If Republicans are half as intelligent as they'd like us to believe, it should be clear to them, as I’ve noted often before, that the administration is rapidly self-destructing. Consequently, it might be best if they simply left the White House alone and picked up the pieces later on, after the debacle’s over.
In that regard, an item today on Fox News on-line says that: “The federal agency charged with implementing the Affordable Care Act announced a multimillion-dollar public relations contract last week in order to convince people to join the program and keep it from collapsing.”
It seems that, “Enrollment in Obamacare's health insurance exchanges is lagging, raising concerns about the viability of the exchanges, which are the law's primary means of delivering health insurance. The bill's congressional architects have warned the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) may be unable to establish a functional health insurance marketplace.”
Therefore, “HHS announced on Friday it would pay public relations firm Weber Shandwick $8 million to promote enrollment in Obamacare's exchanges.”
The article then quotes Ben Domenech, “a health care expert with the Heartland Institute’” who said, “Problems with implementation of the law could "scare off" some health care consumers who are already confused by the government-led overhaul of the nation's health care system.”
And here’s the clincher from Mr. Domenech: "Obamacare's functional defects are becoming a liability, and the train wreck is getting closer, so the administration wants to get as many people dependent on it as fast as possible when it launches, whether the exchanges and other systems are ready for them or not.”
So, here we have another $8 million dollars thrown away to support a broken program that was destined to fail from the git-go. But that’s what happens when political ideology is first and foremost, regardless of cost and the damage done to the population or nation.
Then coming right on the heels of the latest healthcare failure, is the news, also from Fox, that “The Pentagon long has battled with Congress over politically sensitive spending cuts. But this year, military officials say Congress' refusal to retire ships and aircraft means the Navy and Air Force are spending roughly $5 billion more than they would if they were allowed to make the cuts. In some cases Congress restored funds to compensate for the changes, but the result overall was lost savings.”
The article then points out that, “In other cases, frustrated military leaders quietly complained that they were being forced to furlough civilians, ground Air Force training flights and delay or cancel ship deployments to the Middle East and South America, while Congress refuses to accept savings in other places that could ease those pains.”
Since the article contains lot’s of other interesting data on how politics overrides common and fiscal sense, further illustrating that the nation’s financial woes are caused more by a misguided administration than actual economic trends, I’ve included a link you can click on: Congress forcing military to keep unwanted assets, programs despite spending cuts, report says
Another example of putting ideology before practicality, common financial sense or the needs and comforts of the public, was posted on foxnews.com via Drudge today.
The item notes that, Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, “said last week that the FAA "has made zero effort" to avoid [employee] furloughs. The FAA's decision is a dangerous political stunt that could jeopardize the safety and security of air travelers."
The article continues with, “Travelers could be in for longer waits at the airport this week, after the Federal Aviation Administration imposed furloughs on air traffic controllers despite claims by some lawmakers that the agency could have complied with the sequester in other ways.”
I’ve included a link to this item too: Lawmakers decry 'stunt'
Lastly, I might be proving that the adage, “politics makes strange bedfellows” is true. Because apparently Mayor Bloomberg with whom I’ve almost no agreement on anything, picked up on my view regarding the Boston tragedy.
According to Jill Colvin, of the Observer’s “Politicker” column, via Drudge, “In the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Monday the country’s interpretation of the Constitution will “have to change” to allow for greater security to stave off future attacks.”
The item continued that: “The people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry,” Mr. Bloomberg said during a press conference in Midtown. “But we live in a complex word where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.”
So, here we have a guy who believes in a nanny state, creating legislation to impose his personal beliefs and views on everyone else, which I strongly disagree with whereas I believe folks should be free to think for themselves, finally suggesting a Constitutional change that makes absolute sense.
Because, as I keep repeating, its’ beyond comprehension to me that dolts like Levin, Feinstein, Reid and Pelosi and certainly the incumbent himself, put party and ideology above real-time situations and practical, common sense.
But, perhaps now there’ll be more people like Bloomberg, taking a stance and acknowledging that some things need changing to catch up with the realities of the modern world. And, as for me, I certainly hope so, because if left at it is to these biased incompetents now in D.C. our chances of prosperity, and perhaps even survival, are quickly diminishing altogether.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
No comments:
Post a Comment