Epic Liberalism in Punditry: CNN’s Michael Smerconish Edition…

Jumpin’ Ju-Ju bones, check out the level of Moonbattery in this exhibit.

CNN’s Michael Smerconish affirming government mandated health insurance by comparison to mandated Home and Auto insurance required by the underwriting lender:

Holy Cats !  Have Pennsylvania liberals really reached that level of cognitive dissonance?

The requirement to take out mortgage insurance policy, or an auto-insurance policy is directly related to the loan underwriter, the private bank or financial institution, mandating you insure them against the risk of loss. You agree to the loan terms.

If you want a loan for the product (house or car), you must insure the lender against catastrophic loss (fire, accident etc.), or your own default on the loan.  In the auto example the state can also demand coverage in the event your behavior with the vehicle produces catastrophic loss to another (ie. uninsured motorist).

This has nothing to do with government forced insurance coverage of your own body or physical health – UNLESS the progressive argument extends to: the government underwrites or loans you your personage; ie. the government owns your physical body.

Is that what Smerconish is arguing here?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Cultural Marxism, Legislation, media bias, Obamacare, Occupy Type Moonbats, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

170 Responses to Epic Liberalism in Punditry: CNN’s Michael Smerconish Edition…

  1. stella says:

    Seems obvious to me.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Paul Revere says:

      Make no mistake I am not siding with the liberals here, especially for obummercare. But, I do believe government has a role in protecting its citizens from monopolies right? When we all get to that age where we begin to require medical aid to have a descent quality of life, you have to be able to access healthcare. Welcome to the insurance/healthcare monopoly.
      In the past, if you were fortunate enough to have insurance coverage thru your employment you were in perhaps the best situation. But even then if you contracted a serious disease the threat of cancellation of your coverage was a probability.
      And if you were the unfortunate who decided to go into business for yourself the cost of insurance coverage could easily consume your income and the same conditions applied concerning catastrophic coverage.
      If you come to the system already ill, forget it you had no options.
      When you are dropped by insurance, say because you have a heart issue, you are really screwed. And even more so as you climb in age. The health care system will strip you of ALL of your resources and leave you a pauper.
      I understand insurance is purely a numbers game, but everyone in the insurance industry are earning well above average wages and profits on the backs of sick people. It is a blood suckers middleman industry that was set up to take advantage of every one of us who will require medical attention one day. There is no real reason for this entire industry!
      And the healthcare industry is no better, they can charge these ridiculous rates for everything medical because insurance will pay for them, and if they chose not to, and you can’t, you are screwed. These industries have commingled their interests so they are both free to drive up the costs and widen profits because you have no choice if you need to gain access to healthcare. The insurance scam is to make you believe you can afford the ridiculous hospital/doctors fee’s until your actuarial numbers no longer work for them and you are kicked to the curb.
      It is not about the patient, it never was. But lately these industries have their heads in the same cash cow trough our government officials do, and you are going to be forced to feed them one day, sooner or later, with everything you have.
      With all the money our government pisses away on nonsense, we should eliminate the insurance industry and have a federal system where everyone has access to care when they need it.
      Our government is not protecting us from predatory insurance and healthcare industries
      It is done elsewhere in the world, no reason we can not do as well or better here in my opinion.
      The good ol days prior to obummer in insurance and healthcare were just not that good, so if you remember them fondly you obviously were not sick.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Gerkenstein says:

        They are not protecting us from predators… They force us into their hands… Which is also probably what they will do when they run the system….
        There is too much regulation… Get government out of the way.

        Liked by 2 people

      • dalethorn says:

        There is truth there. Unfortunately, without real competition top to bottom, it becomes a scam and government grows on the scam.

        Liked by 1 person

      • dbobway says:

        They were bad before sick or not
        We badly needed reformed then
        Then Obama took more of our money and gave it to insurance, pharmacutal, medical equipment etc. and gave gov’t insurance to 10 million people who could have gotten that before his criminal enterprise called ACA

        If your(you’re) debating grammar here you don’t get it

        Our lives aren’t a dot or a dash

        Liked by 1 person

        • bolshevict says:

          The ins companies aren’t the real problem…..more culpable:
          1. State governments that force coverages to be jammed into every policy offered in their state, thanks to too-powerful associations. When could you buy private insurance 10 years ago that DIDN’T cover chiropractic, some counseling, and drug rehab? Not in Ohio….that makes ins. EXPENSIVE ….the selling across state lines fixes the “special interest coverages” problem. Just buy what you want. (Note: many of those ‘forced coverages’ are for types of treatment that are ripe for abuse by greedy professionals and individuals who LIKE going to the doctors….I REALLY despise those folks. Not sure what to do about them except limit access to the back-crackers and counselors they love to go to so much…maybe even penalize them for going for unnecessary treatment, a very difficult call for obvious reasons).
          2. Cost shifting: Medicare and Medicaid tell docs and hospitals what they can charge. Period. Often the allowable charges are less than COST. How do providers get healthy? Overcharge private payors. If you pay for your own health insurance, the hidden TAX of that cost-shift is in the insurance premium.
          3. Liability laws in the US are insane. Not just lawsuits. The threat of lawsuits.
          4. Enforced (by government) pharma CARTEL pricing of drugs.

          In Ohio, before Obama, the state wouldn’t LET group insurers have any “better” than a 85% loss ratio….they HAD to pay out at least 85% of premiums in actual treatment/drugs, or be penalized to that limit. They had to cover admin and profit from the 15%…..yet rates were still going up maniacally….thats not the insurers fault. Most states had/have such laws.

          Ultimately, insurers make money on the margins. They are “the House”….the Federal and state governments are the ones cheating, with enforced insurance-carrier co-conspiracy. We are the “mark”.

          Liked by 1 person

          • dbobway says:

            Insurance was created to give less wealthy people a way to cover unexpected bad luck!

            It is a worthy endeavor, where the con-man can make a hardy profit selling False security.
            I said worthy endeavor.

            Insurance is an integral part of our health system because…….
            Ask Statefarm how they are doing insuring people who don’t wreck cars, competing with a lizard.
            They’re doing fine, because they are a good company to their customers.
            Health Insurance companies will work the same way.
            The cream of the crop will float to the top.
            The consumer wins.
            The people who deliver the product win, ask car body mechanics.
            Let us decide?
            The best succeeds the bad goes away.
            It really is that simple.

            Liked by 1 person

      • Marian says:

        I sat in many doctors ‘ offices for eight years prior to my mother’s passing. Her supplemental was very good. When they change a provision onMedicare payment of medication things got weird. Her supplemental was previously paying for those drugs, and then they got a pass from big brother. That was under George W. My impression is insurance and government are in cahoots to drag us to single payer, and the generally healthy wealthy get their private insurance .

        Anyway make eight years of sitting led me to the ultimate reform – cures. Never gonna happen. Too much moolah in repeat business for the providers.

        Like

      • stella says:

        Great idea. Have you heard about the VA?

        As for the cancellation of employer insurance, I have never heard of that. My mother had insurance through my father’s company [employer], and even when she was 90 and had heart failure, that excellent insurance covered everything that she needed right up until death, including blood transfusions and ambulance services, all of her drugs etc. They even reimbursed her for her payments for Medicare coverage.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cdquarles says:

        No, governments do not protect us from monopolies. Governments create monopolies. We are all, as individuals or voluntary associations, able to protect ourselves from monopolies, as long as we remain free people.

        Like

  2. jackphatz says:

    O.M.G. yes the stupid really does hurt. In an all out effort to appear smarter or something then the average person on the Right we get this. This will never end, it’s to far gone now.

    Liked by 8 people

  3. Kjf says:

    We are all government issue, Joe

    Liked by 3 people

  4. A2 says:

    Considering US tax policies I would yes; slavery is alive and well.

    Liked by 7 people

    • John Carifidy says:

      Hilliary was telling the truth (perhaps the only time) when she said Congress was run like a slave plantation; she could have gone further with the truth. A2, you’re right on…the whole country is a slave plantation…and we all know “what I’m talking about.”

      Liked by 5 people

  5. Alison says:

    Smerconish? Is that his real name? Sorry but I can’t stop laughing.

    Sounds like a name right out of Get Smart! (except he isn’t)

    Liked by 7 people

  6. John Galt says:

    Here’s another analogy:

    Moonbats: Congress must fully fund Obozo Care because Congress passed Obozo Care.

    Response: Congress must fully fund the prompt deportation of all illegal aliens because Congress passed immigration laws providing for deportation of illegal aliens.

    Moonbats: But, but, but muh healthcare! It’s not fair!

    Response: But, but, but murder victims, rape victims, job losses! It’s not fair!

    Liked by 21 people

  7. A2 says:

    Yikes, cash for clunkers. Quick hide the oldsters.

    Liked by 5 people

    • bertdilbert says:

      Let’s not fuel any ideas for the left or they will Incorporate government mandated life insurance into Obamacare. Then we must buy life insurance for old people as part of social justice. If the medical industry fails, you get paid upon death.

      The life insurance industry will score a huge chunk of GDP and a major factor in campaign funding. The politicians will be all over it. They just have to have the right sales pitch.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. LOL… Last I checked, loans are optional, my physical body is not!

    Liberalism = Mental Disorder

    Liked by 6 people

    • mike says:

      Smerconish has one of those horrible -ism diseases. It used to be prevented or controlled by good education, critical thought, and a hard working, voting population.

      Unfortunately, I think we’re getting close to one those massive lead therapy treatment campaigns…

      Worst part is, knowing which half of the population is going to get it.

      Liked by 2 people

  9. BobW462 says:

    Well, Smerconish has been a moron for a long time. So, nothing surprising here.

    Liked by 3 people

  10. Chgonana539 says:

    Interesting point is that while auto insurance is required a good percentage of illegals drive without it. Again we law abiding citizens are stuck paying ‘uninsured motorists’ insurance. Thus when something happens our insurer pays and our premiums go up.

    Liked by 9 people

    • GREENMIRROR says:

      The illegals are the only ones who exercise our actual right to travel…taxes n tags were for business trucks. Laws still iin the books!

      Liked by 1 person

    • True, auto ins is required – by the state. You don’t have to owe money on a car to be required – all car owners must have auto/collision insurance. This, of course, gives rise to many collision scams that ins companies don’t mind paying at all, b/d all they have to do is raise premium rates and they’re good.

      Don’t know whether all states have this law. At one time, New Mexico did not.

      Like

      • Gerkenstein says:

        Not sure where collision insurance is required. In MN only liability.

        Liked by 1 person

        • boogywstew says:

          NY requires liability only. Lenders can require you to carry collision but if you have the title it’s up to you. I thought every state was that way?

          Like

      • cdquarles says:

        Collision is not required. What’s required is the minimum amount of liability (that is, you cover the damage you caused to others). If your car is financed, the finance company will stipulate that you indemnify them in case you suffer a loss to the value of the asset they are financing. If you want more than that, that’s up to you. That’s how it works here.

        Like

  11. reggiemeezer says:

    Someone remind the idiot No One is required by law to buy a house or a car,

    Liked by 7 people

  12. R-C says:

    The leftist-GOPe approach to this has me spitting red hot, high velocity nails.

    There is ZERO authority for a federal role in our health care. PERIOD.

    The US Constitution does not grant the federal government a role in our health care. No matter how John Roberts wants to twist it, slice it, or spin it.

    Therefore, the control of health care falls to the States, or The People, respectively.

    Liked by 11 people

    • mike says:

      The question becomes, what are WE going to DO about it ?

      Liked by 1 person

    • SteveInCO says:

      Nor does it grant authority for a lot of things that people on this board consider sacred cows, such as Social Security and Medicare. And even NASA.

      Liked by 1 person

      • R-C says:

        Correct. If we’d only follow our Constitution, the majority of our nation’s ‘big problems’ would go away.

        Liked by 1 person

        • singingsoul says:

          If the government has no rift in healthcare what happens if a person has a serious condition not foreseen and has no insurance…? Who pays if the person did not save for healthcare and has not enough money..? What happens if in curers scam people still want government out or selectively out..?
          I have Medicare B and a supplemental insurance that also pays for glasses and dentist and medicine. I am surprised how much hey pay but then I am quite healthy for my age. I find the supplement great for $275 a Month.

          Like

          • R-C says:

            What happens is that the other arms of government–or the civil society–do what they are authorized to do.

            The US Government has NO authority to impose health care upon anyone. The Constitution is CLEAR on this, even if John Roberts can’t understand it.

            Those powers that are not granted to the federal government devolve to the States, or the People, respectively. Individual states are fully authorized to take on this issue. As are charities. And the FREE MARKET. It is NOT a federal issue, no matter how you try to pull at heart strings to make it so. That kind of thinking is what got us into this mess to begin with.

            Like

  13. quintrillion says:

    Well, I did read somewhere once that US citizens were put up as collateral for US debt.
    This really upset me when I learned of it about 8 years ago
    http://www.usa-the-republic.com/revenue/true_history/Chap8.html

    Liked by 6 people

    • John says:

      Yes – that is the definition of debt. Money today in exchange a portion of your future labor in the future.

      Liked by 1 person

      • bertdilbert says:

        If you die first, then it was free money with no payback. The debt becomes someone else’s problem. If you are in a low income bracket, the government is not going to tax you to pay the debt.

        The government will send you a piece of paper showing what your SS benefit will be but they do hot show you a paper with how much debt you owe.

        Liked by 2 people

  14. Founding Fathers Fan says:

    Insurance is Protection against financial loss. Obamacare (and Ryancare) Cause financial loss.

    Liked by 2 people

    • mike says:

      Government healthcare means people become replaceable consumer units, to be “retired” or replaced as needed, converted to fertilizer or disposed at government whim, convenience and profit.

      Single payer gives them direct control of this process.

      Liked by 2 people

  15. majorstar says:

    Am I missing something? Auto insurance is required in every state, by the state, regardless of whether your auto is subject to a lien. It is based on the state’s interest in public health and safety. So it is analogous to mandating health insurance.

    The home insurance analogy is, though, off target. That is mandated by mortgage companies.

    Aren’t I correct on this?

    Liked by 2 people

    • In reality, we are once again subsidizing the illegal aliens and their abuses of our health and safety. If you are the victim in an accident with an illegal alien, you pay and they walk.

      ILLEGAL ALIENS = MY SLAVERY

      Liked by 6 people

    • patrickhenrycensored says:

      The states require liability insurance.
      Liability car insurance covers damages to another person resulting from an accident you cause.
      That’s different from an auto lender requiring insurance to protect his investment/loan.

      Liked by 4 people

      • majorstar says:

        Yes. But the liability coverage — which I was focusing on — is mandated by the state and that is analogous to mandated health insurance. So there is *some* validity to their point, however distasteful.

        Liked by 3 people

        • patrickhenrycensored says:

          You don’t pay a penalty for not driving.

          Liked by 2 people

          • majorstar says:

            Except extreme, extreme hardship and low quality of life. Unless you live in NYC.

            Liked by 2 people

            • bertdilbert says:

              I believe most states allow for self insurance, thus there is no requirement to buy insurance.

              Like

              • majorstar says:

                Now, I know nothing about this, but… I would have to assume that to do that you would have to demonstrate sufficient assets, perhaps set aside somewhere, to cover the mandated level of liability coverage. So in that case, “self” insurance is, actually, “insurance”.

                Like

              • cdquarles says:

                My state allows a person to post a bond in lieu of a certificate of insurance from a locally licensed agent (the agent may represent multiple firms, local or national). Most, naturally, do not, since $40 a month is pretty affordable (that’s the amount that buys the minimum amount of liability coverage of $300,000, if I am remembering correctly). And yes, in my state, driving on the state’s roads is a licensed privilege. I can, of course, drive on my own property without either insurance or a license; but that would be an act that has a very small value.

                Like

        • jtomka says:

          Liability coverage is required if you choose to own a car. Does the government mandate that you MUST own a car? No. Not yet anyway.

          Like

          • majorstar says:

            Yes, yes… IMO that’s a fairly weak argument though. I’d like to see it tested in court. I doubt most judges would give it much purchase.

            My point was that this “argument” is not as hilarious as it seems. I’m not saying it justifies mandatory health insurance. Just weighing arguments… which is what I do.

            Liked by 1 person

        • dutzie60 says:

          No. The coverage is for another person not yourself.

          Like

        • Mikayla825 says:

          I don’t pay for Auto Insurance. I don’t drive a car either.

          Like

    • Sentient says:

      You’re missing everything. You don’t have to drive. The individual mandate is a tax on your merely existing as a living human citizen. The fact that at certain income levels Obamacare subsidizes the mandated purchase of insurance doesn’t change the fact that it allows – in principle – the government to mandate anything. They could require someone with zero income to buy an insurance policy that costs $40,000 per year. The difference between that obscene situation and the current nature of the individual mandate is only one of degree, not kind.

      Liked by 2 people

      • majorstar says:

        Well spin it how you will. Fact is the state requires insurance if you drive a car. It’s a reasonable analogy no matter if it’s a desirable one or not.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Steve Wright says:

          States have financial responsibility laws for drivers of autos. Insurance is the easiest and cheapest way to satisfy these laws but there are other avenues that do not involve insurance. There is zero comparison to what Obamacare mandates. That is not spin, it is an understanding of the issue at hand.

          Like

          • Steve Wright says:

            I should edit that to say OWNERS of autos. You can borrow cars from friends and drive them and have no need to purchase insurance. The owner of the vehicle has that responsibility and typically his policy will cover anyone using the car with his permission.

            Like

          • Headbanger says:

            Unless the argument is that uninsured patients, especially those that require significant care (trauma, MI, stroke, ect.) cost the “government” (ie. we the people) in the long run. After all, hospital systems are required to treat and stabilize anyone presenting to their ED (EMTALA). If that person is uninsured, the hospital system writes that off as a loss. So there IS a financial responsibility to the federal government, in a way.

            Like

        • average Joe says:

          So ,if you had a wreck yesterday,then you could buy a policy today.

          Like

          • average Joe says:

            A pre existing wreck.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Steve Wright says:

              Actually, when I insured a car for comp/collision that had no prior coverage and was not new off the lot, I had to inspect and exclude all prior damage. Just another basic insurance principle thrown out the window once health insurance is the topic. Our health insurance world has violated just about every basic insurance principle.

              Liked by 1 person

          • majorstar says:

            That’s a different issue. We’re speaking about insurance generally. I agree that pre-existing condition coverage is not “insurance”… but the fact that the courts allow it to be “covered” should demonstrate how loosely these concepts are treated by the courts. Remember, I speak from experience.

            Like

        • bertdilbert says:

          You are promoting total ignorance. The state does not require you have insurance. You can be “self insured”

          “Self insurance can take several forms. You can purchase a surety bond, make a deposit with the DMV or state Department of Insurance, or through some other form of secure deposit. In all cases, the amount of your self insurance must meet or exceed the state required insurance minimum.”

          So if you have the money to put up for the potential risk you impose on others, no insurance product is required.

          Liked by 1 person

          • majorstar says:

            No, I’m playing devil’s advocate to put the brakes on some of the echo chambering going on around here. The argument all are laughing about is not a laughing matter. Believe me.

            Like

    • 4beagles says:

      Nope, you’re off target.
      Owning a car or house is a choice.

      Like

    • SteveInCO says:

      Perhaps the relevant difference is that in the case of car insurance the liability required is to cover the possibility you will harm someone else, whereas with health insurance, you’re required to cover yourself.

      Tangentially related rant: Requiring “society” to pay for your medical care opens the door to government forbidding a lot of self-destructive behavior on the grounds that now it imposes a cost on everyone.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Lucille says:

        Your related rant is on the money, Steve. A very large percentage of health care is due to people’s habits, vices, and lack of concern for their bodies. Change destructive ways of living, and medical expenses would be lowered exponentially.

        Like

      • PNWLifer says:

        Which is the entire purpose of Obamacare and ultimately single payer. It’s not really about your health or affordability or access to care. It is about how the government can control every aspect of your life.

        Liked by 1 person

      • majorstar says:

        Devil’s advocate: It could be argued both are intended to promote citizen health and safety. In law, that’s all you need, a colorable argument. That’s how many, many laws are passed that expand the government’s reach.

        Like

        • SteveInCO says:

          Indeed. I find it hard to talk to some people about this sort of thing since they insist on arguing with you when all you’re trying to point out is that the OTHER side COULD say this. They fly into a rage and counterargue.

          Colorable arguments have been used to successfully advance some truly nutty stuff. It springs from the vague “police power” left to the states (but increasingly usurped by the FedGov).

          Liked by 1 person

        • Steve Wright says:

          Financial responsibility laws have zero to do with promoting either health or safety. It is not a Devils advocate position to use unrelated examples to the topic at hand.

          Like

          • majorstar says:

            Nevertheless, it *is* insurance. You don’t seem to recognize the kinds of arguments that tend to resonate in courts of law. That’s all I’m pointing out. Don’t try to reduce it to an argument on the merits.

            Like

    • dalethorn says:

      No, it’s not based in the state’s interest in health and safety – it’s based in the insurance industry’s self-interests – period.

      Like

      • dalethorn says:

        For example, who do you harm by not wearing a seat belt when driving to work? Nobody. The law protects the insurance company.

        Like

      • majorstar says:

        Then by the same token… right?

        All I’m saying is be careful about what you laugh at.

        I have represented insurance companies in coverage litigation (not insurance defense) many times. I have a good sense how the courts view and interpret insurance and the coverage policies provide. I’ve seen it first hand. Just saying.

        Like

        • Steve Wright says:

          And I was an insurance agent and small business insurance agency owner for 25 years. In California no less. Our focus was property and casualty insurance and it was always fascinating that while we would not pretend to be licensed attorneys, many attorneys did not hesitate to think they were licensed educated insurance professionals.

          Like

          • majorstar says:

            No no no, I respect the insurance industry folks. They (you) know your business. I knew how the courts interpreted or dealt with their business. I’m not arguing insurance theory — which I agree with — I’m trying to temper some views of this stuff because I know the dim view the courts have of insurance companies and their “role” in resolving litigation. They’re the fall guys. It unethical.

            So please don’t paint me with the wrong brush.

            Sundance quoted that original tweet where the Leftists cited banks requiring insurance as equivalent to the state doing it. The banks do it as a matter of contract. Obviously. But I raised the point that states do require insurance on their own with automobiles, too, which is a closer analogy. I expected people to glean the gist of my remark. It didn’t take like I figured. Hmm.

            Like

    • dbobway says:

      You don’e have to drive a car.

      You don’t have to own a house.

      The guy , broke, dying in the street is going to be taken care of. This not going away.

      If the house wanted to git rid 95% of Obamacare, they would have.

      Making these huge companies earn their money is not going to be easy.

      “Repeal and replace is so hard, we just can’t “won’t” do it.

      That BS train has left the station.

      Trump doesn’t have time to get in a tit-for-tat with these Representatives of their own bank account.

      We have to beat them into submission, by throwing stuff at them so fast and overwhelming, we can slowly change the narrative.

      The Republican house of Rep’s could have passed Ryan’s, horribly, presented bill.

      It would have gotten parts of a free markets back in the game. It would have been a virus put into the gov’t healthcare Monster. I bet in that 80% of the GOP house, who wanted to pass the bill, there is somebody who can get passed.

      Sundance, rightly, reminds me the HFC voted for Ryan for Leader.

      That eliminates 30 or so members who won’t do the job they were elected to do. Thinning out the heard, shall continue till the people of our country are properly represented.

      Next!

      Like

  16. Aqua says:

    I’m from Bucks Count, PA, where Michael Smerconish grew up. He was an R, but sold out to the Dems when he was offered a spot on CNN and Sirius. No one here has followed him since then, but the story is that his ego grew tenfold since then. Smerconish is a turncoat to all who live here. Unless you are a Dem. and an idiot…..

    Go, Trump! Philly For Trump ruled today, even if it does not show up on the news. Great job for all who showed up!

    Liked by 4 people

  17. Sa_Bi says:

    The ultimate aim of government-controlled healthcare is to create a system where the government can force you to live ‘healthy’ (as defined by the government).

    Basically the Hitler Youth for adults.

    Liked by 2 people

    • John says:

      That’s complete bullshit and wishful thinking. Government decisions are arbitrary. For example, everybody over 70 on average is a net drain on the healthcare system therefore everybody over 70 shouldn’t be treated when they get sick. They don’t give a shit if you are healthy or not.

      Liked by 2 people

    • mike says:

      If youre old, disabled, political dissenter, etc too bad. Look hard at Hilter’s T4 healthcare prograrm… it will be coming sooner than later.

      I would say a stealth T4 program has existed or years in the nursing homes.

      Liked by 1 person

      • 4beagles says:

        Yep, look at dat 101yr old Rockafeller relic that finally died.
        Cyber tech and robits in the future offer even more chaos.
        I’m sure politicians will be the first to claim the rights to having their superior brains planted into cyborgs. Nancy Pelosi might have already had it done…lol

        Liked by 1 person

  18. asawasa says:

    one of the most common signs of heat exhaustion is: confusion. he must have just been outside in the sun too long. maybe it’s that way for him everyday and with no cover it goes right to his brain literally.

    http://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/heat-exhaustion#1

    Like

  19. Howie says:

    It will not stop with the insurance. Once you are in the new insurance scheme you will become a possible risk to the collective good.. a possible claim. Your behavior will have to be monitored to make sure you do not engage in risky activity. Enter the minders.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Sentient says:

      In her confirmation hearing Kagan never stated that a law requiring the eating of broccoli would be unconstitutional – only that it would be a “stupid law”. She’s the most dangerous “justice” on the court.

      Liked by 3 people

    • justfactsplz says:

      Followed by the take your gunners.

      Like

    • woohoowee says:

      LOL! Our employer provided scam, er, insurance is an HSA. They want you to participate in a wellness program via phone and meet different markers in lab work to get additional money put in the HSA. In Arkansas it’s illegal to make diagnosis/whatever by phone or internet. I’m still waiting to get a call from the program so I could tell them, “You’ll have to wait till I go to another state and call ya back b/c what you’re doing is illegal.” LOL!

      Oh, and all the markers they would be checking in labs are already perfect in me so I want to tell ’em just go ahead and put the money in my HSA and I’ll see it when it gets there. But you can’t call me or email me about it, b/c it’s illegal. LOL!

      We found out it’s illegal in Arkansas b/c the insurance provides a phone in/email doc and when we tried to sign up, no cigar.

      These politicians and bureaucrats have made a massive disaster out of everything they touch. Between state and fed I don’t think anyone knows what the law is anymore.

      Liked by 1 person

      • bertdilbert says:

        A wellness program is not a diagnosis of a medical condition. No law broken there. When they refused to sign you up for phone/email they were in compliance with the state law correct?

        I do not understand your complaint.

        Like

        • woohoowee says:

          Yes, the wellness program is practicing medicine by phone/electronically b/c you have to lab work done (they really highlight that the labs are at no charge to you!). They get your lab results and if some of the markers aren’t in acceptable range they have you do different things to get them in range. Neither one of us need the program b/c we already know all of our markers are in perfect range. We aren’t over weight, etc.

          We found out about AR state law b/c the insurance company offers a different program for a doctor by phone/electronically for things like antibiotics due to tonsillitis. It’s to keep people of the ER after clinic hours, etc.

          My complaint is how government has messed everything up. They need to get out of our healthcare. Other than that hubby and me found the whole thing hilarious. “I’ll have to pick a state where its legal and go there to call ya back!” LOL!

          Liked by 1 person

        • woohoowee says:

          Oh, but the wellness people haven’t called, yet. Maybe they already know it’s illegal. LOL!

          Like

      • Steve Wright says:

        HSA means health savings account. It is not the insurance policy but works with it. One can have the high deductible insurance policy with or without the HSA but no HSA without the policy.

        Liked by 1 person

        • woohoowee says:

          Not the way ours is set up. We used to have a separate HSA option (pre-tax) but not anymore.

          Like

          • Steve Wright says:

            Wait…does your employer require this of you before contributing to the HSA? That sounds discriminatory and would probably be illegal. But I assure you I am right on the distinction between the savings account and the policy.

            Liked by 1 person

            • woohoowee says:

              No, it isn’t a requirement. And, yes, you are correct about the distinction, but that’s the term being used for a whole different critter. The employer puts x dollars in your account at the first of the year and if you go to the doc the insurance co. doles it out to the doc/lab/meds till it runs out. Does that help clarify?

              I kept trying to explain it to one of my sisters last year and she didn’t understand it until her insurance co. did the same thing.

              They also rolled our meds in with the whole thing, but it’s still through express scripts. I know that sounds confusing, too. And it is.

              The insurance really doesn’t cover anything and if it does you’d need a cipher to figure out what was paid and why. We don’t have control over *anything*. That’s where everyone is headed insurance wise until Trump45 makes them straighten this whole mess out.

              Like

            • woohoowee says:

              With a true HSA you’re reimbursed for expenses submitted or use your card at point of purchase. With what we’ve got insurance controls *everything*. Does that help clarify? It’s bizarre and frankly, creepy.

              Like

        • woohoowee says:

          For further clarification, the employer puts $ in the account, not the employee.

          Like

          • Steve Wright says:

            Both can contribute until you reach the max annual limit allowed by the IRS. If the employer does not put in the max, many times the employee will top it off to get the full tax benefit

            Liked by 1 person

            • woohoowee says:

              We aren’t offered a true HSA any longer.

              Like

              • Steve Wright says:

                You lost me again. A “true” HSA? I still think any employer mandating wellness exams before making HSA contributions is skating on thin ice.

                Liked by 1 person

                • woohoowee says:

                  Sorry I wasn’t clear. The wellness program is not mandatory. If you do participate in the wellness program the employer puts extra money in your account when you complete the program, and you can do the program several different times during the year. But the insurance company decides who gets paid what, etc. We don’t have a card to use like a debit card and.

                  The employer puts less than half of our deductible in the account at the beginning of the year. It would have made more sense to just lower the deductible on one hand, but I think the money rolls over to the next year if you don’t use it so maybe that’s why it is done this way. Dunno. It’s all just a giant headache.

                  Like

                • Gerkenstein says:

                  Yes.. HSA rolls over… FSA’s or some FSA’s did not.

                  Liked by 1 person

          • cdquarles says:

            More strictly speaking, the employer puts in part of the employee’s pay package (usually from the tax favored parts for both the employer and the employee) into the account as an agent of the employee, so, in the end, the employee is putting in the money, either way or both ways, depending on the terms.

            Like

      • Howie says:

        Some companies no send minders to policyholders homes already. To ‘help’ steer you to a better ‘lifestyle’.

        Liked by 1 person

        • woohoowee says:

          Bizarre. This stuff has got to stop. Wonder what the odds are that a whole bunch of people working for ins. cos aren’t in great shape themselves?

          Like

    • Either that, or the English way – just keep putting off your treatment. I actually witnessed a woman talking about her daughter whose operation had been postponed three times!

      Everybody is thinking of worst-case examples. It is the petty shortages that really get people down. Govt workers Do. Not. Care. About. You. Period.

      Like

  20. james23 says:

    Smerc. is a Philadelphia Ambulance Chaser whose Idea of a Great Republican was Arlen Specterd. Nuff said.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Sentient says:

    The best thing about Ryan’s bill would have been ending the individual mandate. Of course, it should still be declared unconstitutional as a capitation tax.

    Liked by 2 people

  22. GREENMIRROR says:

    To be American Citizen u must pay the King!

    Yep another dolt that hasn’t read the Constitution….

    Liked by 2 people

  23. Ellie says:

    Smerconish thinks like an academic, which means he is demonstrating the loss of ability to think…

    It’s that or he believes all rights are endowed by the government.

    Does anyone listen to this guy?

    Mr. levin and Mr. Smerconish, if you are reading this blog, I don’t listen to you anymore.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. carnan43 says:

    This discussion isn’t quite as simple as making someone purchase healthcare or pay a penalty. Long before Obamacare consumers lost their Freedom via picking up the tab for those that didn’t have healthcare. The cost of emergency room and in some cases hospital stays were passed on to consumers. I’m all for individual freedom but with it, there must be a legal requirement to deny service if you want to be free. Congress and the courts should be the center of freedom lovers attention.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Iron Lady says:

      Right now, everyone is entitled to healthcare whether they pay for it or not. If we are unwilling to turn anyone away from the emergency room, we should require all to have minimum health coverage. Any other policy is much easier said than done.

      Like

  25. Steve Wright says:

    Good grief. State mandated auto liability (and that is all that is mandated) is to protect the innocent from having to pay, sue, or rely on their own insurance when injured by another. Not only that, the limits are very minimal and can be secured in most cases for relatively few dollars and satisfy the law.

    There is no law mandating insuring for your own injuries or physical damage. The discussion by one in the comments is totally off base.

    Liked by 1 person

    • dalethorn says:

      That’s only partly true. Seatbelt laws are proof that the insurance co’s get lawmakers to protect the insurance co’s.

      Like

      • Steve Wright says:

        Please. Insurance is not even needed to satisfy state financial responsibility laws and no insurance company I ever represented wanted us to write state minimum liability only policies. Nor did I as we lost money on each one we wrote.

        Like

  26. ecmarsh says:

    Wife is on the road visiting the boys for a few weeks so me and the dogs eat in the living room.
    Flipped on the MSM and there was Smearconish with some guy from the band Spinal Tap. Never heard of that band so went to You Tube and now I know why I never heard of them.
    Anyway, this Spinal Tap dude was babbling on about nothing and my thoughts were, he wants to grow up to be a Scott Adams. Only problem is that he is probably 20 to 30 years older and 20 to 30 points dumber than Adams.
    Me and the puppies had a good laugh.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Blade says:

      Flipped on the MSM and there was Smearconish with some guy from the band Spinal Tap. Never heard of that band so went to You Tube and now I know why I never heard of them.

      Was it the bass player guy? Harry Shearer, dark haired, a lefty who also is involved with the Simpsons and was never shy about demonstrating his idiocracy.

      Not sure about Michael McKean, one of the two guitar players, the American one. He is very big in Hollywood and pretty talented but it would not surprise if he was a liberal. He is the OCD brother on Better Call Saul.

      The other guitar player is Nigel Tufnel, a Brit, who has the amp that famously goes to eleven. Never heard about his politics. Odds are that he is a leftist but maybe he grew a brain and is like Farage?

      Like

    • Blade says:

      Forgot to mention that Spinal Tap is ( or was ) a fictitious band like the Monkees were, and the movie(s) was a parody of rock star life.

      The producer was meathead Rob Reiner who is as dumb a leftist as you can find in Hollywood. Naturally he is a product of nepotism as his father is/was a famous TV personality.

      Liked by 1 person

  27. Blade says:

    This has nothing to do with government forced insurance coverage of your own body or physical health – UNLESS the progressive argument extends to: the government underwrites or loans you your personage; ie. the government owns your physical body.

    Is that what Smerconish is arguing here?

    They used this bogus argument back in 2009. And yes, they are this stupid.

    Anyone remember a reporter ( maybe Major Garrett? ) asking Nazi Pelosi something like: ‘Madam. Speaker, can you cite where in the Constitution it grants Congress the authority to require health insurance?’. With a snotty scowl on her face she said something like: ‘What, are you kidding?’ Implying they can do anything at all that they can get through Congress.

    Remember Scalia’s awesome hypothetical question during the Obamacare mandate oral arguments: “Can the Congress require you to purchase Broccoli?” It really is time to give back what they have been doing to us. Therefore …

    Let’s demand that Congress legislate the requirement that all citizens purchase firearms, or pay a back-breaking John Roberts tax/penalty.I want them drowning in cognitive dissonance. And I really want to see that one land in the federal courts 🙂 How could they ever rule against such a law! It hits them twice squarely between the eyes. It actually falls squarely in the Second Amendment ‘well regulated’ militia argument that the leftists mention now and then, and it of course exploits the idiotic John Roberts Obamacare ruling.

    Liked by 2 people

  28. Harry Lime says:

    Yeah, every once in a while it slips out. Most in the media are just as left wing and insane as this not-so-useful idiot.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. Timmy-the-Ute says:

    I’ve had 2 mortgages on homes I have bought and never had to get mortgage insurance. Specious argument.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. Sundance: More brilliant breadcrumbs.

    You’ve once again triggered we Treepers toward the end game for healthcare:

    State-controlled and State-funded (where unavoidable) Healthcare.

    50 Incubators for Healthcare that works for us at a high-competition cost we choose to afford.

    Like

  31. Deep thinker turns out to be derp? Haven’t we been doing that for 8+ years now?

    Like

  32. Piper says:

    Tin foil hat time everyone- I’ve done ALOT of reading about this over the last ten years. eatch Jordan Maxwell explain how the whole thing works. It actually makes a lot of sense when you hear how and why you have a birth certificate and social security number. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3P9ustwAsC4

    Liked by 1 person

    • dalethorn says:

      I used to talk to Jordan at those meetings in Burbank. Jordan said something about protests and investigations (by you and me, investigating politicians and their crooked deals): “They will deal with you eventually, and it won’t be good.”

      Like

  33. blazingnash says:

    All Your Bones Are Belong To Us!

    Like

  34. BG says:

    Some sort of socialise medicine is coming and it’s sensible. There is no other choice. Otherwise half the country can’t afford 3 days in intensive care without selling the house, which is how a privatised system for the bulk of poorly “insured” (sic) works. It’s that simple.
    If the top half keep telling the bottom half that the most basic govt service, health care, is merely a profit centre you are going to have those people voting for idiots like Sanders.
    That means privately insured health outcomes will be additional expenditure on top of say a 4% income tax healthcare levy for everyone who works. Get used to it. The underclasses will outnumber the middle class in a couple of elections. We did to ourselves with 3rd world immigration.
    Enjoy.

    Like

    • Blade says:

      You’re pretty much correct except for …

      The underclasses will outnumber the middle class in a couple of elections.

      … that came and went. And they have hollowed out the middle class to non-existence. We are far closer to a feudal system now, the ruling class of Kings and Queens with a closely guarded nobility of aristocrats, and then a big big gap until you get to the serfs. Like in feudal times, the serfs work the King’s estates and pay a duty for the privilege ( property/school taxes, you didn’t really think you own your land? ).

      We do have a hydrogen bomb in our arsenal … repeal of the 16th Amendment… there is no quicker and absolute way to detonate the system. For it is the ability to tax income “instead of” ( really: in addition to ) tariffs that formerly funded the FedGov behemoth that allows them to grow out of control. Well quick correction, they have since added a new idea, “borrowing” ( really: stealing ) from future generations. So they have two income streams at their disposal and they are squeezing every drop out of both.

      Repeal of the 16th Amendment and adding language to prohibit paycheck withholding, taxing gifts or inheritance, and defining a fixed consumption tax would completely reset the beast.

      The only problem is that there may no longer be 38 states left to ratify any pro-American anti-Globalist Amendment. Name the leftists States. Can you count to thirteen? If so, we were successfully tricked into waiting to long.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Steve Wright says:

      We could simply start by treating health insurance like every other type of insurance, then discuss healthcare expenses for the poorer citizens in a different conversation. First step. No employer provided health insurance.

      Like

  35. Rick says:

    I used to think Michael Smerconish was a reasonable guy when he had his own show.
    But he went full noonday when he was trying to get a job with CNN.

    Like

  36. Raven says:

    “This has nothing to do with government forced insurance coverage of your own body or physical health – UNLESS the progressive argument extends to: the government underwrites or loans you your personage; ie. the government owns your physical body.

    Is that what Smerconish is arguing here?”

    I worked for one of the major health insurance providers for about 15 years and sat in on a few high level meetings. It was disgusting beyond words how this nation wide “health” insurance provider no longer called its customers ‘people’ or ‘customers’ or ‘patients’ or even ‘warm bodies’ — they called their customers “UNITS.” And since this company is one of the biggies I am fairly certain all “health” insurance providers do the same thing. They remove the humanity from everything they talk about — they remove human flesh and bone, human dignity and God given breath while supposedly caring for the “health” of God’s greatest creation — mankind.

    The only “health” health insurance providers care about is the health of their cash pile. WE ARE UNITS TO THEM!

    While working for this major HMO one of my co-workers was diagnosed with having cancer. She had to continue working while going through chemo in order to have insurance to pay for the treatments to save her life. When she became so sick she could no longer work she was fired — of course in a “nice” way — and she lost both her income and insurance. The most disgusting part of the story was learning that her employer — my employer — had insured her physical body, and when she died they received a payout for “their loss.”

    So Smerconish doesn’t even have to make the argument that physical bodies are underwritten for profit — I know for certain that one national HMO insures all their UNITS for profit.

    Like

  37. Jenny R. says:

    The state (or corporation, depending upon which “side” you affiliate with; they are essentially the same and a mere matter of semantics) is everything, and everything is for the state (or corporation)!
    That’s pretty much the base essence of the thinking.

    Meanwhile most of my co-workers now have those iFit watch things (it helps you to stay healthy I hear; one lady has three of them all presents from loving family members; she offered to get me one; everyone told me it was a great thing…no thank you) — and obsess over them. Now their watches (or whatever they are) boss them around; so, already ruled over and not even by a human being, a wristband, a piece of electronics and rubber.

    Like

  38. No one will be safe until (D)s and liberals are completely destroyed.

    Like

  39. LARS says:

    The tax plantation will get much smaller, very soon.

    Like

  40. P. A. M. says:

    Banks require insurance on the home because the asset they are providing a loan for can burn to the ground and becomes a loss to the lender. Automobiles, also an asset (depreciating) can harm others usually when in motion and so there is a liability. My body however is something that belongs to me and is not some hard value asset. Or are we to treat it as such? Are humans merely becomming just another commodity?

    Like

  41. spren says:

    The essence of requirements for property and auto insurance are that the insured has the means to assure financial responsibility. He needs to protect others. In the case of homeowners insurance, he is protecting his mortgage lender for their risk in loaning him the money for his house. Once the loan is paid off, the owner of the house has no requirement to carry insurance for his house and now only does so to protect his own interests.

    In the case of auto insurance, the car owner is protecting the interests of anyone he might harm due to his operation of the vehicle. If he is affluent, he doesn’t have to have auto insurance if he can prove through a letter of credit that he personally has the financial ability to cover any losses he might be responsible for.

    The mandate for having health insurance is something quite different. Government is mandating that you have insurance to protect yourself. If we didn’t require health care providers to provide that care regardless of the ability to pay, then government would have no leverage over us requiring us to have that self insurance protecting society from the need to pay for our care. While difficult to set up, we need to place this care for those lacking the ability to do so for themselves with charitable operations. Then we could see our personal freedom to live our own lives as we see fit restored.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s