ObamaTax: It’s on.

Holy sh!t! Did you ever think you’d live to see the day that a Democratic politician would say this?

“Don’t believe the hype that the other side is selling,” Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick told reporters on a conference call.

“This is a penalty,” Patrick said. “It’s about dealing with the freeloaders.”

Bolding mine. So now those of us who can’t afford health insurance are “free-loaders.” Which makes welfare recipients what? More of this please, because this is a debate we desperately need to have. If I were Romney, I’d have an ad airing around this quote tomorrow.

This is an open thread.

About Woke Lola

Bitch, please.
This entry was posted in 2012 Elections, Affordable Care Act. Bookmark the permalink.

65 Responses to ObamaTax: It’s on.

  1. HELENK says:

    there is an inbred contempt for the people who work for a living or are having a hard time within the New democratic party . We will tell the fools what they want to believe while we take what they have and make them like it . Only we know what is best for the fools

  2. Lola-at-Large says:

    For your Retweeting enjoyment:

  3. Excellent. Elitism at its best. I’m sure that the Romney camp is working on an ad as you type. And yes, I never in all my life thought I’d see/hear a Democrat call poor people “freeloaders” … but then again, I never thought I’d see them hail the passing of some bill which was never read, passed in the dead of night, needed companion legislation after the fact because the essential points (kids on parents insurance up to 26) were not even in the original bill. I never thought they would be so easily conned when the healthCARE bill was changed to healthINSURANCE reform. And then demonize anyone who challenged it. Ya know maybe they wouldn’t be flipping FREELOADERS if they had the PUBLIC INSURANCE OPTION they were promised from the get go from the Liar-In-Chief.

  4. yttik says:

    “It’s about dealing with the freeloaders.”

    That’s what some of us are planning to do in November, deal with the freeloaders sitting in congress.

  5. DeniseVB says:

    Really, true story. My 39 yr old special needs son is happy, alive, well, living at home thanks to GOP/Edu/health/care since ’72. We have all the assistance we need AND saving the state about 85k a year keeping him home with us.

    My point, don’t believe the Obamatax morons, thank you 😀

    • votermom says:

      That’s great!

    • WMCB says:

      My oldest daughter, 30, is handicapped and lives with us. She gets a tiny SSI check, that she uses for her own groceries, toiletries, etc. She qualifies for Medicaid, but we’ve never applied. Her health needs are few, so we pay out of pocket, because we can afford to. If she ever got deathly ill or was hospitalized, we’d get the Medicaid, but until then the taxpayers don’t need to cover her pap smears and ingrown toenails.

  6. HELENK says:

    I brought this over from NO Quarter. Something that has to be seen


  7. DeniseVB says:

    Reporting in from VA02, we have Rigell grovelling….

    June 29, 2012

    Dear Friend,

    It is the duty of each Member of Congress to give careful consideration to each vote cast. Certain votes, by virtue of their force if enacted into law, require extraordinary attention and deliberation. Such was the case with two resolutions I voted on yesterday, H.Res. 706 and H.Res. 711, both of which held Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress.

    The resolutions hold the Attorney General in contempt of Congress for his failure to fully cooperate with the House of Representatives’ investigation of the events leading to – and following – the letter he provided to Congress dated February 4, 2011. Attorney General Holder later admitted that the letter contained false information and therefore withdrew it.

    Though many layers of issues entered into the debate, the foundational issues underlying both resolutions are 1) the proper constitutional boundary between Congress and the Executive Branch; and 2) whether Mr. Holder’s actions rise to the level of criminal conduct which connotes intent and malice.

    To hold the highest law enforcement official in America in criminal contempt is a most serious matter. Although I am willing to take that step, I believe that at this point Mr. Holder’s actions fall just short, albeit by the smallest margin, of meeting the standard of criminal misconduct. Further, finding Mr. Holder in civil contempt accomplishes Congress’ need to obtain documents related to Fast and Furious. Accordingly, I voted against the criminal contempt resolution and for the civil contempt resolution. This would allow Congress to seek a judicial order of contempt unless the Department of Justice hands over the requested documents.

    As part of my due diligence, I met this week with legal experts from both parties and I attended the floor debates that preceded both votes. I watched the debates with growing disappointment as House Democrats orchestrated a ‘made-for-television’ moment and walked off the House floor in protest, charging that the contempt votes were politically motivated.

    I reject this. There was a sound legal basis for both resolutions to come before the House. They were not based on race, or politics, or partisanship. Nor were they about defending our Second Amendment rights. They were not even a referendum on Fast and Furious.

    Instead, both resolutions were tightly focused on the issue of how Mr. Holder’s February 4, 2011, letter was produced and later withdrawn. They focused on the responsiveness of the Attorney General to legitimate demands by Congress for information and documentation needed to fulfill its constitutional duty to conduct oversight.

    When my vote against criminal contempt appeared on the board, it quickly got the attention of my colleagues, both Republicans and Democrats. To their credit, my colleagues from both parties were supportive of my right, indeed, my duty, to vote my conscience. I respect and appreciate this. I also understand and respect the votes they cast.

    I have made clear my view that the Attorney General has not served President Obama and the American people well. He has admitted that Fast and Furious was a botched operation. He has admitted that his initial response to the Congressional oversight of that failed operation, which culminated in the February 4, 2011, letter, was inaccurate. If for no other reason than managerial incompetence, I believe he should resign. Absent his resignation, the President should replace him.

    I also believe we should use restraint to avoid constitutional showdowns. That, to me, includes the use of incremental sanctions, including, when warranted, criminal contempt charges. But if Congress can obtain the documents through a civil contempt citation, then why immediately choose the sanction of last resort: criminal contempt?

    Although knowing that I will at times fail in reason or judgment, I will continue to elevate above all else the duty I have to cast a fully-informed vote, one that allows me to walk off the House floor with a clear conscience. That is what is required of me by the Oath of Office I took my first day in office, and it is what is expected of me by the good people I have the privilege to serve and represent.

    Mindful that I work for you, I remain,

    Yours in Freedom,

    Scott Rigell

  8. WMCB says:

    We actually need to have an honest conversation in this country about freeloading vs genuine need. I saw a D spokesman on some show the other night saying “nobody wants to be unemployed and on assistance – all poor people would rather have a job.”

    Ya know what? BULLSHIT. Don’t try that line on me. You know who buys that line about the noble poor all just hankering to make an honest living? White elites who have never been poor in their life, that’s who. I grew up poor. I spent most of my life around foodstamp mamas and WIC babies, and their men. Yes, there are some who would work their ass off given a chance, and often later do. There are also those who will sniff and whine at the slightest labor, and are perfectly fucking content to sit on their ass in their trailer their whole damn lives, so long as they have groceries and cigarette money. In my experience, it’s frankly about half and half.

    DO NOT TELL ME everyone wants a job, and “no one” voluntarily freeloads, and acts as if it’s their right to do so. Bull. Shit. I grew up with them. Some are my goddamned RELATIVES, so don’t even sell me that crap.

    Any program we do, whether insurance or something else, has to take into account that lazy, childish, selfish people do exist. In abundance. And no, I have no desire to subsidize those people beyond BASIC needs. I have a societal interest in not seeing them literally starving and dying. Other than that, I could give a fuck if I’m providing them “dignity.” The indignity of subsisting on public charity when you are an able-bodied person is a powerful motivator, or ought to be. Most people who claw their way out of poverty do it for precisely that reason. I know I did.

    And BTW, the Dems mostly know this truth. They just don’t admit it. They know for a fact they are not eradicating poverty – they are securing a permanently dependent underclass to vote for them forever. It’s a feature, not a bug.

    You know what historically works best to pull people out of poverty who actually want to get out? As well as creating the wealth to be taxed to help those who either won’t or can’t? A booming capitalist economy. I’m not talking about “trickle down”, I’m talking about an honest to God thriving middle class of merchants and skilled industries. THAT, historically, does more to fight poverty and raise standards of living than anything ever tried. It’s also what gives us the damn MONEY to help those with actual needs, and provide upward mobility for that big chunk of the poor who have no desire to stay that way.

    But anyone who says EITHER all poor people are lazy OR all poor people are just itching to go work is completely full of shit. l

    • DeniseVB says:

      front page, front page 🙂 Need over Entitlement is my fav topic, see my post above.

      • WMCB says:

        And don’t get me wrong – I’m not advocating letting even the lazy freeloadersstarve. But our programs would be set up much smarter if we realized the truth that they exist, have always existed, and will always exist. Subsistence level for everyone. Then target the more expansive programs only to those who have proven they want and are able to benefit from them.

        • r u reddy says:

          My memory is dim by now, but I think that was the philosophy behind Nixon’s “negative income tax” proposal. A bare health-and-survival maintaining subsidy for everyone who had nothing more, but nothing more than that. And people on the “negative income tax” could work more to get more.

          It would have led to firing kilo-thousands of welfare case workers and program adminstrators and so forth. So they made very sure to kill the idea. Or at least that is what I remember.

        • WMCB says:

          I vaguely remember something like that as well. It would be an elegant solution. Get rid of all the various bloated programs, foodstamps, etc, consolidate them, and offer a monthly subsistence for under a certain income. Doesn’t mattter what the reason – poor, unemployed, whatever. It does not go away, even if you work for extra money. You’d have to hit a MUCH higher income before it did. It would take almost no bureaucracy to administer. Make it SIMPLE.

          The Dems resistance to doing something like that leads me to believe they are more interested in expanding the govt workforce than in actually solving things. Same with healthcare – more concerned with CONTROL than outcomes.

    • Lola-at-Large says:

      My family was on welfare from the time I was 11 (when my mom divorced my abusive, alcoholic dad) until I was about 16, when she graduated from Nursing school. I spent three years on it myself when my daughter was a baby, until I finished my associates degree. I can confirm what you are saying.

      It even exists within my family. My sister, who is five years older, took to welfare much more than I did, had four children by four different men, and has spent her life on welfare. When her kids aged out of the system, it was all about back trouble until she secured SSI. She was a drug addict for about 15 years, too.

      She’s been clean and sober for almost 10 years now, but she’s so adapted to the lifestyle that to leave it is the scariest thing that could happen to her. Me? I felt so bad for the 3 years I spent on welfare that I neutered myself after the first kid (a decision I very much regret) and never asked for a hand out again, not from anyone, and not even when I qualified for it or could easily get it.

      • WMCB says:

        Sounds about like me. My sister was a big flaming lefty, until she went to work in an OB/GYN office that sees mainly Medicaid women. She makes $12 an hour, and works her ASS off. And she watches them drive up in new cars, sporting the latest iPhone, and talk openly at the window about how much their 4th or fifth baby will increase their check. Many also have money off the books from various, um, “enterprises”.

        After 3 years of working there, paying taxes out of her meager paycheck, she is fucking livid at the system. And she is one of the most compassionate people you will ever meet. Sees very clearly that many of the patients are good people doing the best they can, and grateful for the help they get. Has all the sympathy in the world for them. But many aren’t. Taxpayers are pissed off in this country. Pols had better start HONESTLY addressing these issues, get some JOBS going, and stop treating working people like endless cash cows, or the backlash is going to leave us with no safety net at all. Not saying that’s what I want. Not at all. Just saying it’s what will happen.

    • angienc says:

      White elites who have never been poor in their life, that’s who.

      And who read The Grapes of Wrath — don’t forget that part, as that erudition is what separates the rich white “creative class” from the fat cat rich white 1%ers.

    • HONK HONK HONK!!!!
      I clawed my way out of poverty- I was so ashamed to be living on the dole. Mortified. And I know people that work the system for all it is worth.
      Basic necessities for those who truly truly need it. Luxuries like cable tv and the latest cell phone with internet access? Supporting cigarettes and liquor? food stamps to be used for sugar laden junk?
      Not so much

  9. elliesmom says:

    There’s also a group of young, healthy people who don’t buy health insurance, who walk into a doctor’s office or an emergency room, and take out their wallets and pay the bill. They aren’t “freeloaders”, either. They just are weighing the cost of health insurance vs. the likelihood that they will have more than minimal health care costs. The more cautious buy catastrophic insurance only, but ObamaTax will remove that option for them. If they opt to pay the tax instead, a few of them may find themselves with a hefty bill to pay, but the vast majority of them that take the risk will win. But they’re not freeloaders. They’re astute risk assessors.

    • Lola-at-Large says:

      That’s what we did for several years. We bought catastrophic and paid as we went. Our healthcare costs rarely exceeded $500 a year and the insurance was less than $1,000 a year at the time. You can’t buy a single policy for $1500 a year, let alone a family policy.

    • WMCB says:

      We had only catastrophic for years, and paid routine stuff ourselves.

  10. myiq2xu says:

  11. Lola-at-Large says:

    I just saw a comment that the bill could be invalid because it was a tax bill that started in the Senate, which is unconstitutional according to Article 1, Section 7. I would agree with that, except that in the last 30 years they’ve pulled this switcheroo a few times (remember the bailout that they could not get passed in the House first, so they slammed it through the Senate?). I would love for our resident legal scholars to help explain this part, though.

    • WMCB says:

      No, it started in the House. At least, technically. After the Senate passed their version, they took a military tax credit bill that the House had previously passed, completely stripped it, and inserted the entire 2000+ pages of Obamacare into that unrelated House bill.

      But they want us to respect their process and decorum? Not misuse any of teh rulz in fighting back? Fuck them.

  12. swanspirit says:

    Anyone who doesn’t go along with contributing to Obamas tax/slush fund is demonized .Even if you were the poor person for whom the tax/slush funds were created only moments before.
    But no worries Obama will be in France on the 4th fundraising with friends. But I am sure he will be wearing a flag pin or something.

  13. Lola-at-Large says:

    The kids who abused the bus monitor have been suspended. For a YEAR. w00t! http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=139667&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

    • elliesmom says:

      I turned 61 today so I think that makes me a “senior citizen”. They can come do their community service with me. When it comes to 13 year old boys, I’m a legend..

      • Lola-at-Large says:

        Happy birthday! I bet you are legend. 😀

        • elliesmom says:

          The first week I taught 8th grade one of the little buggers threw a snake at me. I caught it and held it 2 inches from his nose while I lectured him about respecting animals. It was a long lecture and the snake had a long tongue that kept twitching. Never got messed with again. lol

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          LOL. That is movie material, elliesmom.

        • WMCB says:

          Love the snake story! LOL!

      • HELENK says:

        Happy Birthday. being a senior citizen is great for discounts. Other than that saying you are only 21 confuses the hell out of people

      • myiq2xu says:

        I turned 61 today so I think that makes me a “senior citizen”. They can come do their community service with me. When it comes to 13 year old boys, I’m a legend..

        I first read this comment from the moderation page and I couldn’t see Lola’s preceding comment. My first impression was 😯

        • elliesmom says:

          One of the mothers of one of my students went to jail for having sex with 3 thirteen year old boys, but I wasn’t interested in 13 year old boys when I was 13, too. I’ve always preferred older men. lol

    • HELENK says:

      GOOD it need to be done

  14. Lola-at-Large says:

    BTW, the numbers on ObamaTax have not budged for three years. At least Americans are impervious to some aspect of Obama’s BS.

    And you know it’s bad when the Daily Beast is reporting that Romney is outscoring Obama on handling health care.

  15. HELENK says:

    Sarah is on Hannity. The obots are going to explode. She called nancy pelosi a dingbat.
    those of you that do the twitter thing, it should be really interesting.

  16. Lola-at-Large says:

    Ha! FACTCHECK, not PolitFact, called Obama a liar regarding his Bain claims.


  17. HELENK says:

    thank you. when I saw the show , I took a fit of laughing just picturing all the obots jumping up and down like rumplestilskin

  18. carol haka says:

    Sarah Palin ………….. She had me at hello :))

    If I remember correctly, I had to move some of you in the right direction 4 years ago …….. :))

    • carol haka says:

      Hard to believe we have had to tolerate the asshole for over 4 years….. :((

    • elliesmom says:

      I predicted that McCain would chose Sarah Palin as his running mate in June of 2008. It’s on the record at TalkLeft, but I don’t remember which name I was using at the time. (Jeralyn kept banning me, but I kept getting a new IP address and a new login when she did.)

      • Lola-at-Large says:

        I didn’t predict her, but I said on my blog (P&L) in June of 2008 that if he picked her, he had my vote. I was so freaking happy the day she was announced. I remembering going to Violet’s place the day after her convention speech to see a post with the title “Sarah is a STAR!” My how times have changed.

      • carol haka says:

        First time I ever heard of her was Newt talking about her. Those were the old Confluence days when there was still hope for Hillary …..

    • NewOrleans says:

      Sarah called Nancy Pelosi a dingbat on Hannity tonight. It was a beautiful thing.

  19. r u reddy says:

    Yes. This is a penalty. It always was. That is how I always understood it. It is extortion actually, an attempt to extort people into
    buying whatever toxic waste insurance plan the Lords of Big Insura care to sell on their “exchanges”.

    Freeloaders, eh? I have my own theory about how to freeload under the Baucus-Obama Romneycare Plan. If I keep my job, and if my job keeps us health-covered, then I don’t have to roll out my personal freeloading plan. But if I lose my job or coverage, here is my plan: get very clear on the income threshhold which denies me subsidized coveraged under the Dog Shit Obama Plan. And do my best to make less money than that so I can freeload on those more-taxes-than-me payers. If enough coverage-deprived people figure out how to do that same thing, the subsidy-burden on the unsubsidized health-plan premium slaves might become so onerous that the public tortures the congress into burning the whole B O Romneycare Plan all the way down to the ground.

    And since I predicted (in a hedged and conditional way) that the SC would uphold the Forced Mandate Plan , very likely with Roberts LEADing the Court, I will offer my theory that led me to make that prediction, even though nobody asked me. My crassly simple theory is: Roberts is a Federalist Society Embed and he advances the FedSoc goal of returning America to a Guilded Age social order. He identifies with the same social class that Obama works for. That social class plans to collect maybe a cool trillion dollars in Forced Mandate premiums before the plan strings itself out. Roberts always believed in giving our money to his Social Class Comrades in every way possible, so he was going to pretzel his logic as much as necessary
    to support this forced giveaway to Big Insura.

    Is this crassly simple-minded analysis the mad raving of a tinfoil idiot? Maybe. But it did allow me to just-about 80% predict that the court would uphold, very likely with Roberts leading the charge. With enough effort I could go back and find the post where I said that if only Obama had not insulted and hectored the court, I would have predicted with 100% certainty that they would uphold the Forced Mandate. And it does indeed turn out that Roberts’s sense of social class allegiance to his fellow rich people and pro-rich people outweighed any sense of insult he might have felt at anything Obama said. Obama and Roberts are on the same social class team. And we are not on the team. Or to put it the George Carlin way: Obama and Roberts are fellow members of the Big Club. And we ain’t in it.

    And I’ll go further. If Romney becomes President, B O Romneycare won’t get repealed. No way will Big Insura permit the government to shut down Big Insura’s trillion dollar goldmine just when it is about to get going.

Comments are closed.