Oh, and by the way, where's the mention of Governor Tim Kaine in those ads? Until a few months ago — when the governor's popularity began to plunge — Senator Deeds was fond of saying that he would continue the Kaine model. (Being Democrat National Committee chairman kinda debunks the whole "bi-partisan" thing.)

So, apparently, not even state issues are on the Deeds itinerary. Let's see: Senator Deeds won't talk about the last four years in Virginia and he won't talk about the last eight months in Washington. Guess that "Hope and Change" ain't working to well for him, either.

One Man's Stand: Senator Jim Demint Debates Against The "Hate Crimes" Amendment

U.S. Senator Jim Demint (R-S.C.) spoke on the Senate floor last night during the debate on the "hate crimes" legislation. He was one of the few to brave the Politically Correct — that is, Intolerant — liberal Senate mob. It is worth the view. He also blogged about it. Check out his blog, here.

Senator Jim Demint tells liberals what they don't want to hear — the truth about their big government control grab, intolerance, and their curtailing of First Amendment religious freedom and free speech rights.

How Political Correctness May Cost Us $700 Billion

Many years ago, when the first musings of something called "political correctness" starting popping up on campuses and the culture at large — an attempt, ostensibly, to use words not to offend people and to paper over the truth about anything in an attempt at hyper politeness, but whose real aim was to suppress opinion contrary to liberalism — it was paid little notice. When it was talked about, it was in the vein of the little oddity that would run its course into fad history. Nothing to be taken seriously. Except that it got to full march, permeating more than the academy, spreading to entertainment, journalism and media, art, sports, the workplace, anything and anywhere you could think, including (and especially) government at all levels, even to the point of possibly permanently altering the practice and course of our mostly-capitalist-economy that has created the greatest standard of living ever know to man. This really is the chickens coming home to roost.  As "political correctness" morphed into a speech code that discredits anything opposite liberalism as "hate speech" or ignorance or hayseed stupidity, and arrogantly talks down to everyone else, its government proponents encoded it not just in employment practices or protections, but in regulations affecting how financial institutions conduct business by mandating loans to people (out of "fairness" no doubt) regardless of their means to make good on the payments. Even though the House of Representatives voted down the latest government takeover of an industry earlier today, one may still come. The price tag is in the range of $700 billion of our money, threatening our economic well being.

A more detailed look at this phenomena comes from Ann Coulter (click here). It is worth the read to understand the nexus of the culture war and how its political outcome affects everything else, including our economy's capability to function. Coincidentally, a friend brought to my attention a YouTube video that is doubly worth the look (click here). Although a bit long, it documents, albeit in an entertaining way, the cold hard facts, with statements of those in Congress responsible and actual legislative language authored by said incompetents. Or, as this concise news report from Fox News Channel's Brett Baier provides more background (click here), documents, one of the presidential candidates, at least figuratively, voted "present," again.

But here is the best one of all . . . the politically correct (and powerful) crowd in House committee defending Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac when they were being warned of their impending peril! This is a must see video, not long, and in their own words (click here). When will the left be held accountable for what they say and do?