Posted on 09/21/2009 7:08:55 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
President Obama appeared on television yesterday 5 times and it is interesting that very little, if any news, came out of any of them.
The guy is worse than a broken record. At least there, we can take the needle off the disc and make it stop. We are not so lucky with Obama. There's nothing we can do but turn off the TV when he repeats the same things over and over again about health care reform the same things he has been saying for months. Every speech, every townhall, every interview he makes the same points, tells the same lies, and repeating the same mischaracterizations of what he is trying to do.
George Stephanopoulos bored in on one lie the president has been spreading; that people who don't have mandated health insurance will be taxed. This exchange as reported by Carol Lee of Politico is indicative:
Obama spent much of his ABC interview denying that his health care plan breaks his campaign promise not to raise taxes on the middle class. He insisted that requiring everyone to have health insurance, or face a fine of up to $3,800 per family, is "absolutely not a tax increase." Host George Stephanopoulos pressed Obama so much on the issue that, after Obama accused him of making things up, Stephanopoulos read the definition of "tax" from Merriam-Webster's dictionary. "George, the fact that you looked up [in] Merriam's dictionary the definition of ‘tax increase' indicates to me that you're stretching a little bit right now," Obama replied.
We on the right are quite familiar with this tactic from the left; their bold as brass ability to simply change the definition of terms when they are losing an argument. Of course the "fine" is a tax - as are "fees," and other ways that the Democrats are seeking to raise revenue. The liberals believe that simply because they call a tax something else, it is not a tax. Who they think they are trying to fool is a mystery - unless, it is perhaps themselves.
A Wall Street Journa l editorial sums up this dishonesty:
If you can follow this reasoning, then you probably also think that a new entitlement is the best way to reduce entitlement spending. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the Senate's individual mandate will result in new revenues of some $20 billion over 10 years because some people will choose to opt out of ObamaCare-or because they can't afford to buy in, given that other taxes and regulation will make health care more expensive. If that $20 billion doesn't count as tax revenue, then what is it?
And for that matter, what doesn't count as a nontax under Mr. Obama's definition? All taxes can be justified in the name of providing some type of service, however wasteful. Mr. Obama complains that "My critics say everything is a tax increase," as if that is his political problem. His real problem is that the individual mandate really is a tax, but the President doesn't want voters to think of it that way, because taxes are unpopular.
Ordinary Americans are not fooled by this shell game with terms. They know a tax when they see one and Obama can gloss over the truth all he wants and it still won't change the fact that his plan will raise taxes on the Middle Class for no other reason than they wish to opt out of his big government takeover of health insurance.
HR 3200
What the bill says, pages 167-168, section 401, TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE:
‘‘(a) TAX IMPOSED.—In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of—
(1) the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, over
2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer. . . .”
EVALUATION OF THE PASSAGE:
1. This section amends the Internal Revenue Code.
2. Anyone caught without acceptable coverage and not in the government plan will pay a special tax.
3. The IRS will be a major enforcement mechanism for the plan.
Hey Obama .... Joe Wilson pegged you.... “YOU LIE”
Now when can we start with the impeachment proceedings.
However, the “tax” cited is only imposed if the individual has not obtained coverage acceptable to the government. Given that Obama expects individuals to obtain said coverage, the dun more resembles an “unfunded mandate” than a tax.
Of course, the difference is in the details. It’s similar to imposing higher “fees” for this and that and contending that “taxes” are not being raised.
This was hilarious. Stephie pulled out the dictionary and read the definition of a tax. Obammie the Commie says that Stephie is really reaching if he has to use a dictionary.
What Stephie SHOULD have said:
“No. The fact that I have to read you the lexical definition of a tax illustrates how you have completely distorted the term and the concept in your own mind. I am trying to bring you back to reality.”
If you would have used your rose colored glasses then you would clearly see that it really states free pies and lemonade if you vote for this bill.
Words have meanings. The word "tax" is used in both bills. So Obama can tell us that a tax is really not a tax? Only a fool or an idiot can accept such sophistry.
If Stephie had really done his homework and read the Baucus bill and HR 3200, he could have responded to Obama, “If it is not a tax, why do both bills use the word tax to describe it?
I pay over $5,000 per year for health insurance to cover my family. I imagine my employer matches that.
If Obama wants to tax freeloaders, those who *can* pay for insurance but choose not to, then more power to him. I’m tired of paying for the medical expenses of those who *could* buy insurance, but choose instead to by a large screen TV.
I hate Obama, but something about this seems “fair,” considering that hospitals care for the uninsured.
FWIW.
Perhaps, but who would have ever expected Obama to deny that it was a tax... and so brazenly...
I’ll cut S. some slack on that one.
At least he recovered and said ‘but some of your critics say it is a tax’.
I don’t know how we are going to survive these Orwellian years.
Sigh.
Indeed. Good point.
We have to keep in mind that Stephie is “one of them,” however. His hardball questions, like Sissy Matthew’s, are actually Whiffle balls.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.