In the growing shadow of the IRS "War on Conservatives" scandal, the Obama administration has just confirmed our worst nightmares by proudly announcing that there really will be a political component to your IRS-administered healthcare.
Specifically, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen "Shakedown Money" Sibelius says that Obamacare will be putting a "special focus on the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered community because for too long (they) were pushed out of the way." Which means that if you're not a member of that community, then it's time that you were pushed out of the way for awhile.
Secretary Sibelius says that the LGBT community will be getting some benefits specific to their needs, including help with smoking - which LGBT folks apparently do more of than straight folks (although we don't know if that's only after sex).
Interestingly, this isn't the first time smoking has been mentioned with regard to Obamacare recently - because in some cases smokers can be charged up to 50% more for their health insurance under the new rules. Unless, we suppose, those smokers argue that they were "born that way" rather than making the choice to light up.
Frankly, as much as Hope n' Change doesn't like the idea of sexual identity being used to assign favored or unfavored status in healthcare, we're not overly worried about it. After all, everyone's healthcare is going down the toilet as soon as Obamacare is fully implemented.
But just to keep the odds on our side, in the event of a heart attack we plan to be wearing women's underwear and a medical alert bracelet which says "trapped in a man's body."
======
BONUS: WANT TO VOTE AGAINST OBAMA RIGHT NOW?!
Of course you do! And one way to do it is by following this link to cast your vote for "The Coolest SOB in the Conservative Blogosphere!" You'll find my name, Stilton Jarlsberg, about 10 spaces from the bottom - and scads of other snark-filled conservative SOBs who are actively mocking the worst administration in history.
You can vote for as many SOBs as you want, but voting ends Saturday June 8th. The first place winner will be sent to Guantanamo Bay with a black bag over his or her head, and the runner-ups will be audited within an inch of their lives until the sun is a cold, dark ember.
Honestly, I can't make any claims about being "cool," but I'd like to think that there are actual files in Washington DC that prove I'm an SOB. Your vote will be appreciated!
30 comments:
That was fun, and probably the first time that my vote has actually counted since 2004. Good luck Stilton, although I admit that I had to vote for David Burge as well. I might just go back and vote several more times, but that would make me feel so dirty....so progressive...eeewww.
How idiotic can this administration be? Or how devious -- knowing it's an emotional issue they throw us to the sharks -- and avoid the realities of the failing ObamaCare.
They are typical heteros in many ways -- in thinking there's some different or special needs for health care for the "LBGT community." I can't imagine what they could be. As early as 1980 I had a gay doctor -- looked him up in the gay telephone directory -- no problem. In all my reading on the "issue" and talking to gay men (I know a lot) I can't find any special needs we might have. As for HIV, the Ryan White Act, at $2 billion a year, seems to cover all the wondrous drugs one could require, and seems not to be affected or subsumed into ObamaCare whatsoever. Oh, don't worry, gay men pay upwards of $100 billion in federal taxes, so we cover that $2 billion - and we only make up now less than 1/2 of HIV+ in the nation.
The only ones in this ever growing constellation of "sexuality identity" groups -- as if heterosexuals had no sexuality whatsoever, amazingly -- who seem to have problems are transgendered getting surgery -- which no gay man wants, I assure you. Don't touch our junk, no sirree!
Meanwhile, transgendered are heterosexuals -- in the wrong body -- Christine Jorgensen: guy who became gal who legally married a guy in the 1960s, and Chaz Bono who was a girl who became a guy to chase gals -- both of which are guy-gal which is hetero last I looked. It's mind boggling that this hetero stuff could be considered gay anything.
I happened to be in Greenwich Village last night, and talking to gay guys -- not a LBT around as usual -- not a one could explain to me what transgendered had to do with us.
Though, I do think all you people here are going to like my take on this fabled "Community" which has Zero to do with each other ... when my book on the issue comes out at the end of the month.
I find it amazing that no one in this vaunted bunch nor the president and his creeps have an earthly clue that on June 24, 1973 32 gay men were burned to death in an arson in New Orleans -- America's largest unsolved mass murder -- no one gave a damn back then -- no one knows now. Amazing.
As for LGBT smoking more -- since no one knows how many we are, or where we are -- how the hell can that be determined? I know so many gay guys who never smoked I can't imagine we could be doing it more.
Finally, I really hate when any heteros try to speak for me as a gay guy -- never before have so many been so confused and said so much about so few. Obama's proclamation for "Pride months" was so filled with what he did! and nary a word about what gay men did in the past 60 years -- he seems to think he started it all, what a friggin' waste of protoplasm he is.
@Stilton - I cast my vote for you yesterday, but now that you detail the prizes ... I hope you come in last!
On the topic of the day: I hadn't heard about this yet, but it comes as no surprise.
@Jim, I don't think they are typical heterosexuals ... they just haven't "come-out" yet. As to identity: my sexual orientation does not define me. When I meet someone, it isn't, "Hi, I'm Chuck and I'm Hetero." I feel sorry for anyone whose sexual orientation is their all-consuming subject of interest; or their race or income level or their politics, for that matter.
This administration has perfected the art of divisiveness. There isn't a group anywhere that they can't pit against some other group (and I think they've already done them all). Once begun, all they have to do is stoke the flames occasionally ... which they do quite well.
This is just the beginning. Political interference in our health care is going to be accelerating exponentially over the next several months, and at lightspeed after the 1st of 2014. For once, Joe Biden actually knew what he was talking about when at the signing of ObamaCare, he said that this was "a big f****n deal!".
Since the implementation of Medicare nearly a half-century ago, it was inevitable that the political class would ultimately be engaging in control and social engineering via public "health care". And now, openly in the clear light of day, they begin. ObamaCare fundamentally will change the relationship between citizens and the government.
Of course, now that it is in the clear light of day and very soon, hundreds-of-millions of ordinary Americans are going to get smacked with the undeniable unfortunate realities of ObamaCare squarely in the face, Obama and his minions need to start triangulating and shoring up support for it as a critical mass of citizens start finding out for real exactly how disastrous this law is before there is any kind of unified revolt.
Since the Democrats consider the LGBT community as a wholly-owned subsidiary, it makes sense that they'd pull this kind of stunt to keep them in the fold before they start getting their fee increase notices come summer and fall.
Of course, this is pretty transparent to the more cynical, like our friend @Jim Hlavac above. As offensive as I find the "divide and conquer" tactics of the Democrats, I can only imagine how he feels, once again being treated not as an American citizen like the rest of us, but as a "victim" and political prop for Progressive ambitions.
This is just the beginning. Expect soon to see similar "specific to their needs" benefits for other large Democratic constituencies.
Q: Knock, knock...
A: Who's there?
Q: The IRS...
A: the IRS, who?
Q: WE WILL ASK THE QUESTIONS, BUDDY!!!
Okay, I voted for OUR Fearless Leader (meaning the good Doctor); shall I expect the audit notice in the mail by Friday?
As for the "Affordable" I Don't Care Act and sex prefs, Christ, I think we all are pretty equally screwed regardless of which and whose holes we are interested in. I await news as to the new "affordable" premium for my business health (or lack thereof) policy, due in a month or so. Perhaps the shock will put me out of my misery permanently.
It's the liberal version of "separate but equal" - separate but more equal...
Glad Shakedown has her priorites in order.
Just when you think the Øbama administration has reached absolute rock bottom, they go to work with pickaxes in the sub-basement.
@TrickyRicky- Personally I voted for about 10 familiar names, and I encourage readers to vote for ALL of their favorites. For that matter, check out some of the writers you haven't heard of - the real purpose of the contest is to introduce readers to funny conservative sites they may not have been familiar with.
@Jim Hlavac- Some of the "special needs" that Sibelius was mentioning are things like smoking (huh?), screening for depression (shouldn't that be a "special need" of conservatives right now?), counseling in case of partner violence, and other things which seem more universal than LBGT.
But of course, it's all just pandering to a perceived special interest group - and a "group" (as you say, what the hell do all those people have in common?) which has been ill-served by this administration except for lip service (hey, no snickering in the back of the class!).
By the way, despite Barry just proclaiming this LGBT pride month, the first lady was just interrupted by a Lesbian activist while making a speech; Michelle told the crowd "she goes or I go" (or words to that effect), at which point the activist was dragged out of the room - which presumably didn't do much for her pride.
@Chuck- As you say, it's about divisiveness. Sibelius couldn't just say that Obamacare has some swell benefits for LGBT (I can never remember the order of the letters; I wish it was GBLT so I could just use the mnemonic of "Gay Bacon Sandwich"), instead she has to make a point that this group has been "pushed aside too long" - thereby creating victims and victimizers, and defining a world which only Big Goverment can bring moral order to.
@John the Econ- It's going to be interesting to see the backflips coming to Obamacare. The rules say that people who are overweight can be forced to pay higher rates for their insurance - but won't this have "disparate impact" on black Americans?
As I've said roughly a bajillion times here, Obamacare isn't about medicine - it's about abusable power and wealth redistribution.
@Necron99- Too true to be funny.
@Grafton Cheddar- Oh, we're all screwed, no doubt about it. And I'm waiting in borderline terror for my next insurance rate jump. Also, just for grins, I went to the government website to see what Obamacare might cost me if I can't afford private insurance anymore. I entered my information and then hit the button for sample plans and rates. The webpage told me that there were "zero results." There's a train wreck coming, and I can hear the whistle blowing already.
@CenTexTim- Exactly. You can't give anyone a special focus unless you're giving others a less special focus.
Oh, to be one of the 2%, huh? One can only dream...........
So, then, now we *must* divulge our sexual preferences to the gummint in order that they might determine "specific to their needs" medical benefits we need? Sounds like another "win" for the side that wants to catalog us all, from the strands of our DNA to the content of our prayers... And the same person responsible for this travesty being law - Roberts - is supposed to now adjudicate all of the constitutional violations baked in? Yeah. Right.
@Stilt: I voted on that SOB like a progressive liberal democrat poll worker! Lots 'o times. May do so a few more yet. Figure showing such disdain for the sanctity of a ballot box might throw them off my scent...
@rickn8or- I can see why Sibelius doesn't want to open the can of worms associated with changing rules on an individual basis, but to say that she wants to keep politics and politicians out of the medical decision making process is complete BS.
And remember when Obamacare was first passed, and Barry's buddies all got waivers? When Sibelius was asked about this by Congress, she claimed she didn't know any such waivers existed. Liar.
Stilt, you're cool WITHOUT me voting for you online. One of your best today, thank you!
A factory I used to work at in the 80's had plantwide smoking. Management decided to discourage smoking by creating smoking areas within the plant, and only allowed emplyees to smoke during breaks. As a peace offering to the now pissed off smokers, they were allowed two extra breaks per shift, so they wouldn't have to go so long without a "fix." It was hilarious to see how many non-smokers started lighting up just to get the extra two breaks per day. So the company's efforts to discourge smoking had the reverse effect.
I see the same thing happening with Obummer-care. I'll gladly proclaim myself a gay person if it will get me premium health care. Although, "premium health care" under the increasingly misnamed Affordable Health Care Act might only mean you get a better quality of pain killers if you have terminal cancer.
Good illustration of the law of unintended consequences, @Colby.
So, if that's what it will take to get "premium" health care (since obviously paying for it will no longer do) I won't stop a "gay" but the Econ family will embrace LBT as well. Where do they issue the rainbow flags?
But on second thought, I wouldn't get too excited about this. I seriously doubt that the LBGTs are going to get anything more of substance than anyone else. This is all just marketing to keep those without the insight of Jim on board.
So far, the only demographic group I know of getting substantial freebies is the "Julia" types and Sandra Fluke, who will be getting their "free" birth control.
I don't think of that so much as a freebie as I do good social engineering.
I voted, you cool SOB you, but the rest of y'all better hurry. "IntellectualFroglegs" has taken the lead. That is not cool.
BTW, Sibelius is already a murderer in my mind. That little 10 yr old girl with CF waiting for a lung has been turned down for help by the gooberment. Sibelius claimed she won't help her. I guess we're in an early version of Obamacare.
All of this makes me wonder what kind of medical "care" I can expect to receive as a just over middle-age, conservative, Caucasian, straight male, who still believes in God, guns, and guts as the three ingredients to success? Now let me guess, if the choice were to treat me, or a twenty something liberal for the exact same illness entailing the exact same cost which would get the treatment? I'm betting that I wouldn't be the one treated.
@American Cowboy,
No, you'd certainly be treated... like an enemy of the State.
Stilt, just think of Mooch -
Licking
Gay
Bacon
Tw*t
And have a bucket of brain bleach handy...
OMG - the test words...
retaining packedf
@George- I just saw a segment on Fox's "The Five" (a fun show) in which they were talking about the need for "cooler" people in the GOP to appeal to young voters. Mind you, I don't consider myself affiliated with the GOP in any way, but if I'm even debatably cool then I'll volunteer to expose myself (well, my cartoons) to impressionable youth. Seriously, wouldn't it be nice to put Hope n' Change in college newspapers? Kids might be drawn to my saucy sense of anarchy and political incorrectness!
@Colby- Exactly the point of the cartoon. When the government starts applying political/behavioral tags to our medical care, people will start trying to present themselves as one of the favored groups. To quote The Who's song "Substitute," we may claim "I look all white, but my dad was black."
Meanwhile, Barry made it clear that his idea of cost-effective healthcare is painkillers instead of pacemakers. I can't believe that he's not still being beaten over the head about that. One course of treatment helps you live, the other helps you die. That's a pretty big effing difference if you're the patient.
@John the Econ- I don't think LGBT folks are really going to get anything better than anyone else. You're right that it's the "Julia's" and Flukes who'll benefit, while the rest of us pay a lot more to get a lot less.
@Sparky Hudson- Happily, my cool quotient doesn't rely on the actual contest results. It's more of a Zen thing.
And I just heard on the news that little Sarah (who needs a new lung or two) may at least get a chance to get on the adult waiting list thanks to a judge's overruling of Sebelius. I doubt it will be enough to save her...but still, isn't this country (and this administration) still supposed to be about hope?
@American Cowboy- You (and I) are screwed for all the reasons you mention, but there's more to the equation. The young patient is still paying into the system, while old farts such as ourselves are just a drain on the system. Not just for medical bills, but social security. There is a huge financial incentive to hasten our deaths through denial of treatment. And that will be one of the jobs of the IPAB (death panel) to implement.
@txGreg- Actually, it seems like enemies of the state (the Guantanamo gang, and the Boston bomber) are getting great treatment. No, we'll be getting something much worse than that.
@Stan da Man- You just reminded me of this image from almost exactly one year ago...
Two dark depressing clouds in NC today. It's raining, and Crap Weasel will be here taking credit for the state of the art schools in Mooresville. For those of you not familiar with Mooresville, it is Nascar central. Nearby Lake Norman is flush with multi-million dollar homes, so the tax base is very lucrative for the school system. But we all know who will take credit.
And... I was in the grocery last night and there by every checkout were copies of The Globe. OMG! Granted, it's The Globe, but they tell it like it is (on the front page anyway).
Myself, I've always felt like a lesbian trapped in a mans body... I wonder if I qualify for special 0blamacare LGBT treatment?
I don't know what y'all are crying about. I have heard repeatedly that Zero Care is FREE!! Not going to cost a dime.
@WMD: Technically, you're correct. It will cost many, many, many dimes. and, likely, many more lives...
@Colby- Barry has never been shy about taking credit for things he had nothing to do with. I will always believe that Osama bin Laden's killing was done despite Obama, and in no way because of him. Although in fairness, I'd be willing to believe that he may have been involved in the subsequent deaths of many of the Seal Team Six members.
@Necron99- Good news! Under Obamacare you'll be getting conjugal hospital visits from Rosie O'Donnell.
@WMD & Emmentaler - Exactly.
Do you know why Sumo wrestlers shave their legs?
.
.
.
.
.
So they won't be mistaken for Necron99's conjugal visitor.
Speaking of my "conjugal visitor"...,
What's the difference between Rosie O'Donnell and the Hindenberg?
.
.
.
.
.
One is a flaming Nazi gasbag, and the others just a blimp.
Necron - "Dirigible", please - blimps are tethered, dirigibles (even the unframed, simply inflated ones) are powered and steered (funny fact - most people assume 'dirigible' to relate to the 'rigid' frame - like the Hindy - but it's actually 'direct-able'. No, it's not rocket science, but it's close, and I *did* study rocket science...)
So your saying Rosie is 'direct-able'...
What if I'm a lesbian trapped in the body of man?
Post a Comment