"You didn't get there on your own"

[Foxfyre]

Evidence?

David Frum and the Closing of the Conservative Mind | by Bruce Bartlett

You consider the fact that David Frum being fired after penning a column that called the ACA a defeat of free market and conservative principles proof that AEI scholars were banned from speaking to the media because they agreed with Obama?

Does you brain actually work?

By the way, why was David Frum actively writing columns if he was forbidden to talk to the media?

Bruce Bartlett was fired for personalizing his criticisms and furthering a diatribe against a personality rather than focusing on specific policy. NCPA has strict rules against that and all affiliated with NCPA agree to those rules. Bartlett violated the rules, refused to comply with them, and that is why he was dismissed.

I suspect if the skinny on Frum here is accurate, something similar was in the works.

I also suspect if that there was more focus on being honest and accurate about a lot of things, we might have much better information on which to form our own opinions and convictions about things.

Would it be asking too much for the President of the United States to do that? Most especially when it affects national commerce and industry and our ability to make a living?

 

[Listening]

Would it be asking too much for the President of the United States to do that? Most especially when it affects national commerce and industry and our ability to make a living?

I'd like him just to be honest about what he really is trying to do.

 

[Foxfyre]

Would it be asking too much for the President of the United States to do that? Most especially when it affects national commerce and industry and our ability to make a living?

I'd like him just to be honest about what he really is trying to do.

You know, after looking at this in every possible way for the last four years, and doing my damndest to try to be as objective as possible, I am convinced that it may not be a fact, but it also very well could be possible that if the President was honest about what he is trying to do, he would be clearly guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors and subject to impeachment. Not that his worshippers would ever agree to that though no matter what he says or does.

 

[Bfgrn]

Evidence?

David Frum and the Closing of the Conservative Mind | by Bruce Bartlett

You consider the fact that David Frum being fired after penning a column that called the ACA a defeat of free market and conservative principles proof that AEI scholars were banned from speaking to the media because they agreed with Obama?

Does you brain actually work?

By the way, why was David Frum actively writing columns if he was forbidden to talk to the media?

My God, are you right wingers THAT fear-filled and insecure to even READ something that would disturb your dogma and lock-step doctrinaire?

Bruce Bartlett wrote about David Frum:

"Since, he is no longer affiliated with AEI, I feel free to say publicly something he told me in private a few months ago. He asked if I had noticed any comments by AEI “scholars” on the subject of health care reform. I said no and he said that was because they had been ordered not to speak to the media because they agreed with too much of what Obama was trying to do.

It saddened me to hear this. I have always hoped that my experience was unique. But now I see that I was just the first to suffer from a closing of the conservative mind. Rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed, and the conservative brain will slowly shrivel into dementia if it hasn’t already.

Sadly, there is no place for David and me to go. The donor community is only interested in financing organizations that parrot the party line, such as the one recently established by McCain economic adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin.

Why was David Frum actively writing columns if he was forbidden to talk to the media?

Simple: because the health care debate was over. The Affordable Health care Bill passed.

 

[Bfgrn]

David Frum and the Closing of the Conservative Mind | by Bruce Bartlett

You consider the fact that David Frum being fired after penning a column that called the ACA a defeat of free market and conservative principles proof that AEI scholars were banned from speaking to the media because they agreed with Obama?

Does you brain actually work?

By the way, why was David Frum actively writing columns if he was forbidden to talk to the media?

Bruce Bartlett was fired for personalizing his criticisms and furthering a diatribe against a personality rather than focusing on specific policy. NCPA has strict rules against that and all affiliated with NCPA agree to those rules. Bartlett violated the rules, refused to comply with them, and that is why he was dismissed.

I suspect if the skinny on Frum here is accurate, something similar was in the works.

I also suspect if that there was more focus on being honest and accurate about a lot of things, we might have much better information on which to form our own opinions and convictions about things.

Would it be asking too much for the President of the United States to do that? Most especially when it affects national commerce and industry and our ability to make a living?

Here is an excerpt of what Frum wrote. It is available to anyone with the courage to read it.

Waterloo
March 21st, 2010 at 4:59 pm | David Frum

Conservatives and Republicans today suffered their most crushing legislative defeat since the 1960s.

It’s hard to exaggerate the magnitude of the disaster. Conservatives may cheer themselves that they’ll compensate for today’s expected vote with a big win in the November 2010 elections. But:

(1) It’s a good bet that conservatives are over-optimistic about November – by then the economy will have improved and the immediate goodies in the healthcare bill will be reaching key voting blocs.

(2) So what? Legislative majorities come and go. This healthcare bill is forever. A win in November is very poor compensation for this debacle now.

So far, I think a lot of conservatives will agree with me. Now comes the hard lesson:

A huge part of the blame for today’s disaster attaches to conservatives and Republicans ourselves.

At the beginning of this process we made a strategic decision: unlike, say, Democrats in 2001 when President Bush proposed his first tax cut, we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing. We were going for all the marbles. This would be Obama’s Waterloo – just as healthcare was Clinton’s in 1994.

Only, the hardliners overlooked a few key facts: Obama was elected with 53% of the vote, not Clinton’s 42%. The liberal block within the Democratic congressional caucus is bigger and stronger than it was in 1993-94. And of course the Democrats also remember their history, and also remember the consequences of their 1994 failure.

This time, when we went for all the marbles, we ended with none.

Could a deal have been reached? Who knows? But we do know that the gap between this plan and traditional Republican ideas is not very big. The Obama plan has a broad family resemblance to Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts plan. It builds on ideas developed at the Heritage Foundation in the early 1990s that formed the basis for Republican counter-proposals to Clintoncare in 1993-1994.

Barack Obama badly wanted Republican votes for his plan. Could we have leveraged his desire to align the plan more closely with conservative views? To finance it without redistributive taxes on productive enterprise – without weighing so heavily on small business – without expanding Medicaid? Too late now. They are all the law.

No illusions please: This bill will not be repealed. Even if Republicans scored a 1994 style landslide in November, how many votes could we muster to re-open the “doughnut hole” and charge seniors more for prescription drugs? How many votes to re-allow insurers to rescind policies when they discover a pre-existing condition? How many votes to banish 25 year olds from their parents’ insurance coverage? And even if the votes were there – would President Obama sign such a repeal?

We followed the most radical voices in the party and the movement, and they led us to abject and irreversible defeat.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Would it be asking too much for the President of the United States to do that? Most especially when it affects national commerce and industry and our ability to make a living?

I'd like him just to be honest about what he really is trying to do.

I hear you

Come next election
this may be a moot point

 

[bripat9643]

You consider the fact that David Frum being fired after penning a column that called the ACA a defeat of free market and conservative principles proof that AEI scholars were banned from speaking to the media because they agreed with Obama?

Does you brain actually work?

By the way, why was David Frum actively writing columns if he was forbidden to talk to the media?

Thanks for sparing me the trouble of reading his propaganda. I knew it wouldn't come close to proving his claim.

 

[Foxfyre]

David Frum himself said that nothing he wrote or no policy position he ever took at AEI had anything to do with his leaving AEI. He left over a contract dispute. The powers that be at AEI wanted him to come to the office more to earn his $100k salary and he didn't want to. So they parted company. It was as simple as that.

But like the President, his worshippers, and surrogate media are wont to do, they put a dishonest spin on that and try to make it look like something very different from what it was. They can't attack it as it is, so they put a dishonest spin on it.

Anerican business has been under that kind of assault fron the President, his worshippers, and their surrogate media for some time now.

And I for one am quite pleased to see the great sleeping American public shake off their apathy and start waking up and fighting back. It was about time.

 

[Bfgrn]

David Frum himself said that nothing he wrote or no policy position he ever took at AEI had anything to do with his leaving AEI. He left over a contract dispute. The powers that be at AEI wanted him to come to the office more to earn his $100k salary and he didn't want to. So they parted company. It was as simple as that.

But like the President, his worshippers, and surrogate media are wont to do, they put a dishonest spin on that and try to make it look like something very different from what it was. They can't attack it as it is, so they put a dishonest spin on it.

Anerican business has been under that kind of assault fron the President, his worshippers, and their surrogate media for some time now.

And I for one am quite pleased to see the great sleeping American public shake off their apathy and start waking up and fighting back. It was about time.

Link?

 

[Bfgrn]

David Frum and the Closing of the Conservative Mind | by Bruce Bartlett

You consider the fact that David Frum being fired after penning a column that called the ACA a defeat of free market and conservative principles proof that AEI scholars were banned from speaking to the media because they agreed with Obama?

Does you brain actually work?

By the way, why was David Frum actively writing columns if he was forbidden to talk to the media?

Bruce Bartlett was fired for personalizing his criticisms and furthering a diatribe against a personality rather than focusing on specific policy. NCPA has strict rules against that and all affiliated with NCPA agree to those rules. Bartlett violated the rules, refused to comply with them, and that is why he was dismissed.

I suspect if the skinny on Frum here is accurate, something similar was in the works.

I also suspect if that there was more focus on being honest and accurate about a lot of things, we might have much better information on which to form our own opinions and convictions about things.

Would it be asking too much for the President of the United States to do that? Most especially when it affects national commerce and industry and our ability to make a living?

Link??

 

[Quantum Windbag]

David Frum and the Closing of the Conservative Mind | by Bruce Bartlett

You consider the fact that David Frum being fired after penning a column that called the ACA a defeat of free market and conservative principles proof that AEI scholars were banned from speaking to the media because they agreed with Obama?

Does you brain actually work?

By the way, why was David Frum actively writing columns if he was forbidden to talk to the media?

My God, are you right wingers THAT fear-filled and insecure to even READ something that would disturb your dogma and lock-step doctrinaire?

Bruce Bartlett wrote about David Frum:

"Since, he is no longer affiliated with AEI, I feel free to say publicly something he told me in private a few months ago. He asked if I had noticed any comments by AEI “scholars” on the subject of health care reform. I said no and he said that was because they had been ordered not to speak to the media because they agreed with too much of what Obama was trying to do.

It saddened me to hear this. I have always hoped that my experience was unique. But now I see that I was just the first to suffer from a closing of the conservative mind. Rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed, and the conservative brain will slowly shrivel into dementia if it hasn’t already.

Sadly, there is no place for David and me to go. The donor community is only interested in financing organizations that parrot the party line, such as the one recently established by McCain economic adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin.

Why was David Frum actively writing columns if he was forbidden to talk to the media?

Simple: because the health care debate was over. The Affordable Health care Bill passed.

Yes, he wrote that, so what? That is known as hearsay, and is only as good as the person repeating it. The problem with your position is that Frum has published a weekly column for years, and did so before, during, and after the Obamacare debate. That column is published in a newspaper. In addition, he writes various columns for US News, the New York Times, and the Guardian, among others. He also did a regular stint on Marketplace.

Seriously, I am having trouble believing you believe this crap, much less believe it myself.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed, and the conservative brain will slowly shrivel into dementia if it hasn’t already.

of course there was a lot of difference between all the Republicans in the primaries.

IF AEI wants a unified conservative/ libertarian message that is their right, much like the White House has a right to look coherent with a unified message.

The issue is whether the message is correct. A liberal will lack the IQ to know and will try to change the subject to the coherency of AEI as if it matters.

 

[Foxfyre]

Rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed, and the conservative brain will slowly shrivel into dementia if it hasn’t already.

of course there was a lot of difference between all the Republicans in the primaries.

IF AEI wants a unified conservative/ libertarian message that is their right, much like the White House has a right to look coherent with a unified message.

The issue is whether the message is correct. A liberal will lack the IQ to know and will try to change the subject to the coherency of AEI as if it matters.

The thing is though that AEI does NOT require a unified conservative/libertarian point of view any more than CATO does, and it has hosted more than one spirited debate offering many differences of opinion. Ditto NCPA. The former incident with Frum involved a contract dispute, not a quarrel with his opinion. NCPA's dispute with Bartlett had nothing to do with any issue but rather had to do with a tightly enforced rule of not attacking personalities but rather focusing on policy and Bartlett violated that rule and refused to comply when asked to do so.

 

[Bfgrn]

Rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed, and the conservative brain will slowly shrivel into dementia if it hasn’t already.

of course there was a lot of difference between all the Republicans in the primaries.

IF AEI wants a unified conservative/ libertarian message that is their right, much like the White House has a right to look coherent with a unified message.

The issue is whether the message is correct. A liberal will lack the IQ to know and will try to change the subject to the coherency of AEI as if it matters.

The thing is though that AEI does NOT require a unified conservative/libertarian point of view any more than CATO does, and it has hosted more than one spirited debate offering many differences of opinion. Ditto NCPA. The former incident with Frum involved a contract dispute, not a quarrel with his opinion. NCPA's dispute with Bartlett had nothing to do with any issue but rather had to do with a tightly enforced rule of not attacking personalities but rather focusing on policy and Bartlett violated that rule and refused to comply when asked to do so.

Where are your links Foxfyre?

HERE is what David Frum had to say about his being fired.

David Frum told us last night that he believes his axing from his $100,000-a-year “resident scholar” gig at the conservative American Enterprise Institute was related to DONOR PRESSURE following his viral blog post arguing Republicans had suffered a devastating, generational “Waterloo” in their loss to President Obama on health reform. “There's a lot about the story I don't really understand,” Frum said from his iPhone. “But the core of the story is the kind of economic pressure that intellectual conservatives are under. AEI represents the best of the conservative world. [AEI President] Arthur Brooks is a brilliant man, and his books are fantastic. But the elite isn’t leading anymore. It’s trapped. Partly because of the desperate economic situation in the country, what were once the leading institutions of conservatism are constrained. I think Arthur took no pleasure in this. I think he was embarrassed. I think he would have avoided it if he possibly could, but he couldn't.”

I can GUARANTEE one thing: The AEI is not going to say they fired Frum because of his Waterloo column.

 

[Foxfyre]

of course there was a lot of difference between all the Republicans in the primaries.

IF AEI wants a unified conservative/ libertarian message that is their right, much like the White House has a right to look coherent with a unified message.

The issue is whether the message is correct. A liberal will lack the IQ to know and will try to change the subject to the coherency of AEI as if it matters.

The thing is though that AEI does NOT require a unified conservative/libertarian point of view any more than CATO does, and it has hosted more than one spirited debate offering many differences of opinion. Ditto NCPA. The former incident with Frum involved a contract dispute, not a quarrel with his opinion. NCPA's dispute with Bartlett had nothing to do with any issue but rather had to do with a tightly enforced rule of not attacking personalities but rather focusing on policy and Bartlett violated that rule and refused to comply when asked to do so.

Where are your links Foxfyre?

HERE is what David Frum had to say about his being fired.

David Frum told us last night that he believes his axing from his $100,000-a-year “resident scholar” gig at the conservative American Enterprise Institute was related to DONOR PRESSURE following his viral blog post arguing Republicans had suffered a devastating, generational “Waterloo” in their loss to President Obama on health reform. “There's a lot about the story I don't really understand,” Frum said from his iPhone. “But the core of the story is the kind of economic pressure that intellectual conservatives are under. AEI represents the best of the conservative world. [AEI President] Arthur Brooks is a brilliant man, and his books are fantastic. But the elite isn’t leading anymore. It’s trapped. Partly because of the desperate economic situation in the country, what were once the leading institutions of conservatism are constrained. I think Arthur took no pleasure in this. I think he was embarrassed. I think he would have avoided it if he possibly could, but he couldn't.”

I can GUARANTEE one thing: The AEI is not going to say they fired Frum because of his Waterloo column.

The same article in your link also rebuts what Frum said. Frum had been with AEI for a long time and had frequently disagreed with the others on various issues. The idea he would be sacked on this particular issue is ludicrous. And also differs from what he told others:

article.wn.com/view/2012/06/29/David_Frums_Alternate_Health_Care_Reality/
Jun 29, 2012 ... By W. James Antle, III on 6.29.12 @ 2:23PM David Frum is once ... He is relying on some rather questionable political analysis to get to this conclusion. ... Conservative Fired For Criticizing Fox News & Republicans ..... but Frum said that the AEI had not cited his criticism as the reason for his termination.

 

[Neotrotsky]

The thing is though that AEI does NOT require a unified conservative/libertarian point of view any more than CATO does, and it has hosted more than one spirited debate offering many differences of opinion. Ditto NCPA. The former incident with Frum involved a contract dispute, not a quarrel with his opinion. NCPA's dispute with Bartlett had nothing to do with any issue but rather had to do with a tightly enforced rule of not attacking personalities but rather focusing on policy and Bartlett violated that rule and refused to comply when asked to do so.

Where are your links Foxfyre?

HERE is what David Frum had to say about his being fired.

David Frum told us last night that he believes his axing from his $100,000-a-year “resident scholar” gig at the conservative American Enterprise Institute was related to DONOR PRESSURE following his viral blog post arguing Republicans had suffered a devastating, generational “Waterloo” in their loss to President Obama on health reform. “There's a lot about the story I don't really understand,” Frum said from his iPhone. “But the core of the story is the kind of economic pressure that intellectual conservatives are under. AEI represents the best of the conservative world. [AEI President] Arthur Brooks is a brilliant man, and his books are fantastic. But the elite isn’t leading anymore. It’s trapped. Partly because of the desperate economic situation in the country, what were once the leading institutions of conservatism are constrained. I think Arthur took no pleasure in this. I think he was embarrassed. I think he would have avoided it if he possibly could, but he couldn't.”

I can GUARANTEE one thing: The AEI is not going to say they fired Frum because of his Waterloo column.

The same article in your link also rebuts what Frum said. Frum had been with AEI for a long time and had frequently disagreed with the others on various issues. The idea he would be sacked on this particular issue is ludicrous. And also differs from what he told others:

article.wn.com/view/2012/06/29/David_Frums_Alternate_Health_Care_Reality/
Jun 29, 2012 ... By W. James Antle, III on 6.29.12 @ 2:23PM David Frum is once ... He is relying on some rather questionable political analysis to get to this conclusion. ... Conservative Fired For Criticizing Fox News & Republicans ..... but Frum said that the AEI had not cited his criticism as the reason for his termination.

Frum is a lost RINO looking for cheap shots
to make money via the MSM

I often laugh at the "conservatives" the left and the MSM like to toss out
Brooks, Meghan Mccain, Sullivan and Frum to name a few.

Good article here

Odious Conservatives

WASHINGTON -- A major proposition that I advance in a book that will be published later this month, After the Hangover: The Conservatives' Road to Recovery, is that there exists an odious subgroup of conservatives who since the beginning of the conservative movement have made their way to prominence in the mainstream media by a cheap act. They disparage with great melodrama other conservatives. Liberals love it -- and for a while love the disparagers. In the late 1990s Arianna Huffington exploited this instrument of self-promotion brazenly. For several years David Frum has been doing it haltingly, even timorously. However, in the last two weeks he has been pulling a Huffington with unusual boldness.

First he smeared Sean Hannity. Then he reproached conservative opponents of the Democrats' healthcare monstrosity. Now he is claiming martyrdom at the hands of Arthur Brooks, the head of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) that housed him as a resident fellow for seven years, reportedly at a salary of $100,000 a year. Brooks was willing to let him stay on at AEI but without a salary. Very theatrically Frum(p) quit, and the Liberals pronounced him a great man. ​

Never trust the left on spending, taxes, and especially never
trust them to identify who "real" conservatives are......
----------------------------------------------------------------



Back to the issue at hand

Papa Obama is to the left of Kennedy, Clinton, Reagan, Ford on taxes
and how free enterprise works


His ideas are very un-American

Which probably explains why

Obama is not working

 

[Quantum Windbag]

of course there was a lot of difference between all the Republicans in the primaries.

IF AEI wants a unified conservative/ libertarian message that is their right, much like the White House has a right to look coherent with a unified message.

The issue is whether the message is correct. A liberal will lack the IQ to know and will try to change the subject to the coherency of AEI as if it matters.

The thing is though that AEI does NOT require a unified conservative/libertarian point of view any more than CATO does, and it has hosted more than one spirited debate offering many differences of opinion. Ditto NCPA. The former incident with Frum involved a contract dispute, not a quarrel with his opinion. NCPA's dispute with Bartlett had nothing to do with any issue but rather had to do with a tightly enforced rule of not attacking personalities but rather focusing on policy and Bartlett violated that rule and refused to comply when asked to do so.

Where are your links Foxfyre?

HERE is what David Frum had to say about his being fired.

David Frum told us last night that he believes his axing from his $100,000-a-year “resident scholar” gig at the conservative American Enterprise Institute was related to DONOR PRESSURE following his viral blog post arguing Republicans had suffered a devastating, generational “Waterloo” in their loss to President Obama on health reform. “There's a lot about the story I don't really understand,” Frum said from his iPhone. “But the core of the story is the kind of economic pressure that intellectual conservatives are under. AEI represents the best of the conservative world. [AEI President] Arthur Brooks is a brilliant man, and his books are fantastic. But the elite isn’t leading anymore. It’s trapped. Partly because of the desperate economic situation in the country, what were once the leading institutions of conservatism are constrained. I think Arthur took no pleasure in this. I think he was embarrassed. I think he would have avoided it if he possibly could, but he couldn't.”

I can GUARANTEE one thing: The AEI is not going to say they fired Frum because of his Waterloo column.

Great way to make your point.

“There's a lot about the story I don't really understand,”

In other words, he doesn't know why he was fired, he is guessing it had something to do with money.

I also like the part where Frum insists he was forbidden to talk to the media.

But he maintains he developed and spread conservative ideas -- AEI’s stated goal -- with the 300,000 words a year that he writes for his blog, FrumForum.com; his weekly columns for CNN.com, The Week, and the National Post of Canada; his biweekly offerings for TIME and American Public Media’s “Marketplace”; and his three TV and three radio appearances in a typical week.

 

[Dr Grump]

Outraged small business owners fire back at Obama
Jul 28, 2012

Entrepreneurs say, 'We did build this'
Outraged small business owners fire back at Obama

Wow. It's like everyone in the country, except for Obama's most slavish worshippers, heard his speech EXACTLY THE SAME WAY.

Er, no. Just bitter and twisted neocons. And those who listen to the likes of fox news etc twisting his words. IOW, people who can't think for themselves...

 

[thereisnospoon]

WOW, are you THAT naive? Even if Romney wins and Republicans gain control of both houses, the individual mandate is not going to be removed. Why you ask? Because the private sector insurance companies demanded it.

BTW, please provide ONE country where private sector insurance works?

The USA.

Now, can we get back to Obama and the off speech yacking he did that essentially reminded so many people who in love with the government he is.

I've already described the issues one of my family members had with the start up a travel agency in a small town in AZ. Nobody on the left wanted to address the fact that besides spending time going through a great deal of red tape which cost a lot of money and brought no value it also delayed the opening (only for red tape reasons) long enough for them to miss the busy season.

Why ? Because there is nothing to say. Obama's attitude is why he needs to go.

The USA?

The Cost of Doing Nothing
Why the Cost of Failing to Fix Our Health System Is Greater than the Cost of Reform

2008

The U.S. health care system is in crisis. Health care costs too much; we often get too little in exchange for our health care dollar; and tens of millions of Americans are uninsured.

Our economy loses hundreds of billions of dollars every year because of the diminished health and shorter lifespan of the uninsured. Rising health care costs undermine the ability of U.S. firms to compete internationally, threaten the stability of American jobs, and place increasing strain on local, state, and federal budgets. As health care costs continue to rise faster than wages, health insurance becomes more and more unaffordable for more and more American families every day.

Yet, the recent financial services meltdown has led some people to suggest that we cannot afford health reform and that fixing our broken health care system will have to wait once again. But waiting comes with a price. The crisis worsens every day that we do not act. Premiums will continue to rise; Americans will continue to pay more for less-generous health coverage; and fewer employers will offer health insurance to their workers.

We must reform our struggling health system not in spite of our economic crisis, but rather because of the impact health care has on the American economy. The economic and social impact of inaction is high and it will only rise over time.

Economic Cost

The economic cost of failing to fix our broken health care system is greater than the upfront expense of comprehensive health reform. In 2006, our economy lost as much as $200 billion because of the poor health and shorter lifespan of the uninsured. This is by most estimates as much as, if not greater than, the public costs of ensuring all Americans have quality, affordable, health coverage. The economies in California, Texas, and Florida suffer most from productivity loses stemming from the uninsured. Yet, Delaware’s economy loses more per uninsured person -- over $6,800 per uninsured resident.

Affordability

As health care costs continue to grow faster than wages, health insurance will become more and more unaffordable for more and more American families every day. The financial burdens associated with health care and health insurance will only get worse over time without action.The cost of the average employer-sponsored health insurance plan (ESI) for a family will reach $24,000 in 2016. This represents an 84 percent increase over 2008 premium levels. Under this scenario, we estimate that at least half of American households will need to spend more than 45 percent of their income to buy health insurance.

More

Nice opinion piece...
'Here it is ...."under this scenario we estimate..."
What a bunch of pro Obama care propaganda.
These people do not have the facts. The Obama regime has the facts and the regime is hiding the real cost not just in dollars, but the cost in job losses, the cost of the rationing of care and of course the cost in emotional strain once the bureaucrats in charge start telling older people the care they USED to receive is too expensive and of course "we are sorry. Perhaps you should get your affairs in order."
Happens in the UK all the time.

 

[saveliberty]

Obama hasn't done thing one to help small business. My guess is losing in November is his best shot.