From MEDIA MATTERS:
Today, in a long speech on the House floor, Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA) laid out his case against health care reform. On top of the usual talk about a “government takeover” and “socialized medicine,” Gingrey stressed his belief that, in the midst of a recession, improving the nation’s ailing health care system shouldn’t be President Obama’s top priority. Gingrey acknowledged that 14,000 Americans are losing their health insurance every day, but literally laughed off the notion that this constitutes a health care crisis. Rather, he said, “14,000 people are losing their health insurance every day NOT because of the cost of health insurance [laughs], they’re losing it because they lost their job!”
Yeah, Phil, that’s just hilarious!!
However, Gingrey either doesn’t grasp or is intentionally ignoring the fact that rising health care costs are often the reason for layoffs. As Business Week reported in July:
In a first-of-its-kind study, the non-profit Rand Corp linked the rapid growth in U.S. health care costs to job losses and lower output. The study, published online by the journal Health Services Research, gives weight to President Barack Obama’s dire warnings about the impact of rising costs if Congress does not enact health care reform. […]
Of course, Dr. Gingrey has good reason to deny the severe problems in the current system. In his political career, Gingrey has received over $1.8 million from the health sector, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
(Video at link above)
From TALKING POINTS MEMO:
During a House floor speech on Monday night, Rep. Michele Bachmann gave a dire warning: That President Obama has already begun efforts to limit our energy usage from cars and home heating and air conditioning — and our food consumption is next:
“President Obama said we can’t eat as much food as we want and think the rest of the world will be okay about that — as if that matters to freedom-loving Americans,” said Bachmann. “Well, we just heard last week that the Federal Government now under the Obama administration is calling for a re-ordering of America’s food supply. What’s that going to mean? Now will the White House decide how many calories we consume, or what types of food we consume?”
Banks lost the battle but not necessarily the war Thursday when the House voted to stop subsidizing the companies’ student-loan business. If the legislation becomes law, it would change 35 ways of doing business. That’s a big “if” however.
The vote was largely along partisan lines in the House, 253-171. But it now goes to the Senate where the financial-services industry can now target its lobbying efforts even more intensely to stop the bill it roundly detests.
The legislation, the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009, would allow college students to go directly to the U.S. government to obtain loans instead of private banks, yanking a lucrative piece of business away from banks and Sallie Mae, the private company that dominates the student-loan industry.
Supporters of the bill say it would save the federal government more than $80 billion though opponents either say the savings would be far less or that the new approach would eventually wind up costing the government more money.
NPR’s Audie Cornish explained the political and lobbying dynamics around the bill on Morning Edition before Thursday’s vote.
AUDIE: Under the bill, the Perkins Loan Program would be expanded to more students. And Pell Grant awards for low income borrowers would increase. School construction projects around the country would get a $4 billion boost. Community colleges could expect $10 billion for renovations and adult retraining programs. Additional money is slotted for other programs. It’s a list that makes Republicans, like North Carolina’s Virginia Foxx, wary.
REP. VIRGINIA FOXX (Republican, North Carolina): The bill creates nine new programs and increases the federal government takeover of early education, higher education, school construction, and more. It is an insidious intrusion into education at all levels by the federal government.
From Rod Dreher at Opinion Blog at The Dallas Morning News:
It’s Obama’s America, is it not? Obama’s America, white kids getting beat up on school buses now. You put your kids on a school bus, you expect safety but in Obama’s America the white kids now get beat up …”
So, I guess that now that we have a black man in the White House, it’s open season on white children, right? Oh no, say Rush’s defenders, that’s not what Rush meant. He was being sarcastic. Ah, I see. Well, how do you think things would go if Limbaugh said something like this, if, say, Joe Lieberman were president?:
It’s Lieberman’s America, is it not? Lieberman’s America, Gentiles getting defrauded and robbed by Jews on Wall Street. You put your money in a mutual fund, you expect security but in Lieberman’s America the non-Jews now get robbed blind…”
How does that sound, Dittoheads? Yeah, right, sarcasm, if by “sarcasm” you mean using vile racial and ethnic tropes to make a political point.