Kevin Rennie’s posted news this afternoon indicating Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) will not run for re-election in 2012. Earlier today, Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz announced she would be running for the seat as a Democrat in 2012. Linda McMahon still may be in for the next round, and Peter Schiff is still interested. Still, it’s a stretch to think Connecticut would send a Republican to the Senate in 2012, but you never know…
To be fair. Connecticut’s junior Senator begins the bite with praise for the law enforcement people who nabbed this jihadist before he got away, and in record time. But Joe calls it like he see it, and in this case, to paraphrase Liz Cheney, luck ain’t a terror policy.
Senator Joe Lieberman seems to understand the gravity of the situation. Get them before they get us. The terrorists are not suspects and their acts are not alledged, they are intent on killing all of us. Joe knows this not because he is a wicked smahhhht analyst. He knows it because they have told us so.
He begins by asking the President to keep GITMO open. Not a bad idea.
I am not sure what he means by pre-emptive. Then again maybe I do.
Judge for yourself. The Democrats are making a big deal out of Joe Lieberman’s interview with the Connecticut Post last September (video included) where he purportedly supports a medicare buy in. Lieberman says he was referring to his support of a similar proposal made during the 2004 Presidential campaign. Now he says his position has changed because times have changed, the deficit has grown and the current health care bill makes a “buy in” unnecessary.
Spin? You decide. What’s more enlightening is the story Lieberman tells toward the end of the interview about 1:50 in. Lieberman called the Medicare buy-in unaffordable and was rebuffed by a pro buy-in colleague. Like I have said many times. It’s not about us, it’s about power.
Here’s the original Connecticut Post clip that seems to back up what Joe is saying. You decide.
Bottom line: Joe says he will now support this crummy bill because it no longer contains a public option. But make no mistake, it is still a crummy bill that will:
- add to the deficit
- higher costs for business and high premiums for individuals because of mandates
- and will cut medicare for seniors.
- and this doesn’t even include the likely prospect of rationing of care as promised Doctor reimbursements decline along with the number of Doctors.
These are not scare tactics. These statements all are based on a careful reading of the bill by the people who write this blog. All of these statements, unlike those of the President, are cited and linked. We’ve done the research. All you have to do my lefty friends is read. Feel free to browse.
With several Senator’s, most notably, Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) saying they will not vote for the Harry Reid (D-Nev.) version of Obamacare if it contains the public option, Democrats are now scrambling to come up with a compromise.
We detailed here how the President called the Baucus Bill bi-partisan. Well if Senator Snowe makes a bad health care bill bi-partisan … then the opposition mounting against this bill is truly bi-partisan.
Connecticut’s Junior Senator Joe Lieberman told Don Imus on FBN yesterday that he could not support the Baucus bill primarily because of cost. He reiterated hat stance again today and added that he is not the only Democratic Senator who feels like he does.
Perhaps this is why Joe is so dead set against this crummy bill.
The Baucus plan passed by the Senate Finance Committee yesterday amounts to a massive middle-class tax increase, according to one columnist today, and a dishonest shell game on taxes according to another. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former CBO director, argues that the Baucus plan will hit consumers with a deluge of taxes, many of which deliberately lack transparency, and 90% of which hit the middle class.
Read the rest at Hot Air.
It makes no sense to ask taxpayers to pay what the Cato Institute pegged this morning at $2 trillion, not $870 billion dollars over 10 years to insure 25 to 30 million additional people, under the guise that it will at some point down the road make insurance cheaper. That is doubtful for many of the reasons we have detailed on this blog. Even the CBO says it can only happen if Medicare is cut and everyone jumps in the pool. Add to that a long list of new taxes and penalties on everyone from medical equipment makers to the average American and it, as Joe knows, is the great deception
- It is doubtful they can or will cut medicare by any amount because they never have.
- It is doubtful they will create any savings through medical early intervention (a promise oft made during the HMO debate)
- And it is doubtful that adding young people to the pool will add funding without taxing services any more. Experience shows that if a service is paid for, and offer at below market or subsidized rates … utilization goes up (see HMOs)
- Nor there will be no savings, no cost cutting, only rationing and cuts (see Massachusetts)
Joe is correct to stand against this government care. Count me among the growing list of naysayers.
UPDATE: The politco is reporting this morning pretty much what Joe alluded to last night … no Snowementum.