"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it."
Princess Nancy has decided that she wants to have a vote on her PelosiCare bill this weekend. That's right. This Saturday, the House is going to vote on a piece of legislation that could potentially turn over 18% of our economy to the government ... to bureaucrats, actually. Timing is far more important than getting it right. Now if you want to know the details of the vote, be sure to follow my guy Jamie Dupree. He is sticking around Washington DC to follow this historic vote.
Did you know that Nancy Pelosi thinks that she and her fellow Democrats are ready to vote on a bill even though they don't know the price tag? The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services does not believe that it can come up with a cost estimate for the bill before Saturday's vote. Eh .. not surprising. That's not what this is really about anyway, is it? This is about the government takeover of healthcare .. making you more dependent on government .. power. The price tag for your children and grandchildren isn't important.
Speaking of your children and grandchildren. The Cato Institute has done the research and it has determined that Obamacare could as much as double premium costs for young Americans (25-year-olds). And you thought this was all about making healthcare more affordable?
We are just adding to the list of people in Washington who see our Constitution as nothing but a limit to what they can do with the power of government. First it was Nancy Pelosi scoffing at a question from reporters about healthcare and how it is constitutional. Then we had Robert Gibbs who wasn't concerned in the least about the Constitution and didn't believe White House lawyers needed to look into the Constitutionality of Obamacare.
Now we have Illinois Senator Roland Burris. There's a waste of a Senate seat. He'll be gone soon, so maybe there will be an improvement. Burris was asked to specify which part of the Constitution authorizes Congress to implement an individual mandate on individuals to buy health insurance. Burris' answer? It is the responsibility of the federal government "to provide for the health, welfare and the defense of the country."
Here's the quote: "Well, that's under certainly the laws of the--protect the health, welfare of the country ... That's under the Constitution. We're not even dealing with any constitutionality here. Should we move in that direction? What does the Constitution say? To provide for the health, welfare and the defense of the country."
Well guess what? The word "health" does not appear in the Constitution. The guy is wrong. Rather than worrying about reading 2,000 page healthcare bills, Roland Burris and his Democrat buddies should try and refresh themselves on our Constitution - the foundations of this country and what make this country great.
Somewhere in Washington D.C., a former Boehner speech writer is doing the walk of shame with his box of personal belongings. -ww
What does the Republican alternative include? Glad you asked. Some of the highlights are:
Increasing incentives for people to use health savings accounts
Capping non-economic awards in medical malpractices cases
Incentives for states to drive down premium costs
Allowing health insurance to be sold across state lines
What does the Republican plan NOT include?
No employer mandate
No individual health insurance mandate
It doesn't require insurers to cover pre-existing conditions
Probably some abortion stuff that I could care less about
As the Republicans introduced their bill the Democrats were passing around a binder with a cover page reading "Republican Health Care Plan." Inside you would only find blank pages. Very cute ... the Republicans introduce a 233 page plan, and the Democrat Socialist Party refuses to acknowledge its very existence.
There is, though, something wrong with the GOP bill. They posted it online in a non-searchable format. This is particularly vexing to reporters like Jamie Dupree. If you follow him on Twitter [@jamiedupree] you can share his pain. There is, as I see it, only one reason to post your legislation in this manner ... and that's to make it more difficult for snoopy reporters and voters to get into that bill and look for specific little goodies. We expect this from Democrats. Republicans need to correct this.
A Republican congresswoman has really managed to stir the puddin'. North Carolina Rep. Virginia Foxx made a speech on the House floor, and in that speech she said that people have more to fear from Democrat healthcare legislation than from terrorists. She says that it is the greatest threat to our freedom. Foxx said that she believes "we have more to fear from the potential of that bill passing than we do from any terrorist right now in any country."
Well durned if I didn't say pretty much the same thing my own self just last week! Smart gal, that Foxx lady.
The MUSLIM terrorists targeted people. They killed 3000. We fought back. The loss of the 3000 people will be mourned forever by friends and families and will be remembered by Americans. America, however, recovered. This country will survive the ISLAMIC terrorist attacks.
It may not be so for Obama-PelosiCare. A government takeover of our health care system will do more than the Islamic terrorists to cause permanent damage to our Republic. The amounts of money we will have to borrow from China and Europe to fund this takeover will be a burden on generations of Americans to come. You can't say that about the Islamic terrorist attacks. The terrorists didn't rob tens of millions of Americans of their sense of independence. ObamaCare will. The Islamic terrorist attacks did not permanently reduce the quality of health care in the United States. ObamaCare will. The Islamic terrorist attacks did not destroy health care innovation in the United States. ObamaCare will.
Virginia Foxx is right. The Islamic terrorists can only dream of harming America the way the Democrats takeover of health care will.
When it comes to achieving the Democrats dreams and schemes, there is nothing that will stand in their way. Not even that pesky little thing called the Constitution. Republican Senator Orrin Hatch put it all in perspective recently. He does not believe that the Democrat plans for healthcare are justifiable. He says that if the federal government can force Americans to buy health insurance "then there is literally nothing the federal government can't force us to do."
Ain't that the truth?
First it is healthcare. Then what? What comes next for the Democrats to achieve their goal of making you more and more dependent on government? Orrin Hatch's point is that right now, the Constitution still remains a "barrier" for the Democrats. But if they get their way with healthcare, the levies will be broken. There will be nothing stopping them from trampling over what is left of our Constitution.
And the White House doesn't seem to have a problem with that. Robert Gibbs was asked just yesterday whether White House lawyers had reviewed the Constitutionality of Obamacare. Robert Gibbs' response was that the White House is not seriously concerned about this.
Not seriously concerned? What is there to be MORE concerned about than upholding the foundation of this country? Then upholding the Constitution. Didn't The Community Organizer take an oath to protect and defend our Constitution? And now he's "Not concerned"? And if you will remember, Nancy Pelosi had a similar response last week. When asked about the Constitutionality of her healthcare plan, she actually thought the reporter was joking. She chuckled, "Are you serious? Is that a serious question?" Yes, Nancy. Yes, Robert. Yes, Obama. We are serious. And it is about time you get serious too before you completely destroy what is left of this great country.
Harry Reid has some gonads. He is accusing the Republicans of not having any healthcare plans, when he himself technically does not have a completed healthcare bill to show the world. Last week, he sent off pieces of healthcare legislation for a CBO cost analysis. So the Republicans said they wanted to see the bill that he sent to the CBO. Well the truth of the matter is that this bill hasn't even been written yet. He is waiting for the CBO analysis to come back in order to decide which direction he wants to take. Then he took a shot at the Republicans for daring to request to see this elusive bill he submitted to the CBO. Reid said that the GOP health care plan "remains a secret, unless perhaps it does not exist." He goes on to say, "I fully understand if your plan is still under development, and would not presume to suggest that you publicly share draft legislative text for even an individual element of your plan, let alone an entire bill, before it is finalized."
Unfortunately for Harry Reid, the Republicans do have healthcare bills. Three of them. And they have been on the table since May and June of this year. CNSNews has the list:
In May, Republicans in the House and the Senate formed a bicameral coalition to produce the130-page "Patients Choice Act of 2009."
In June, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) introduced the "Health Care Freedom Plan," a 41-page proposal.
And in July, the Republican Study Committee, under the leadership of Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), unveiled the "Empowering Patients First Act," a 130-page plan.
Harry Reid is desperate. So are his Democrat friends. They know that they are losing this battle to get their healthcare plans passed. So now they are complaining that the other side doesn't even have a plan. Shouldn't we be thanking these Democrats! Oh we should be so thankful ... at least THEY have come up with plans to take over 18% of our economy!
The looters must have hated this. Right there on your very own television screen you could see people - hundreds of people - lined up to receive their Swine Flu shots. Particularly poignant were the pictures of young women carrying infants waiting hours in these lines for their shots.
You do know, don't you, that the manufacture of this Swine Flu vaccine was essentially a government operation. To be sure, private manufacturers were producing the vaccine; but they were doing so under government contracts following government rules and regulations and with no small amount of control and interference from government bureaucrats. There is no doubt that if the private drug manufacturers had been turned loose to produce this vaccine and to sell it on the open marketplace there would have been no shortages. The shortages were caused by government. This is your future when the looters manage to take over one-sixth of our economy --- when the government controls your health care. Oh ... you're going to love this stuff.
In the wake of the reveal of Nancy's House healthcare bill, the Congressional Budget Office has released another analysis. It believes that when it is all said and done, the Democrat's government option would only end up covering 2% of Americans. Those are the estimated numbers for Americans under the age of 65. With a pool of 30 million people, only 1-in-5 would sign up for the government option. The rest would then buy into the private option (because the government will force everyone to carry health insurance, remember?). The theory is that less healthy people would be more drawn to the government option because they are moochers. As a result, premiums for the government plan would increase and end up being more costly than private plans.
So why push the government option at all? After all, it's only going to cover a paltry 2%! Glad you asked. The reason for the government option is to put in place the machinery that will be needed to run the private health insurance companies (along with their "obscene" and "immoral" profit margins of 2.2%) out of business. You can't expect the government option to come on the scene with a huge market share. This has to be earned ... and it will be earned by using the bottomless well of taxpayer funds and an endless parade of new government regulations to run the private insurers out of office. The looters are patient. They've been waiting for this opportunity since HillaryCare was killed off by the 1994 voter's revolution. It make take years, but the government option will lead inexorably to a single-payer system .. and the single-payer will the federal government. Give the looters their health care "reform" and you will one day be completely reliant on the decisions and whims of government bureaucrats - people quite possibly not qualified to work in the private sector - in all matters related to your health care.
What have the Democrats managed to tuck into this 1,900 page healthcare bill? Well how about goodies like this ... uncovered by BigGovernment.com:
Section 2531, entitled "Medical Liability Alternatives," establishes an incentive program for states to adopt and implement alternatives to medical liability litigation. [But]...... a state is not eligible for the incentive payments if that state puts a law on the books that limits attorneys' fees or imposes caps on damages.
Well that's rather obvious, isn't it? Just what in the hell does this have to do with health care reform? How does protecting trial lawyer's contingency fees improve the delivery and quality of health care to the American people? It is a gift from Nancy Pelosi directly to trial lawyers ... trial lawyers who contribute tens of millions of dollars to Democrats in every election year. Any changes made on medical liability lawsuits will not be allowed to affect the livelihood for her beloved trial lawyers.
What else appears in Nancy's healthcare bill? Well I talked to Jamie Dupree last week about the fact that the world "shall" appears 3,425 times. Here are a few more .. how about the fact that the bill requires at least 42 studies. The word "report" also appears 364 times and "tax" is used 214 times.
Princess Nancy is going to unveil her healthcare bill today. I'm absolutely giddy with excitement. Just what we need ... another competing blue-print for a government takeover of healthcare and 18% of our economy. It also represents a huge shift in government entitlements ... a shift that will be impossible to reverse. Once you get the people hooked on government, there is no way to end it. This may the strongest and most addicition we have in this country .. and unfortunately it's legal. In fact, addiction to government could very well be the most dangerous addiction America has to deal with. Give me a good old fashioned coke addict any time. What's more, this is an addiction that is openly promoted by many politicians ... politicians who generally, an with inexplicable pride, call themselves Democrats.
The Aging Hollow-eyed Hippy from Haight-Ashbury says her government takeover of health care will cost over $1 trillion over the next ten years. That's a lie. She knows it's a lie. Our government has never introduced an entitlement program that didn't cost at least twice as much as the politicians who forced it on us said it would cost. And just how will this monstrosity be paid for? Taxes, that's how. Taxes levied by the looters on the producers to buy votes from the moochers. That's the recipe for government growth. Pelosi also plans to cut payments to Medicare providers. Medicare providers are, in case you haven't figured this out, are doctors. Under Nancy's plan more and more doctors will certainly decide to opt out of treating Medicare patients. Then the government will come along to tell them they can't. Then the doctors will tell the government to go pound sand and will simply retire. This will mean a shortage of doctors that will come at the exact same time demand for services will increase. This will mean waiting lines. This will mean rationing. And all of this will come along because the Democrats steadfastly and absolutely refuse to consider any private sector options in their health care reform plan. Why not private sector options? Simple ....
... because this has everything to do with controlling you and nothing to do with improving your health care.
Employers would be required to offer health insurance to workers Employers will pay fines for not offering health insurance Americans will be fined for not purchasing insurance coverage (no word yet on enforcement) Subsidies will be provided to poor people who can't afford health insurance Insurance companies will not be able to discriminate against older people or pre-existing conditions A government option will be available to "compete" with the private sector
(Can any of you figure out just where these actions are authorized in our Constitution? Oh, wait. I'm sorry. Our Constitution doesn't count anymore. K bye!)
Now these are all of the things that Nancy and the Democrats want us to know right now about Nancy's bill. But like any piece of legislation, there are hidden gems that are impossible to decipher without two lawyers, a psychic and the 3rd floor ward of your local mental institution to help make sense of it all.
We will have Jamie Dupree explain this one to us, but it seems as though Harry Reid is gearing up to use the reconciliation tactic to get his healthcare bill passed in the Senate. This is the tactic that would require only a simple majority - fifty votes plus one - for final passage. Actually ... I'll take a stab here. This means that Harry Reid wants to attach the health care takeover to some budget bill. Budget bills can't be filibustered ... so they can pass on a majority vote.
This should show you how desperate the Democrats are to gain control over your health care. They'll break the rules .. they'll bend the rules. They'll lie. They'll mislead. They'll twist arms, bribe, lie cheat and steal. Whatever it takes. Democrats know that control over your health care is essential to preventing another voter revolution like the one that kicked their butts out of office in 1994. They reason that if they control your health care, they control your vote. All they have to do is tell you that if you vote for the evil Republicans you will be on your own when it comes to your next hospital visit.
Now, let me remind you of a video from 2007. In this video you will hear Barack Obama say that we cannot pass healthcare reform using this reconciliation tactic. You would think that this should settle things ... so much for Harry's big idea, right? Sorry ... but wrong. We could fill a feature-length motion picture with video and audio clips of The Community Organizer making campaign promises that he had no intention of keeping.
Maybe the Democrats are hoping that third time is a charm?What I mean by that is that the Democrats are trying anything and everything they can to make you people like their plans to take over our healthcare system.In the past, they have relied on simple tricks to sway public option ... like buzz words and focus groups.But something has gone awry lately.No matter what the Democrats call their government takeover of healthcare, people aren't liking it.
Oh, no!What is a Democrat to do?
So first we had "public healthcare reform."Then it was "insurance reform."There was also the "public option."Some say that the original name for the "public option" was the "government option."I can't verify that, and it seems unlikely our political class would be that honest.Well ... it's time to rename "the public option" and Princess Nancy has come up with a new moniker .... "the consumer option."If you don't like that one, she suggests another name:"the competitive option."This is how Nancy Pelosi would like to refer to the government takeover of healthcare.Now you good Democrat myrmidons remember -- if you are unfortunate enough to get into a conversation with a liberal today, remember to use the new phrase "competitive option" so as to not offend him or her.
You will love this explanation from Princess Nancy as to why the name needs to be changed.Listen to this: "You'll hear everyone say, 'There's got to be a better name for this ... When people think of the public option, public is being misrepresented, that this is being paid for with their public dollars."Oh right, Nancy.No taxpayer dollars involved, right?And by the way ... the proper phrase is "taxpayer dollars," not "public dollars."Do we see another change in terminology coming here?
Public enemy number one of the moment is Cadillac insurance plans.The Democrats are trying to focus on these ritzy plans in order to gain support of their plans to limit competition and make you dependent on the government for healthcare.Obama's chief economic advisor Christina Romer says that the tax on Cadillac insurance plans is "probably the number one item that health economists across the ideological spectrum believe is likely to stem the explosion of health-care costs."
Did you hear that?According to Obama's chief economist, the biggest savior to our healthcare system comes in the form of a tax.
Romer says, "It will discourage insurance companies from offering high-priced plans that would otherwise eat up larger and larger shares of workers' wages."So now the government is in the business of dictating how employers set up their wages and benefits for workers.If the government doesn't like the way your company has set up its benefits, tax them to death!Eventually these plans will be eliminated and you will be forced to take on the government option, which will supposedly be cheaper (which it won't be).Then you will magically increase the wages of your employees!See how easy that was in liberal fairy land?
When I say "government healthcare" I mean the government takeover of healthcare that the looters are planning. Do you remember Rahm Emanuel's saying, "Never let a good crisis go to waste"? Well the Democrats are going to make sure that this suffering economy is put to good use ... in this case, the people are so economically insecure that they will look to the government to provide anything it can. And in this case, the government is going to deliver on healthcare. The Democrats even acknowledge that this is a big difference between healthcare reform now and healthcare reform efforts back in the 1990s. During Clinton, people were riding high. They didn't think they as much of a need for government. And this ... among MANY other reasons ... led to the demise of Hillarycare. So this time around, the Democrats are pumped. They are pumped that they economic conditions are ripe for a government takeover of healthcare.
Yesterday I tried to explain how Obama and the Democrats were scamming their way into making you believe that they healthcare plans could be deficit neutral. Looks like National Review has discovered yet another scam in the Baucus bill -- raid Social Security. Andrew Biggs explains:
But the CBO analysis actually leads to a very different conclusion: that in a classic "raid" on Social Security, Baucus's ostensible fiscal responsibility depends on raising Social Security taxes today to paper over new health spending, ignoring that those increased Social Security taxes imply higher benefit costs down the road.
CBO breaks down the Baucus plan's budgetary effects into those occurring "on budget" (where the substantive policy changes are) and those "off budget" (meaning through the Social Security program). The Baucus plan's on-budget provisions would reduce the ten-year budget deficit by a tiny $1 billion and in 2019 would increase borrowing by $6 billion. In the real world, where entitlement costs rise faster than projected and Congress fails to implement promised cuts to Medicare spending, the Baucus plan will doubtless generate significant deficits.
Meanwhile, the Baucus plan's fiscal skullduggery takes place off-budget. Social Security revenues would increase by $80 billion over ten years, with an $18 billon increase in 2019 alone. Around 3 million individuals would leave employer-sponsored health coverage -- which is exempt from taxes -- to purchase insurance through a subsidized "exchange." Leaving employer-sponsored coverage would raise workers' taxable wages and thereby boost Social Security revenues. Millions more would trade a portion of their insurance benefits for higher wages to avoid a new tax on high-cost policies. By skimming the new Social Security taxes, the Baucus plan appears to significantly cut the deficit when, in truth, it balances only by the skin of its teeth.
Now all of this is pretty complicated .. I know. This means that most Americans won't catch on to what the Democrats are pulling. Know this ... there has NEVER been a big entitlement program that did not cost AT LEAST twice as much as the political class said it would cost when they pawned it off on the American people. This is as it shall be with ObamaCare. It is going to bankrupt this country. These jerks in Washington don't care, though. They can always tax the rich, can't they?
Sadly, this is a legitimate question to ask. The Democrat plans to take over 18% of our economy (under the guise of healthcare reform) is well underway ..... but in order to get this thing passed, Democrats are not beyond bribery. Essentially, yes, that is what we are seeing. Democrats in Washington are including perks or exemptions for certain states in order to gain Senate votes from those states.
Nevada would get help from the federal government with its Medicaid bills. Isn't that special? However, the same does not go for every state. Hmm wonder why. Could it be that Harry Reid is from Nevada, and he sure pulls his weight around Congress.
Senior citizens in Florida and New York get additional Medicare benefits! Aren't they lucky? Too bad if you decided to retire in Minnesota. Or Wisconsin. No extra benefits for you.
And it's not just states, folks. Some professions are being singled out. Like firefighting and construction ... these "high-risk professions" will be getting a tax break on a new insurance tax that the Democrats want to pass. Soon, teaching government schools will be a "high-risk" profession .... or being a Senator!
Are you seeing what is happening here, folks? This healthcare reform is nothing but a scam to make more Americans dependent on government. It is nothing more than a scam to give the government control of more of our economy. And the way the Democrats will achieve this scam is to offer perks and benefits and exemptions and pork until they get the votes they need.
Okay, you already know ... the Senate Finance Committee got their Baucus bill passed. Sadly even though much of the bill wasn't even written when these Senators decided to vote on it. Yup .. you head me right.
Now just how in the world do you pass a bill that isn't even written yet? Well, you have these little goodies called "place holders." These place holders figuratively say "When the bill is written, we will fill in this blank ." Wow! I feel so much better about the legislative process now.
Well .. it's hard to comment on the parts of this bill that haven't even been written yet; but we can sure say something about a line that showed up on the "Plain English" version of the bill which the Senators did have. Right there, in black and white, it said that we would be offered the "convenience" of getting their health insurance at the Department of Motor Vehicles.
What? Yep you read that correctly. You will be able to go to the DMV in order to get health insurance.
Remember just a last week, I played a video for you from BigGovernment.com. It was a parody of a video by some Hollywood actors about health insurance and their evil profits. Well this parody video used the phrase "DMV-style healthcare." Did they know something that we didn't when they produced that video? Seems so. That's exactly what we're going to have! You think renewing your driver's license is a pain now, just wait until you have to wait for some welfare brood mare to sign up her and her litter for health insurance! And it looks like that is closer to reality than we would hope.
According to CNS News, it will be the duty of the Health and Human Services Secretary or the state governments to make sure that you have access to health insurance at the DMV. You would also be able to get government health insurance at .... government schools!

Don't believe me? Page 19 of the committee's "plain English" text says: "The Secretary and/or states would do the following: ... Enable customers to enroll in health care plans in local hospitals, schools, Departments of Motor Vehicles, local Social Security offices, and other offices designated by the state."
I suspect that this is just the first of many wonderful surprises to come from the looters.
After the looters make their nationalized medicine a reality we are, of course, going to see the quality of care decline while the costs skyrocket. There is going to be a big push to reform the reform. Who knows? Maybe someone will come along and suggest some privatization. The looters, of course, will fight back ... hard. I can hear some of the lines in the radio and TV ads they'll run right now:
The Republicans want to take away your health care.
The Republicans believe that only the rich deserve health care.
Vote the Republicans, get the flu, die.
Republicans are dangerous to your health.
As your doctor if no health care is right for you
Hoping ... just hoping ... that with every day that passes just a few more Americans open their eyes to see what the real game is here. This is NOT about your healthcare. This is about CONTROLLING your health care. It is about controlling you. Nothing more.
Why would they be? After all, wealth envy is such an easy card to use on the American public. Most Americans will buy into the demonization of other's success, particularly if it is an evil corporation or business!
So Congressional Democrats are back to their same old tricks: breathing down the necks of the health insurance industry. Their tactic is to regulate the industry into oblivion. The way that you gain support for that regulation is to portray the health insurance industry as the bad guys who need of some serious government intervention.
Chuck Schumer is on a mission to amend the healthcare reform bill to remove antitrust exemptions for insurers. Schumer believes that this law, dating back to the 1960s I believe, is largely to blame for increased medical costs.
What exactly is he referring to? Politico explains: The exemption, known as McCarran-Ferguson, cedes regulatory control of the industry, on the business side, to individual states. But repealing the antitrust exemption would give the federal government more authority to oversee the business side of health insurance companies -- something states now have the sole authority to monitor.
Harry Reid also decided to weigh in on the subject. He says ... and you'll love this quote ... "There isn't anything we could do to satisfy them in this health care bill. Nothing ... They are so anti-competitive. Why? Because they make more money than any other business in America today. . . .What a sweet deal they have."
Oh, so now all of the sudden it is the private businesses that are anti-competitive and the government that is in favor of competition. Amazing how that turned around so quickly. Pardon me if I have this wrong, but isn't it the government that refuses to allow health insurance companies to engage in interstate competition? Isn't it government that tells insurance companies what they must cover? Isn't it the government that prevents a health insurance company from offering a bare-bones policy to those who cannot afford a more comprehensive plan? All this --- and it's the health insurance industry that wants to kill competition?
Even Politico points out that this latest push from the Democrats indicates "that Democrats are planning to intensify their efforts to paint insurance companies as the villains in the health reform fight, something that could prove useful as President Barack Obama and others try to rally a skeptical public around a sweeping health reform measure."
If you enjoy Neal's daily chat with Jamie Dupree, you'll love Jamie's Blog! Check it out for analysis of the campaigns and goings on in Washington D.C.
Cristina Gonzalez and Laura Nunemaker assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze!
Search Boortz.com
We are just adding to the list of people in Washington who see our Constitution as nothing but a limit to what they can do with the power of government. First it was Nancy Pelosi scoffing at a question from reporters about healthcare and how it is constitutional. Then we had Robert Gibbs who wasn't concerned in the least about the Constitution and didn't believe White House lawyers needed to look into the Constitutionality of Obamacare.
So the 
Harry Reid has some gonads. 
We will have 
Yesterday I tried to explain how Obama and the Democrats were scamming their way into making you believe that they healthcare plans could be deficit neutral. Looks like National Review has discovered yet another scam in the Baucus bill -- raid Social Security. 
Why would they be? After all, wealth envy is such an easy card to use on the American public. Most Americans will buy into the demonization of other's success, particularly if it is an evil corporation or business! 