Wednesday, March 11, 2009

We Have Seen the Enemy and Her Name is Kate Bolduan

Know Your Enemy
More: Update below
(Edited for format 3/30/09)

Kate Bolduan is an attractive reporter. Actually a very attractive, young, likable, intelligent (as in Phi Beta Kappa smart) reporter for CNN. If you were to bring Kate home and introduce her to Mom and Dad, she's already part of the family, she is that likable.

But Kate is the enemy.

Today, I am naming names and today Kate Bolduan you are Public Enemy Number One. Moreover, I am making this call based on the evidence of a single damning report. A single report is as damming as a single wide stance. Kate Bouldan generates one-sided propaganda in support of a radical shift of political power and wealth and the creation of a dependent constituency.

Kate writes, in CNN's "First 100 Days" marquee a piece called The plight of young, uninsured Americans. These are the self-described 'story highlights."

  • Statistics: Young adults are the largest group of uninsured Americans

  • Many 20-somethings don't have jobs that offer health benefits

  • Bree Honey: "I can't get sick. I have to worry about if I'm going to get hurt"
So it is clearly a piece on the Presidents health care proposals. "So, what's the problem?" Kate asks. "Young adults, ages 19 to 29, are the largest age group of uninsured people across the country." That's her answer. They are uninsured. And, Kate, that is a problem because... ? I'm waiting? Are we going to hear about a plight?

Here's the 'plight': According to Bree Honey, an unmarried 20 year old something "I am buying my own prescription drugs by myself. ... And I have to pay for that out of pocket every single month. So it's very difficult on me," she said.

Hey, it is very difficult for Bree... did everyone get that?

"I'm just a struggling student right out of college, trying to make my way. And I can't--I don't have the money right now for insurance," Honey said. "If there's some way that the government could get me, or get everyone, just a minimal coverage ... I would even pay for it out of my taxes if I had to."
Kate is really trying to make a martyr out of Bree Honey. Bree doesn't have the money for health insurance. But if the government would add her and 50 million others to the health care system, well Bree would pay what she could out of her taxes.

Now Kate, let me just take the devils advocate for a moment here.

Question: If the Government does not buy Bree Honey's health insurance, what would be the the harm? If the government does nothing, what will happen?
Answer: It will be 'difficult' for Bree.

Question: Doesn't Bree Honey have any family that would help her out in her time of need? Can she move back home to save some money? What other alternatives does Bree Honey Have?
Answer: Over to you Kate what are the answers? You did ask Bree these questions?

Question: If we buy Bree, (and the other 50 million so-called uninsured Americans) how will we pay for this?
Answer: Mostly by taxing our children and grandchildren.

Question: What happens to the cost of health care when we add 50 million people to the demand side of the equation?
Answer: Everyone knows that when demand increases, the price goes up.

Question: So the price for my own insurance is going up, and we are adding people who cannot pay to the rolls? So I have to pay more for me, and I have to pay for Bree as well?
Answer: Precisely.

From each, according to his ability, to each according to his need.

See Kate, this little exercise is quite revealing. Why is was it not in your 'report'? Perhaps because so few people would want to waste our precious tax dollars to make life 'less difficult' for poor Bree Honey.

By the way, everyone, it is damned difficult on me too, and I don't see Kate Bolduan riding an Obama Unicorn over here to shower me with health care or government cheese or anything.

It reminds me of Carl's quote from Sunday, Dr. Melissa Clouthier , and it bears repeating: "Until America becomes the socialistic, even-Steven, mediocre, complacent haven for the average and lazy, the left won’t be happy. Until America is the same as every other 3rd rate socialist state, the left will curse American exceptionalism and decry the inequity. Until America is hamstrung by laws and regulations and rules only she will follow, in the name some warped morality, the left will curse the lack of justice and fairness."

The idea that we need to expand social programs further to help Bree Honey is just propaganda. There is no substance to it. It is a Big Lie. More from Public Enemy Kate:

Only about one-half of all young adults who are working are offered coverage through an employer...And it's a common problem. According to the latest date from the Census Bureau, in 2007, there were an estimated 13.2 million uninsured young adults. It's the fastest growing group of the 46 million uninsured Americans today.
Of course Kate is quick to note:

Reducing the number of uninsured young adults is a top priority for President Obama.
Kate Bolduan is on a mission to help make socialism and socialistic health care a reality in this country. Not because we need to do it, but because it will create a permanent constituency for Obama and the Democratic party. That is precisely why Kate Bolduan, you are Public Enemy Number One.

Add this to the other evidence that the so-called 'mainstream media' is anything but the mouthpiece of the Democratic Party. So called 'reports' like this one is just propaganda, and 'reporters' like Kate Bolduan masquerade as information providers.

It isn't news you can use.

The message Kate brings us is we ought to do something so poor Bree Honey's life isn't so difficult. Kate also does not tell you the other ugly side of the equation for twenty-somethings.

The annual report from the National Center for Health Statistics (via the USA Today) tells us that two-thirds of these uninsured young people are overweight, one quarter binge drink, one third smoke and otherwise abuse their bodies. The USAT provides some great info from the lead author, Amy Bernstein: "Saying they're all basically healthy now doesn't take into account ... the long-term effects of health habits formed during this time," she says. "They're still smoking, still drinking, still taking illicit drugs and not exercising," she says. "Whatever we're doing, we're not getting through to this particular age group."

Now, Washington and the so-called 'main-stream' media want to send them the message 'don't be concerned about your health care, we'll take care of that.'


Anonymous said...

right on.

Assistant Village Idiot said...

It's about feeling, not thinking.

And Bree will pay a lot for that free health care over the years. Very likely, much more than if she had just paid out of pocket.

Bob in Los Angeles said...

Assuming that Bree ever pays taxes...

By the way, I tried but could not find an email for Kate Bolduan. I would have asked her these questions myself, before I wrote this up, but she is pretty tough to reach. Any of you have an idea how to reach her? I'd pay dearly for a response...

OBloodyHell said...

Bob, if you have ever encountered the e-mail address of anyone actually at CNN, you could try just reformatting that using her name. The other obvious thing is going indirectly through the "contact us" for newssource

Finally, you could call CNN and try and get through to her flapper and thus get an e-mail address (not hers, no doubt, but someone who hopefully would forward reasonable RFIs to her) to send such questions to.

The latter has the best chance of success but would most likely be time-consuming.

Anonymous said...

Get real! Public enemy number one for pointing out our health care/insurance problem? Again, get real!

Anonymous said...

Hey, this is not a comment on the substance of this blog but just your economics: you say that we would be "add[ing] 50 million people to the demand side of the equation." That's not true. Clearly Bree is already on the demand side of the equation, she just feels like the price is too high to purchase the good in question (graphically, this means that Bree is on the demand curve below the point of equilibrium). What the government is talking about doing is adding some sort of regulation or "public option." Regulation would create a shortage (demand outweighs supply because of a price ceiling on health insurance) while a public option would roughly equate to new firms joining the supply side of the equation, which would actually lead to the equilibrium price dropping (meaning we'd all pay less). This is actually the substance of the debate right now because health insurance providers say that lower prices mean that they'll go out of business, but that really depends on the nature of the health care industry, which tends to be described as an oligopolistic model. This is a different subject, though. You still have an argument, just the point about premiums going up is wrong due to the faulty economics. Cheers.

Bob in Los Angeles said...

Anonymous Economics: There is an error in your reasoning: The public option does not roughly equate to new firms joining the supply side of the equation. It equates to new users joining the demand side, as well as users dropping off the private side.

Bob in Los Angeles said...

Anonymous #2 "get real" What exactly is "our health care/insurance problem, as you see it?"

I don't have a health care/insurance problem. No one that I know has a problem. So what are you talking about?

Anonymous said...

this probably wont get added to the blog but... i was a very close friend of Kate's throughout high school and am pretty sure she is a card carrying republican and is only reporting the information given to her or what cnn wants her to report. i will say that i havent had contact with her for 5 years, but unless she has totally changed her political views i think you are way off base with this personal attack

Bob in LA said...

Hey Anon -- friend of Kate Bolduan. Your post made the blog so where's the backup? How about a high-school yearbook photo proof for your claim? I stand by my story. No way she is a republican. No way.

John said...

This is a stupid page. For example:

"Question: If the Government does not buy Bree Honey's health insurance, what would be the the harm? If the government does nothing, what will happen?
Answer: It will be 'difficult' for Bree."

"Difficult" meaning up to and including DYING. You take her words and ridicule her, just like a good little conservative, but you don't bother to talk about the meaning behind them. No health insurance can mean a death sentence. And it has for some people.

Bob in LA said...

John, Difficult does not mean dying, it means difficult. That's all. No health insurance can mean a death sentence... all the more reason to get some health insurance even if it is Difficult. Difficult is better than death.