Video: Louisiana Democratic Party chair blows the lid off the secret reason people oppose ObamaCare

posted at 6:41 pm on May 30, 2013 by Allahpundit

Via Chicks on the Right, two possibilities for why the GOP’s grown chilly to national health care programs over time. One: Republican pols used to support a bigger role for government here, replete with variations of an individual mandate, but as the country’s sunk deeper into debt over the past 20 years and the entitlement wave has begun to crest, conservatives have grown more libertarian. You may be seeing the start of a similar phenomenon right now in foreign policy: Most grassroots righties I know backed the Iraq war but are deeply skeptical of intervening in Syria. Quasi-isolationist Rand Paul is a more popular figure among rank-and-file conservatives than the staunchly hawkish former nominee John McCain. If I had to bet, I’d bet heavily that GOP voters will be more accepting of gay marriage 10 years from now than they are today. Parties change, for complex reasons. Many conservatives wish Beltway Republicans would change more quickly than they have.

Two: Racism.

To take this argument seriously, which none but the cheapest lefty demagogues pretend to do, you have to believe that the Republican response to health-care reform in 2010 would have been different under President Hillary. If you remember 1993, you know the truth about that. But then, instead of posting this video, in that alternate universe I’d be posting a video of some Democratic apparatchik complaining that the opposition to HillaryCare is driven by sexism. The only upside to losing to Andrew Cuomo or (giggle) Martin O’Malley in 2016 is that this sort of lame identity-based pandering will be momentarily disabled for national policy, unless the left figures out a way in the meantime to build a “Republicans hate Italians/Irish” narrative. They’re smart. Don’t put it past them.

Anyway, a lot more people are set to become racist next year. Exit question: If Peterson’s right, why do I loathe RomneyCare so much? Oh, right — biased against his religion, I take it. Never mind.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

I hate these people. Honestly, it should not be a crime to exterminate them, as an act of self defense for the gene pool / humanity.

Sick to f*cking death of them, and beyond any sense of humanity or compassion for such repugnant and vile creatures.

Midas on May 30, 2013 at 8:46 PM

I’d have to back-fill all the implications and unspoken “logic” just so you could understand.

I suppose the comment is too sublime for some – perhaps all. I apologize. Nevertheless, the troll fishing effort is wasted on me, but I did smile at the dog-pile effort.

ericdijon on May 30, 2013 at 8:35 PM

I see.

I didn’t know you were a troll. I didn’t understand your point, your topic sentence, which is why I said

I don’t understand your point, your topic sentence.

Axe on May 30, 2013 at 7:20 PM

– but, now I suppose I should abandon the effort.

I did smile at the dog-pile effort.

That’s wonderful. :) Two people responded to you, and only cableguy615, ostensibly, understood you to begin with, and for you, that magnitude of attention is a “dog-pile effort.” I’m glad things are going so well for you.

Keep reading your bible!

Axe on May 30, 2013 at 8:47 PM

I’d really like to see the paragraph by paragraph comparison of ACA to the “Newt bill”. Serve it up, Senator, since this is the basis of your case. Let’s see how many rabbit holes we’re going to be asked to explore here.

dissent555 on May 30, 2013 at 8:53 PM

Would libs please tell us what the process is for disagreeing with a black man?

Please.. what is the process to disagree with a black man or woman and not be accused of racism? Please.. post a memo.. a flow chart or something.. tell us all the procedure and we will follow it. Do we have to spin around 6 times, hit ourselves in the head with boards while walking in circles on our knees… and then it’s ok to stand up.. and disagree with a back man without being called a racist?

Please.. please.. for the love of God.. tell us what it takes so we all know how to do it .. so we can all get beyond this and finally only deal with the issues!

JellyToast on May 30, 2013 at 8:53 PM

Buy Danish, many children someday be asking you what you were thinking for not accepting True Marriage Equality. How will you answer?

blink on May 30, 2013 at 8:41 PM

Whose children? Not children produced by two people married to each other as a product of your alleged “True Marriage Equality” because those children cannot exist. Perhaps I’ll answer with “Robert Oscar Lopez”. One of many poignant warnings here.

Buy Danish on May 30, 2013 at 8:55 PM

make sure you’re playing this while you watch her video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avcS0aYJ2a8&feature=player_detailpage#t=15s

yall ready fo this?!

ITS ABOUT RACE!

kaltes on May 30, 2013 at 9:06 PM

True Marriage Equality

blink on May 30, 2013 at 8:41 PM

You have your talking points down.

So can ANY two people marry? Are you really for TRUE MARRIAGE EQUALITY?

YES OR NO WILL DO.

CW on May 30, 2013 at 9:11 PM

blink on May 30, 2013 at 8:41 PM

And this.

Buy Danish on May 30, 2013 at 9:12 PM

She forgot to mention the one-word reason people support ‘Obamacare’…

stupid

a5minmajor on May 30, 2013 at 9:17 PM

You have your talking points down.

So can ANY two people marry? Are you really for TRUE MARRIAGE EQUALITY?

YES OR NO WILL DO.

CW on May 30, 2013 at 9:11 PM

Exactly. Not to mention adopted or surrogate children who don’t enjoy True Marriage Parenting Equality if both parents are of the same sex.

Buy Danish on May 30, 2013 at 9:35 PM

I also should have noted that children born out of wedlock do not enjoy True Marriage Parenting Equality either. All this alleged equality seems to disregard the rights of children entirely…

Buy Danish on May 30, 2013 at 9:47 PM

If only there was an inoculation against morons like this breathing our good air. Always throwing the race thing because they’re to inarticulate to come up with something else. Never mind that Obamacare rules & regulations & mandates stand seven feet tall. That Cathy Sebilius is running around strong arming people for money to fund this monstrosity. That doctors are opting out of this train wreck and that the union members who lobbied for this abortion of a health program want no part of it. “Good for thee, but not for me” Someone please give this broad an IQ test.

RdLake on May 30, 2013 at 10:36 PM

If I had to bet, I’d bet heavily that GOP voters will be more accepting of gay marriage 10 years from now than they are today.

I’ll take that bet…the true consequences of gay marriage won’t even begin to be felt for 5-10 years…especially the damage done to children raised by dad/dad or mom/mom.

ironmarshal on May 30, 2013 at 11:04 PM

two possibilities for why the GOP’s grown chilly to national health care programs over time. One: Republican pols used to support a bigger role for government here, replete with variations of an individual mandate, but as the country’s sunk deeper into debt over the past 20 years and the entitlement wave has begun to crest, conservatives have grown more libertarian.

Cute. Except GOP support for national healthcare reform didn’t end ~20 years ago; Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich both supported the individual mandate as recently as 2009. So what changed? Obama began supporting it too. That’s pretty much it.

righty45 on May 30, 2013 at 11:48 PM

Rosie O’Donnell is a senator? That one flew by me!

Anyway, isn’t Obama Hawaiian and wasn’t his mother “typically” white? So he’s not much blacker than Bill “Nate Griffin” Clinton. Obama went to a whites-mainly college, Occidental, and then to whites-mostly Columbia and whites-largely Harvard University. He sends his kids to a whites-preferred private academy in DC, so its beginning to look like he isn’t really “down for the struggle”, not a genuine black man, after all.

virgo on May 31, 2013 at 12:30 AM

One: Republican pols used to support a bigger role for government here, replete with variations of an individual mandate, but as the country’s sunk deeper into debt over the past 20 years and the entitlement wave has begun to crest, conservatives have grown more libertarian. You may be seeing the start of a similar phenomenon right now in foreign policy: Most grassroots righties I know backed the Iraq war but are deeply skeptical of intervening in Syria. Quasi-isolationist Rand Paul is a more popular figure among rank-and-file conservatives than the staunchly hawkish former nominee John McCain. If I had to bet, I’d bet heavily that GOP voters will be more accepting of gay marriage 10 years from now than they are today. Parties change, for complex reasons. Many conservatives wish Beltway Republicans would change more quickly than they have.

Sorry, but you’re starting with bad analogies and ending up with bad reasoning.

First of all, the “individual mandate” you refer to was only for catastrophic insurance, which would have been hugely cheaper than the Obamacare gold-plated insurance requirements with no pre-existing conditions. The reasoning was that in the event of a catastrophe, you would use your mandatory insurance, but for ordinary healthcare you had to either pay for it or buy more insurance than what was mandated. So the comparison is already apples and oranges. Furthermore, it’s not really true that the right generally supported the idea. Some were pushing it, but a lot more rejected it. And with good reason.

As for comparing the Iraq War to Syria, there’s really no comparison. Iraq was a danger to nations around it, and presented a risk that we might have to send soldiers into a much bigger war if we didn’t take steps to fix the problem before it got worse. Syria is a sideshow by comparison. I’m confident, though, that a few more years of Obama could turn the entire Middle East into a basket case.

As for same-sex marriage, 31 states have it directly in their constitution that same-sex marriage is prohibited. This does not present the face of inevitability. If the Supreme Court doesn’t jump in to force states to accept same-sex marriage, it’s already a dead issue. Support for it grew for a long time, but it is now getting pushback. We may in fact be seeing a repeat of the ERA: it looked inevitable at first, but then it stalled, and some of the support right now was pushed through against the will of the people, and may in fact be scaled back in the future. Don’t forget that Iowa wound up with same-sex marriage because of their judges, and the people were upset enough about it to recall some of those same judges.

Let’s face it: if the various state governments were actually listening to their people right now, there would probably be no more than two states right now that allow same-sex marriage.

There Goes the Neighborhood on May 31, 2013 at 3:16 AM

A: there is already a single-payer mandate. Hospitals are required to give free health care to people who don’t pay for it, and everyone else picks up the tab. As such, an insurance mandate isn’t really the problem.
B: the real problem (besides the unworkable guaranteed issue) is the minimum coverage rules, which not only destroys the high deductible/HSA market and jacks up rates all around, but also gives us the belief-violating contraceptive mandate.

Count to 10 on May 30, 2013 at 8:17 PM

The law you speak of is called EMTALA, and it does NOT require just giving free health care to people who don’t pay for it. Romney supporters love to point to this law and claim that the insurance mandate was some sort of free-market small-government answer to the problem. That claim is a fraud.

First, the only health care that must be provided, whether the person can pay for it or not, is emergency care. A hospital is required to provide enough emergency care to stabilize a patient, whether or not they can pay for it. Once the patient is stabilized, they are under no more obligation to provide healthcare.

Secondly, even though emergency health care must be provided whether or not the person can pay, that does not mean that the hospital providing the care can’t charge or bill for its services. The real problem is that the hospital at this point has little leverage to force payment, but they can still pursue collection actions. Since most insurances pay considerably less than the amount billed, if a hospital can convince the patient to pay just a portion of their services, they really don’t come out all that far behind.

But I completely agree with the rest of what you say. The problem is not just that some form of insurance is mandated, but that an expensive form of insurance is mandated for everyone, whether they need it or not.

There Goes the Neighborhood on May 31, 2013 at 3:28 AM

two possibilities for why the GOP’s grown chilly to national health care programs over time. One: Republican pols used to support a bigger role for government here, replete with variations of an individual mandate, but as the country’s sunk deeper into debt over the past 20 years and the entitlement wave has begun to crest, conservatives have grown more libertarian.

Cute. Except GOP support for national healthcare reform didn’t end ~20 years ago; Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich both supported the individual mandate as recently as 2009. So what changed? Obama began supporting it too. That’s pretty much it.

righty45 on May 30, 2013 at 11:48 PM

Dead wrong all around. Mitt Romney did support an individual mandate, but you can’t generalize that to conservatives, since he never was one.

Newt Gingrich talked about an individual mandate, but he was also looking at purely last-ditch catastrophic insurance. And conservatives across the country did not exactly follow even in that limited form.

There Goes the Neighborhood on May 31, 2013 at 3:33 AM

Those who cry racism at the drop of a hat, fail to differentiate between race and a morally corrupted criminal culture.
There are good reasons to dislike certain group–bad behavior by most people in the group is one.
The most racist of all is the political culture that feeds, aggravates, and perpetuates, the bad behavior for their own selfish political gain, rather than assist in converting it to a more civilized community.

Don L on May 31, 2013 at 6:06 AM

I see the bar is set really high for elected officials in LA.

acyl72 on May 31, 2013 at 7:59 AM

Please.. what is the process to disagree with a black man or woman and not be accused of racism? Please.. post a memo.. a flow chart or something.. tell us all the procedure and we will follow it. Do we have to spin around 6 times, hit ourselves in the head with boards while walking in circles on our knees… and then it’s ok to stand up.. and disagree with a back man without being called a racist?

Please.. please.. for the love of God.. tell us what it takes so we all know how to do it .. so we can all get beyond this and finally only deal with the issues!

JellyToast on May 30, 2013 at 8:53 PM

I bet it’s this…

SauerKraut537 on May 31, 2013 at 8:09 AM

Axe on May 30, 2013 at 8:47 PM

*Snort* … my oh my, remind me never to get into a snark contest with you. Quite the eloquent take down if I do say so.
I’m afraid it’s going to be lost on our erudite visitor. (shucks, I’m the third person to dog-pile him/her/it …doing wonders for it’s self esteem I’m sure)

wolfplus3 on May 31, 2013 at 8:12 AM

many children someday be asking you what you were thinking for not accepting True Marriage Equality. How will you answer?

blink on May 30, 2013 at 8:41 PM

“You’re a child. when you grow up, you will understand.”

Do you have any kids?

alwaysfiredup on May 31, 2013 at 10:05 AM

I’ll take that bet…the true consequences of gay marriage won’t even begin to be felt for 5-10 years…especially the damage done to children raised by dad/dad or mom/mom.

ironmarshal on May 30, 2013 at 11:04 PM

Yep. The damage done by widespread divorce was first felt by my generation, and I am convinced it led directly to our much-lower marriage rate. Gay relationships are going to be held to the same standards as straight–not by the government, but by their children. The children will expect the “parents” to stay together/be reasonably monogamous. If they do not, serious psychological damage will ensue. That’s the real test here. Have you seen any kids raised in so-called “poly” families? They’re a complete wreck. The modern sensibility to sex is really bad for raising kids and its sad that we’re going to have to have another broken generation before we realize it.

alwaysfiredup on May 31, 2013 at 10:11 AM

She’s the stupidest person on the face of the earth. Okay, maybe not; be she’s close.

Smooth Rooster on May 30, 2013 at 7:13 PM

If you put her stupidity on the same side as Hank Johnson’s, they could probably capsize Guam.

Axeman on May 31, 2013 at 10:33 AM

Cute. Except GOP support for national healthcare reform didn’t end ~20 years ago; Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich both supported the individual mandate as recently as 2009. So what changed? Obama began supporting it too. That’s pretty much it.

righty45 on May 30, 2013 at 11:48 PM

And everybody on the right likes Newt, right? That’s why the right was so pleased with a choice between the two in the primaries–and Newt of course won overwhelmingly and no one ever complained about his more liberal stances or that his favorite president was FDR?

Axeman on May 31, 2013 at 10:41 AM

I AM NOT RACIST!!!!! I hate Obutthead’s white half far more than I hate his black half.

What in our environment causes liberals to have such profound mental illness?

NOMOBO on May 31, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Wow. When I first listened, I thought she was a (mostly) white woman saying why certain people voted for ObamaCare.

“I can’t go back to my district … constituents and tell them … I can’t support ObamaCare.”

I thought, she is right. Many people who voted for this did so because they are racist – they voted for Obama and for ObamaCare because he is black; well, half-black.

Can you imagine the uproar if she had said the above?

Of course, she said the opposite. Where’s the outrage?

And, of course, she apparently cannot speak proper English, even though her career requires regular public speaking. The quote above has a double negative, negating what she intended to say.

IrishEyes on May 31, 2013 at 1:15 PM

The pink elephant in the room.

Sherman1864 on May 31, 2013 at 7:00 PM

If I had to bet, I’d bet heavily that GOP voters will be more accepting of gay marriage 10 years from now than they are today.

Allahpundit on May 30, 2013 at 6:41 pm

Sorry, but no.

Dunedainn on May 31, 2013 at 11:33 PM

Here’s the serious argument, while we’re at it:

It won’t work.
It’ll cost trillions.
Health care will suffer.
Health care workers will suffer.
Doctors will quit in record numbers.
Doctors are already quitting in record numbers.
The liars who are responsible for implementing this travesty are apparently incapable of telling the truth under oath.

The gist of it is that the best health care system in the world will be brought down to a level that is acceptable to the America-hating bunch who, given their head, would haul us down the path to mediocrity.

This is just a minor summation of the most glaring of offensive and putrid actions of those who would claim to represent us, but who in fact ignore their constituency and represent a vile and growing threat to our Republic with their disingenuous representations.

Please, Lord, save us from our foolishness and from others’ deceptions.

hillbillyjim on June 2, 2013 at 2:46 AM

<
Yep. The damage done by widespread divorce was first felt by my generation, and I am convinced it led directly to our much-lower marriage rate. Gay relationships are going to be held to the same standards as straight–not by the government, but by their children. The children will expect the “parents” to stay together/be reasonably monogamous. If they do not, serious psychological damage will ensue. That’s the real test here. Have you seen any kids raised in so-called “poly” families? They’re a complete wreck. The modern sensibility to sex is really bad for raising kids and its sad that we’re going to have to have another broken generation before we realize it.

alwaysfiredup on May 31, 2013 at 10:11 AM

While I agree with what you’re saying, at the risk of insulting you, you’re still falling into the “useful idiot” category if you really believe that this whole push to legalize same sex marriage is being done on behalf of gay couples. IT’S NOT.

The Marxist leaders of the gay rights movement don’t give a damn about giving gay couples the right to marry. What they want is for same sex marriage to be legal for the whole population. What they is for it to be legal for a heterosexual man to marry a heterosexual man.

It doesn’t matter that no straight guy in his right mind would ever want to marry another straight guy. No man in his right mind would want to marry his daughter. No woman in her right mind would want to marry her brother. But that doesn’t mean ANY of this should be legal.

The Left wants to promote depravity. I don’t think there’s anything depraved about gay couples WANTING to get married. But they should understand that what’s normal for them is depraved for heterosexuals, and that it’s irresponsible to legalize depraved behavior for 97% of the population in order to please 3% of the population.

Bisexuality is like heroin, or joining a gang, or getting tattoos and piercings all over your body. It’s something to “try”, something to “experiment” with, all via peer pressure of course. Young people like to be rebels, they like to get into a bit of trouble and push the envelope. Having a bisexual experience will be the new thing that teenagers dare each other to do.

That’s what the Marxists want in order to further weaken the nuclear family. If feeding gay couples into a meat grinder would help bring about the fall of Western Capitalism, the Marxists would support that instead.

ardenenoch on June 4, 2013 at 11:41 PM

Comment pages: 1 2