Explanation for how the Affordable Care Act (AKA Obamacare) Became Law

Charles Krauthammer wrote an editorial describing how recently released videos of MIT professor Jonathan Gruber, an architect of Obamacare, describing how Obamacare was written deceptively to allow it to become law. Gruber explained, “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. Basically call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass. Gruber also explained that the authors of the bill realized they had to manipulate the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office that is responsible for issuing cost estimates on any legislative proposal. “This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CDO did not score the mandate as taxes. If the CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies.” The President even insisted in his speeches in favor of the law that what must be paid to the government if you fail to buy health insurance was not a tax. We all know that the Supreme Court declared the law constitutional because it was a tax.

There were numerous broken promises. One that was repeated on numerous occasions by the President was that “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Period. If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance. Period. Then people learned their doctors often weren’t included in the government-approved coverage. People who had shopped for tailored health insurance were told they could not keep their insurance because it was substandard. Thus a fifty year old woman with no children remaining at home was told her insurance did not meet government standards because it did not include maternity benefits or pediatric dental coverage. Continue reading

Gun, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies

guns-germs-steel book cvrI posted a two part review of this book in 2011, but was inspired to reread parts of it as I was doing some other reading about history. The book by Jared Diamond won several awards, including the Pulitzer Prize. It is an excellent book that deserved awards and I decided it deserved a second review.

The Prologue is titled “Yali’s Question, The regionally differing courses of history.” The author explains that New Guineans had tens of thousands of years of history and were still using stone tools when the Europeans showed up with all manner of manufactured goods, including steel axes. New Guineans called all those goods “cargo.” Yali was a New Guinean politician who inquired, “Why do white people have so much cargo, but we New Guineans have so little?” The Europeans used their superior technology to impose a centralized government and dominate the New Guineans, who they considered to be primitive. Yali’s question is mentioned often in the author’s quest to understand how Europeans and Asians were able to dominate original occupants of many lands, such as Native Americans, despite having no genetic superiority.

Part I gives chilling descriptions of man’s actions against man.  One is about the Maori invading the Chatman Islands 500 miles East of New Zealand.  The Moriori who lived there had originated from the same Polynesian origins, but the Maori developed into highly organized warriors while the Moriori had lived peacefully.  The Maori told the Moriori they were their slaves, and those who resisted were killed and consumed.  The others were kept and killed like sheep.  One Maori explained what happened was “…in accordance with our custom.”   Continue reading

Tooth and Nail

The Grammarphobia Blog explains that the origin of the expression is pretty much what you would expect.  It literally means fighting “…with the use of one’s teeth and nails as weapons; by biting and scratching.” It also explains that it means to attack or defend “…vigorously, fiercely, with one’s utmost efforts, with all one’s might.” The first recorded mention was by Sir Thomas More in 1535 while he was waiting execution. I typically don’t make editorial comments about expressions, but think fighting “tooth and nail” against an executioner or someone with an axe, spear, or gun means you are merely trying to maintain some semblance of dignity or prolonging the inevitable.