Charles Krauthammer, On Obama Care, See Commonsnese2day’s One Word Answer.

Commonsense2day thoroughly enjoys the Opinion Pages of Mr. Krauthammer, he invokes common sense 2 day. Please read his piece below, and here is our one word answer. “Romney”.

Tell us what you think….

Obamacare: The Reckoning

Obamacare dominated the 2010 midterms, driving its Democratic authors to a historic electoral shellacking. But since then, the issue has slipped quietly underground.

Now it’s back, summoned to the national stage by the confluence of three disparate events: the release of new Congressional Budget Office cost estimates, the approach of Supreme Court hearings on the law’s constitutionality and the issuance of a compulsory contraception mandate.

Cost:

Obamacare was carefully constructed to manipulate the standard 10-year cost projections of the CBO. Because benefits would not fully kick in for four years, President Obama could trumpet 10-year gross costs of less than $1 trillion — $938 billion to be exact.

But now that the near-costless years 2010 and 2011 have elapsed, the true 10-year price tag comes into focus. From 2013 through 2022, the CBO reports, the costs of Obamacare come to $1.76 trillion — almost twice the phony original number.

It gets worse. Annual gross costs after 2021 are more than a quarter of $1 trillion every year — until the end of time. That, for a new entitlement in a country already drowning in $16 trillion of debt.

Constitutionality:

Beginning Monday, the Supreme Court will hear challenges to the law. The American people, by an astonishing two-thirds majority, want the law and/or the individual mandate tossed out by the court. In practice, however, questions this momentous are generally decided 5 to 4 — i.e., they depend on whatever side of the bed Justice Anthony Kennedy gets out of that morning.

Ultimately, the question will hinge on whether the Commerce Clause has any limits. If the federal government can compel a private citizen, under threat of a federally imposed penalty, to engage in a private contract with a private entity (to buy health insurance), is there anything the federal government cannot compel the citizen to do?

If Obamacare is upheld, it fundamentally changes the nature of the American social contract. It means the effective end of a government of enumerated powers — i.e., finite, delineated powers beyond which the government may not go, beyond which lies the free realm of the people and their voluntary institutions. The new post-Obamacare dispensation is a central government of unlimited power from which citizen and civil society struggle to carve out and maintain spheres of autonomy.

Figure becomes ground; ground becomes figure. The stakes could not be higher.

Coerciveness.

Serendipitously, the recently issued regulation on contraceptive coverage has allowed us to see exactly how this new power works. All institutions — excepting only churches, but not excepting church-run charities, hospitals, etc. — will be required to offer health care that must include free contraception, sterilization and drugs that cause abortion.

Consider the cascade of arbitrary bureaucratic decisions that resulted in this edict:

(1) Contraception, sterilization and abortion pills are classified as medical prevention. On whose authority? The secretary of health and human services, invoking the Institute of Medicine. But surely categorizing pregnancy as a disease equivalent is a value decision disguised as science. If contraception is prevention, what are fertility clinics? Disease inducers? And if contraception is prevention because it lessens morbidity and saves money, by that logic, mass sterilization would be the greatest boon to public health since the pasteurization of milk.

(2) This type of prevention is free — no co-pay. Why? Is contraception morally superior to or more socially vital than — and thus more of a “right” than — penicillin for a child with pneumonia?

(3) “Religious” exemptions to this edict extend only to churches, places where the faithful worship God, and not to church-run hospitals and charities, places where the faithful do God’s work. Who promulgated this definition, so stunningly ignorant of the very idea of religious vocation? The almighty HHS secretary.

Today, it’s the Catholic Church whose free-exercise powers are under assault from this cascade of diktats sanctioned by — indeed required by — Obamacare. Tomorrow it will be the turn of other institutions of civil society that dare stand between unfettered state and atomized citizen.

Rarely has one law so exemplified the worst of the Leviathan state — grotesque cost, questionable constitutionality and arbitrary bureaucratic coerciveness. Little wonder the president barely mentioned it in his latest State of the Union address. He wants to be reelected. He’d rather talk about other things.

But there’s no escaping it now. Oral arguments begin Monday at 10 a.m.

Contact Mr. Krauthammer at: letters@charleskrauthammer.com

Original article at the Washington Post can be viewed here

Recommend to a friend

Luck? or is there really no such thing…Santorum Lost Michigan…Karma?

Some would say that there is no such thing as luck, maybe just good or bad karma. In the case of Michigan we agree with  that father Santorum certainly had a chance, but kismet as it be he could not help but blow it. The gravitational heart strings that pull a man to the right are just to strong. Santorum quite frankly, got to full of himself thinking that people were actually buying into his right wing brand of social rhetoric, that was not the case. It was just another go round of Bachman, Cain, Perry, Newt and now father Santorum’s turn to rise and fall. It is indicative of Romney not being the idea candidate, but he is by far the stronger and better candidate. Time will ultimately tell.

Romney’s luck

It’s been a wild ride, but the story line of the Republican race remains remarkably simple and constant: It’s Mitt Romney and the perishable pretenders.

Five have come and gone, if you count the Donald’s aborted proto-candidacy. And now the sixth and most plausibly presidential challenger just had his moment — and blew it in Michigan.

It’s no use arguing that Rick Santorum won nearly as many Michigan delegates as Romney. He lost the state. Wasn’t Santorum claiming a great victory just three weeks ago when he shockingly swept Missouri, Minnesota and Colorado — without a single convention delegate being selected?

He was right. It was a great victory. Delegate counts were beside the point. These three wins instantly propelled him to the front of the field nationally and to a double-digit lead in Romney’s Michigan back yard.

Then Santorum went ahead and lost it. Rather than sticking to his considerable working-class, Reagan-Democrat appeal, he kept wandering back to his austere social conservatism. Rather than placing himself in “Grandpa’s hands,” his moving tribute to his immigrant coal miner grandfather as representative of the America that Santorum pledges to restore, he insisted on launching himself into culture-war thickets: Kennedy, college and contraception.

He averred that John Kennedy’s 1960 Houston speech on separation of church and state makes him “throw up.” Whatever the virtues of Santorum’s expansive view of the role of religion, the insulting tone toward Kennedy, who, living at a time of frank anti-Catholic bigotry, understandably offered a more attenuated view of religion in the public square, was jarring, intemperate and utterly unnecessary. Continue reading

Recommend to a friend

JOE VS. JOSE | If you vote for or support any politician that supports illegal aliens… You are part of the problem!

We received “Joe vs. Jose” in the Inbox today. We make no claim or authorship, ownership or any other ship, it just is what it is. Joe vs Jose is a widely known internet piece of electronic content about undocumented workers that has been floated around and discussed on Snopes and other sites for sometime. And while Joe vs. Jose is certainly an exaggeration (i.e. 30% on 52K come on..) and while we usually do not re-post internet pass it on emails, we are re-posting this one here for no other reason that to allow our readers to read, be thought provoking, think, and decide. So here we present you with Joe vs. Jose. The timing seems to be just about right.

JOE vs. JOSE

You have two families: “Joe Legal” and “Jose Illegal”. Both families have two parents, two children, and live in California .

Joe Legal works in construction, has a Social Security Number and makes $25.00 per hour with taxes deducted.

Jose Illegal also works in construction, has NO Social Security Number, and gets paid $15.00 cash “under the table”.

Continue reading

Recommend to a friend

Keep you legs closed ladies. Santorum sugar daddy. Foster Friess is a real pill on contraception.

Commonsense2day, Santorum is to far to the right on social issues. Not only will woman not support him, the American people do not share his extreme views. He is hypocritical when he exclaims that Romney did one thing regarding health-care in his state, but although Romney has spoken  over and over denouncing Obama care, Rick holds to his “so what” I don’t care what you say, because of what you did in your state.  So, its hypocritical for Rick to say, at my core this is what I believe, but don’t worry I wont let it affect my policies. Santorum and his core beliefs and moral and religious principles will not effect his government polciies, that’s ridiculous. You can’t run as someone who holds these cherished beliefs and then turn right around and say, don’t worry I won’t let any of my beliefs effect policy. That is the most ridiculous thing and no one believes it. Santorum is not right of center, he is off the map when it comes to many of his beliefs.

Foster Friess proved to be a real pill on MSNBC’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports” today. Mitchell asked the mega-wealthy and conservative bank roller of Rick Santorum’s presidential campaign if he had any concerns about Santorum’s comments on social issues such as contraception and women in combat. Friess’s stupefying, backward and dangerous response had jaws dropping from coast to coast.

People seem to be preoccupied with sex. I think it says something about our culture. We, maybe, need a massive therapy session so we can concentrate on what the real issues are. This contraceptive thing. My gosh, it’s so inexpensive. Back in my days they used Bayer Aspirin for contraception. The gals put it between their knees, and it wasn’t that costly. Continue reading

Recommend to a friend

FATHER RICK SANTORUM, A NICE GUY…BUT…

Email to a Friend Email to a Friend

The 2012 republican primaries have been full of nice people, I think everyone would agree with that statement.  However, each one of them come with their own “but”. Congress woman Bachman, tore out of the gate with an Iowa straw poll win that the media latched onto to make her the first ‘flavor’ of the race, then came the ‘buts’. Then we had the rise of Herman Cain, the Godfather’s Pizza CEO, and his 999 plan, and then came his ‘but’s’ with a little side of extra cheese to boot, and the new ‘flavor’ failed to deliver, and so much so that he bowed out.

Then we had the extra-ordinary Texan who rose and fell through his seemingly odd behavior and failed debate performances which led every one to question is good old fashion IQ. Odd, but again, the flavor or the day that came and went.

And of course we have Newt, that requires no comment as his ‘buts’ are so prolific. So, here we are with Father Santorum as the new flavor of the day, the question will not be his strengths as a candidate and potential leader of the free world. The question facing the American populace will be are his ‘buts’ bigger and more troubling than Mitt Romney’s or Newt Gingrich’s but’s.

Ron Paul’s but’s are excluded for the obvious reasons.

It’s a real telling sign when we are not voting on the most qualified but instead the least offensive.

Recommend to a friend