Phil Hare’s New, Improved “Affordable Health Care Of America Act”

The recently released House health care reform bill (HR3962) is 1990 pages and contains 13 new tax hikes including taxes on employers, individuals, medicines, medical devices, small businesses, corporations and much, much more.

But so what—at least Phil’s major campaign donors, Big Labor and trial lawyers will be happy.

Isn’t that the most important thing?

About these ads

About qcexaminer

Wouldn't you like to know? View all posts by qcexaminer

14 responses to “Phil Hare’s New, Improved “Affordable Health Care Of America Act”

  • thescoundrel

    I am sure Philobluster was in there cheer-cheer-cheering for any suggested tax increase. The thing is in the end when you add taxes onto any product or service – the tax is passed onto the people whom have to purchase the item or service. I have not read the bill but at one point I heard auntie nancy pushing for a vat tax. Those are insidious and costly to Joe Average and Joe Dirt Poor Americans.

  • Frankenstein Unleashed – Trick or Treat « Samaritans Scalawags Scoundrels Fleecing the Sheep

    [...] Pages in order to create one Gigantic Phantasm of Congressional Legislation. As pointed out by local blogger QCExaminer even our local Party-Selected Congressman Philobluster Hare is rushing to take credit for creating [...]

  • qcexaminer

    There are also massive Medicare cuts in the bill.

    When the geezers discover this little hidden gem, expect a run on tar and feathers at the local Farm & Fleet and Menards. :-)

  • thescoundrel

    Whew if there is going to be a run of Tar – it is a good thing I already had my roof reshingled. They use all the tar they want on our Congressmen as I should not need any this winter. (Knock on wood.)

  • Tspud1

    Where is that campaign pledge “You will not see any of your taxes increase one single dime,” Obama promised tens of millions of Americans making $250,000 or less. In fact, candidate Obama promised the middle class billions of dollars in tax cuts, part of his whole “spread the wealth around” plan.

    “If you’re a family that’s making $250,000 a year or less, you will see no increase in your taxes,” Obama promised. “Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your personal gains tax, not any of your taxes.”

  • qcexaminer

    T, you are so behind the times—the not one single dime and $250,000 tax pledges are so 2008.

    Now it’s all about quality affordable health care for all, provided by unicorns and mermaids finance by quatloos. :-)

  • Hareman

    Why would Congressman Hare upset those of us who are his strongest and biggest finaicial supporters (labor and trial lawyers)? We’ve given Cong. Hare all the campaign money he will ever need to retain Lane’s power. While we don’t own Phil, we have paid a huge down payment.

    I don’t understand why folks think Cong. Hare should vote against those of us who have consistently butter his biscut? When did Bush vote against Haliburton? When did any Republican vote against the QC Chamber? When did Schilling speaks out against the right wing? Fact is, congressional critters are paid to dance to the tune we play!

  • Tspud1

    Bush didn’t vote on anything. Where is your understanding of how our government runs? You truly must be a lawyer.

  • Tspud1

    QC, I remember the promises and Obama and Pelosi should be held to them. She breaks hers every week.

  • qcexaminer

    “You truly must be a lawyer”—that’s pretty harsh, T. :-)

    As for Obama’s campaign promises, in a perfect world he could be impeached and removed for serial lying, but that isn’t the system we have. It also doesn’t help that the press is so entralled by him that they are rendered completely useless.

    But the good news seems to be that even though the press is covering for him, people are starting to notice the disconnect between Obamaland and reality, and his approval ratings are dropping like a stone.

    The only way we can hold politicians accountable is by voting ‘em out—which as we know, isn’t as easy as it sounds. Obama won’t be up for re-election for three more years, which in political years can seem like eternity—especially if you hate the incumbent.

  • Tspud1

    There is a problem with the “vote them out argument” It assumes that people will vote for the non incumbent. That is not the case in many areas. People will vote for a dog or monkey if it has a D by their name. They do not even know who or what they are voting for in many cases. They just want something from the government and think it is an entitlement. Government is destroying the self reliance this country use to have. It is creating a mindset that it is someone elses job to provide for you. Again I say, I will not wait for the government cheese.

  • qcexaminer

    I wasn’t really making the case for “vote ‘em out”, but it was the only way I could think of to hold politicians accountable for breaking their promises, as you mentioned in #9—what else is there?

    It’s not just that some people vote in lockstep according to party, it is also the fact that incumbents have many built-in advantages (i.e. name recognition, $$$$, McCain-Feingold, etc.) that makes it so difficult to oust them once they’re in.

    If you have other ideas about how we can hold politicians to their promises, let’s hear ‘em.

  • Tspud1

    I think we have to try to show how many times Hare has sold his constituents out to as many real voters as possible. Time after time he votes against the wishes of the people in this district. He is comfortable in knowing his base will still vote for him. Those are some of the voters we need to cross over or not vote. Preaching to the choir doesn’t get to many new voters. Unfortunately the youth don’t vote in great numbers and many have not had real world experience to counteract the liberal teachers they have been forced to listen to over the years.

  • qcexaminer

    So true T, but here’s the problem:

    1. Around here, the local press is firmly in the pocket of the Democrat political elites. One of the primary reasons I started blogging was I thought the press wasn’t doing it’s watchdog duty. I was told by one reporter than no one cared about my anti-Hare attitude. While I’m happy with my blog, my traffic numbers and my readers/commenters, I don’t have the readers/viewers the traditional press has.

    2. I’m sure he has his reasons, but it would really help if Schilling jumped into the fray. The Dispatch just printed another story which allowed Hare to repeat the same tired, FALSE talking points he has for months about the health care bill. If Schilling—or anyone of his stature spoke out about Hare’s lies and votes, the establishment press would have to cover it.

    3. It would also be helpful if Hare had a challenger in his own party—look what happened in the NY-23 race—Scuzzyfava just quit the campaign—she was too leftwing for the GOP and Hoffman’s challenge proved she was too liberal for the district. If a moderate Dem challenged Hare as being too leftwing for the 17th (which he is) we might stand a chance of ousting Hare. I could live with a Dem congressman as long as he/she wasn’t a radical leftwinger like Hare.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.