Friday, July 31, 2009

What to tell the birther bashers

This is a much longer and complete explanation that finishes with this important point:
Obama was born with multiple allegiances (at birth both U.S., if born in the U.S., and British, and also acquired Kenyan citizenship at age 2). Obama also obtained Indonesian citizenship when he was adopted by his step-father in Indonesia at age 6. The Founders would not have allowed such a person who was not born with sole allegiance, loyalty, and attachment to the United States to be President and most importantly, Commander in Chief of the Military. We the People have too many "natural born Citizens" in our country from whom to pick to risk jeopardizing the best interests of the United States by allowing a person born with conflicting allegiances and loyalties to be President and Commander in Chief of our Military. There simply is no sound reason for risking America’s national security, welfare, and ultimate preservation by allowing a non-"natural born Citizen" to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military. To permit it is a violation of Article II of our Constitution, the supreme law of our land.
What To Tell The Birther Bashers

3 Americans kidnapped in Iraq?

US probes reports of three Americans kidnapped in Iraq


Thomas Sowell: "Like so many before him who have ruined countries around the world, Obama has a greatly inflated idea of his own capabilities..."

This is a president on a mission to remake American society in every aspect, by whatever means are necessary and available. That requires taking all kinds of decisions out of the hands of ordinary Americans and transferring them to Washington elites-- and ultimately the number one elite, Barack Obama himself.

Like so many before him who have ruined countries around the world, Obama has a greatly inflated idea of his own capabilities and the prospects of what can be accomplished by rhetoric or even by political power. Often this has been accompanied by an ignorance of history, including the history of how many people before him have tried similar things with disastrous results.
Read the whole thing

Health Reform and Cancer

The danger is that ObamaCare will stifle medical innovations that could save patients like me.


I have been battling non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, an incurable blood cancer, for the past nine years. Last year, I was also diagnosed with uterine cancer.

I didn’t run to Canada for treatment. Medicare took care of my needs right here in New York City. To endure, I just need the freedom to choose my insurance, my doctors, and get the diagnostic scans and care I need. And one more thing: I need hope that a treatment will be developed that can control my diseases the way insulin controls diabetes.

Every cancer patient needs these things, especially hope. But the government’s plan to reform the health-care system in this country threatens all of this—particularly the development of new treatments.
Read more

Congress and trial lawyers are ruining our health care system!

By Philip K. Howard
Friday, July 31, 2009

Health-care reform is bogged down because none of the bills before Congress deals with the staggering waste of the current system, estimated to be $700 billion to $1 trillion annually. The waste flows from a culture of health care in which every incentive is to do more -- that's how doctors make money and that's how they protect themselves from lawsuits.

Yet the congressional leadership has slammed the door on solutions to the one driver of waste that is relatively easy to fix: the erratic, expensive and time-consuming jury-by-jury malpractice system. Pilot projects could test whether this system should be replaced with expert health courts, but leaders who say they want to cut costs will not even consider them.
Health Reform's Taboo Topic

Did Jesus actually reveal name of the 'antichrist'?

Viral video makes Hebrew word connection to latest White House occupant

VERY interesting (but personally I think the man is too incompetent to be anything, much less an anti-christ!)

UPDATE: Charles Krauthammer just said this about Obama - Yesterday, Barack Obama was God. Today, he's fallen from grace..."   :=)

Democratic Senator calls police to get rid of a group of retirees who want to ask questions about Democrats' health care reform bills

This is just the beginning folks. There is NO respect or concern for people as they age in this country: Police were called on a group of retirees who refused to leave Sen. Dianne Feinstein's West Los Angeles office until she talked to them about health care reform.

Recession Worse Than Prior Estimates, Revisions Show

By Bob Willis

July 31 (Bloomberg) -- The first 12 months of the U.S. recession saw the economy shrink more than twice as much as previously estimated, reflecting even bigger declines in consumer spending and housing, revised figures showed.

Wednesday, July 29, 2009


At Barack Obama’s web site, the following admission:

“ Clarifies Barack’s Citizenship

‘When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…’ “

Read that last line again.

“That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…”

That’s an admission that Great Britain “governed the status” of Barack Obama, Jr. He has chosen to highlight this on his own volition.

And this leads to the relevant question:

UPDATE: Sorry, forgot to post the link to this story! - Read the whole thing

House Dems Hide Cost Of Health Plan

House Democrats are scrambling to come up with tax increases or other means of paying for their $1.2 trillion medical insurance plan. Yet the legislation they're trying to cram through Congress is even costlier than they'd have you believe.

Where was Obama born???

New movie tackles Obama eligibility

Unveiled! Hawaii's 1961 long-form birth certificates
Real documents include name of doctor, hospital:

Hawaiian Newspapers Don't Prove Birthplace:

New doubts revealed in Obama's nativity story:

Congressional support for proof of eligibility grows
10th congressman now supports election law change:

Hawaii's statement on Obama birth record breaks law?

Soldier's case against Obama to be class-action?

Who Will Tell Michael J. Fox He Needs to Die?

Which health care mouse out there will have the guts to bell the cat who is one of the most famous Parkinson's Disease sufferers in America? Who is going to tell him that the treatments that are associated with Parkinson's -- drugs like Sinemet, Symmetrel, Eldepryl, Parlodel, Permax, Mirapex, Requip, and surgery with the quaint name "deep brain stimulation" -- are just no longer possible for Fox because, well, Mike, your QALY just isn't up to snuff, babe. You have Parkinson's. You boozed (according to you). As a result, the government has decided treatment for you, Mike, lacks "appropriateness." The "outcome and effectiveness" of treating you -- which is to say the worth of your 47-year old life -- just isn't worth it for the rest of us.


Recession, Depression, What Michelle Worry?

If you’re one of the tens of millions of Americans facing certain destitution, earning less than subsistence wages stocking the shelves at Wal-Mart or serving up McDonald cheeseburgers, prepare to scream and then come to realize that the benefit package for these servants of Miz Michele are the same as members of the national security and defense departments and the bill for these assorted lackeys is paid by John Q. Public:

1. $172,2000 - Sher, Susan (CHIEF OF STAFF)





6. $90,000 - Medina, David S. (DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE FIRST LADY)

7. $84,000 - Lelyveld, Catherine M. (DIRECTOR AND PRESS SECRETARY TO THE FIRST LADY)













20. $36,000 - Armbruster, Sally M. (STAFF ASSISTANT TO THE SOCIAL SECRETARY)

21. Bookey, Natalie (STAFF ASSISTANT)


First Lady requires more than twenty attendants

There's no evidence Obama has even a sketchy grasp of economics

Obamanomics pays lip service to a free market economy. But Obama hasn't a clue what makes it work.

Just how smart is Obama?

Just how smart is the President? Famous presidential historian Michael Beschloss, a regular on PBS's Newshour show, says his IQ is "off the charts" and that he is "probably the smartest guy ever to become president," while admitting he doesn't know what his IQ is. I say: let's look at the evidence.

Do Americans want a federal board deciding if their kids need surgery?

Kurt, a financial consultant friend of mine, states:
The reality is that the doctor is not looking at his reimbursement schedule. Instead he is looking at his malpractice insurance bill and a list of the latest lawsuits and deciding he better run every test possible in order to not get sued by Mr. Obama's fellow lawyers looking for that big pay day. Anyone seen the attorney victim trolling ads on TV lately. Ads for Mesothelioma, Cerebral Palsy, Erbs Palsy, bad nursing home care, etc. etc.
Dr. Obama’s Tonsillectomy

Myth #1 Health Care Costs Are Soaring

No, they are not.

New doubts revealed in Obama's nativity story

School documents show mother left father within weeks of birth

Posted: July 28, 2009
8:54 pm Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

More cracks have appeared in the official story of Barack Obama's family life, with the revelation in school documentation from the University of Washington that Ann Dunham most likely left her husband, Barack Sr., within weeks of the baby's birth.

The official story as presented in his autobiography, "Dreams from My Father," and in various accounts in newspapers and websites supporting Obama conflicts with the results of a careful analysis of the documentary evidence available.

For example, the official story claims Dunham relocated to Seattle late in 1962, but documentary evidence establishes she left Hawaii when she moved to Seattle in August or September 1961, only a few weeks after the birth of Barack Obama Jr.

Likewise, the official story describes how Dunham and Obama Sr. lived as man-and-wife in Hawaii until he left for Harvard to begin the fall term in September 1962. But the documents establish Dunham abandoned Obama Sr. when she left to begin school at the University of Washington in Seattle for the fall term of 1961, which began in September of that year.

The repositioning of the timeline revealed by the school documents may mask a yet undisclosed secret that lies at the heart of the Obama birth certificate controversy.

The Obama long-form original birth certificate continues to be hidden from the public by Obama despite a multitude of requests to make the document public.

But here are a number of critical dates documenting the birth of Barack Obama Jr. from available public records...
Read more

Reparations By Way Of Health Care Reform

Legislation: Still believe in post-racial politics? Read the health care bill. It's affirmative action on steroids, deciding everything from who becomes a doctor to who gets treatment on the basis of skin color.

President Obama is on the record as being officially opposed to reparations for slavery. But as with other issues, you have to sift through his eloquent rhetoric and go beyond the teleprompter to get at what he really means.

His opposition to reparations is based on the fact they don't go far enough. In a 2004 questionnaire, he told the NAACP, "I fear that reparations would be an excuse for some to say, 'We've paid our debt,' and to avoid the much harder work."

Never mind there are those who thought we apologized at Gettysburg and that an African-American president is a recognition of the hard work that has been done.
Read more

Is There a ‘Right’ to Health Care?

In Britain, its recognition has led to substandard care.


If there is a right to health care, someone has the duty to provide it. Inevitably, that “someone” is the government. Concrete benefits in pursuance of abstract rights, however, can be provided by the government only by constant coercion.

People sometimes argue in favor of a universal human right to health care by saying that health care is different from all other human goods or products. It is supposedly an important precondition of life itself. This is wrong: There are several other, much more important preconditions of human existence, such as food, shelter and clothing.

Everyone agrees that hunger is a bad thing (as is overeating), but few suppose there is a right to a healthy, balanced diet, or that if there was, the federal government would be the best at providing and distributing it to each and every American.

Where does the right to health care come from? Did it exist in, say, 250 B.C., or in A.D. 1750? If it did, how was it that our ancestors, who were no less intelligent than we, failed completely to notice it?

If, on the other hand, the right to health care did not exist in those benighted days, how did it come into existence, and how did we come to recognize it once it did?
Read more

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

PS: Cronkite told Larry King that Karl Rove "set up" bin Laden to send a video just before the 2004 elections! about conspiracy nuts!

Bin Laden Releases New Videotape

Aired October 29, 2004 - 21:00 ET

KING: OK, Walter. What do you make of this?

CRONKITE: Well, I make it out to be initially the reaction that it's a threat to us, that unless we make peace with him, in a sense, we can expect further attacks. He did not say that precisely, but it sounds like that when he says...

KING: The warning.

CRONKITE: What we just heard. So now the question is basically right now, how will this affect the election? And I have a feeling that it could tilt the election a bit. In fact, I'm a little inclined to think that Karl Rove, the political manager at the White House, who is a very clever man, he probably set up bin Laden to this thing. The advantage to the Republican side is to get rid of, as a principal subject of the campaigns right now, get rid of the whole problem of the al Qaqaa explosive dump. Right now, that, the last couple of days, has, I think, upset the Republican campaign.
Read the whole thing

Do you know anyone who supports ObamaCare?

10 Questions for Supporters of 'ObamaCare'

Nothing ruins a good beer like the taste of condescension

What Are Obama & Gates Trying to 'Teach' Us?

Monday, July 27, 2009

Obamacare: Funding for abortions is mandatory and no doctor or institution can refuse to perform them by law

Funding on abortion is required!

Senator Jon Kyl was on FOX News Sunday today and admitted that the Democratic health care legislation passed in the House and currently being discussed in the US Senate will require all health care providers, including Catholic institutions, to perform abortions.

Black Cambridge cop says she won't vote for Obama again


Obama Owes Apology to Policemen of America according to Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund


If the Obama Administration is, in effect, acting as an agent of Venezuela (and Iran) in Honduras, such a foreign policy could be described not only as anti-American but potentially treasonous, considering that the outcome could be the loss of another country in Latin America to the Chavez brand of communism.

It is time for some investigative reporting into the nature of the Chavez-Obama axis.

By Cliff Kincaid
July 25, 2009

The United Nations on Thursday begins a debate over a new U.N. military doctrine called the “Responsibility to Protect,” which would authorize the world organization to be used as cover to intervene in the sovereign affairs of a nation state, supposedly to protect the people of a country against their own government. The first target could be anti-communist Honduras.

The “Responsibility to Protect,” also known as RtoP or R2P, is mostly the work of the World Federalist Movement, a group dedicated to world government by strengthening the United Nations system. It is the major force behind the “International Coalition for the Responsibility to Protect.”

R2P was sold as something to be exercised against regimes practicing genocide against their own people. But the new doctrine is so vague and subject to political manipulation that one can speculate it could be used to justify some form of U.N. intervention in Honduras on the pretext that the people there are somehow being victimized by a popular military-backed regime. In fact, some Hondurans are telling this columnist that they are fearful that U.N. “blue helmets” are right now being prepared to invade their country.

It is difficult to dismiss these concerns as baseless rumors, considering what will be happening at the U.N. The key U.N. official orchestrating the debate, General Assembly President and Lenin Peace Prize recipient Miguel D’Escoto, is the same figure who recently managed passage of a U.N. resolution supporting the return to Honduras of Manuel Zelaya, who was removed by the military on the orders of the Honduran Supreme Court and Congress. Zelaya is a lackey of Venezuelan communist ruler Hugo Chavez, who is using his oil money to buy and influence governments throughout Latin America.

In an ominous development, blogger Jason Poblete, an astute observer of Latin American affairs with excellent sources, reports that “The Obama Administration is considering a United Nations Security Council Resolution against the constitutional government of Honduras.” If true, anticipated U.N. sanctions against Honduras could be followed by the world organization being used as cover for outside forces to invade Honduras and reinstate Zelaya.

The new government in Honduras replaced Zalaya because he was trying to set himself up as president-for-life, Chavez-style. All of this was found to be in violation of Honduran law and the Constitution. Despite what officials of the Obama Administration said in trying to orchestrate media coverage of this crisis, it was not a military coup in any sense. The military doesn’t run Honduras today. In fact, the new president, appointed by Congress, is from Zelaya’s own political party. Zelaya was dismissed because of the simple fact that he tried to violate the law and the Constitution.

Zelaya flew from Costa Rica, where he was deported, to U.N. headquarters in New York, where D’Escoto, who is also a Communist Catholic Priest from Nicaragua, greeted him as a comrade. Since the crisis began and the U.N. voted to have him reinstated, the Obama Administration has been trying to figure out a way to get him back into power. Costa Rican President Oscar Arias recently hosted some negotiations to try to resolve the dispute but they appear to be going nowhere.

The U.N. may be the logical next step, if Zelaya’s allies in the region don’t act precipitously on their own and intervene. Chavez has already threatened to invade Honduras to put Zelaya back in power.

Interestingly, according to one report, when Zelaya tried to return to Honduras by plane and was turned away, his supporters began chanting “We want blue helmets!”—a reference to U.N. peacekeepers. This could be the scenario we see developing, using the “Responsibility to Protect” or something similar as justification for U.N. economic and military intervention.

R2P is usually offered as a possible remedy in the case of Darfur, a region of Sudan where people are being massacred by the Islamic regime. But this was never realistic. President Obama promised but has failed to do anything about this. The real source of the problem in Darfur is the communist regime in China, which directly finances the Sudanese regime through oil purchases. Obama won’t confront China because he needs Chinese help to finance his tax, spend and debt policies.

With Arab and Muslim governments also unwilling to confront the problem directly, the burden of responding to Darfur falls on the incompetent and corrupt U.N., which is always anxious to expand its scope and power. The “Responsibility to Protect,” which was actually approved by the U.N. General Assembly in 2005, when the Bush Administration was in power, is supposed to be the answer. The debate unfolding in the U.N. is over how to implement this doctrine and under what circumstances. What can be certainly be expected are calls for more money for the U.N. to finance more military power, perhaps even a standing World Army that includes more U.N. “blue helmet” peacekeepers.

Everybody knows, of course, that the doctrine will not be used against China, a member of the U.N. Security Council. Nobody expects a U.N. force to liberate Tibet. Neither will a U.N. force be deployed to protect Georgia from Russia. Instead, it will be used against small countries, possibly Honduras, where there is a U.N. “consensus” and the Obama Administration could vote and work with China and Russia.

D’Escoto, or as he is called, “Father D’Escoto,” will preside over the U.N. debate, which is expected to run into Friday. Pope Benedict XVI endorsed the “Responsibility to Protect” in an April 2008 speech before the U.N. but has been unclear about how it should be implemented. He has called for dialogue in Honduras.

On the ground in Honduras, an overwhelmingly Catholic Central American country, the Catholic Church has backed the ouster of Zelaya because of the realistic fear that he was a front man for Chavez. In a statement, the Catholic bishops of Honduras declared that Zelaya had been removed from office on the basis of a valid court order.

But not all of the Catholic elements in the country are opposing Zalaya’s return. The Jesuit-run Radio Progreso has been acting as a mouthpiece for Zalaya and his supporters and is the source of the recent report that Zelaya intends to invade the country in cahoots with something called the Peaceful Resistance Front. The Catholic Church in Honduras fears that Zelaya could spark a bloodbath. Such a spectacle could provide the cover for U.N. intervention.

With Obama’s plans to seize the health care and energy sectors a focus of public attention, few in Congress are taking a hard look at the prospect of violence in Honduras. However, Senator Jim DeMint and several other senators have protested the Obama policy. DeMint also introduced an amendment to the defense authorization bill to require the Director of National Intelligence to present a “full report” on the roles played by Chavez and the leaders of Nicaragua and Cuba in facilitating the crisis in Honduras.

What is also needed is for the Congress—and the media—to start investigating the Obama Administration’s role in all of this. On July 13, the State Department spokesman confirmed that Chavez had called Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Thomas Shannon to “discuss the current situation in Honduras and the ongoing negotiations mediated by Costa Rica’s President Oscar Arias.” The confirmation followed news of Chavez boasting about the telephone call on Venezuelan state TV.

This tends to confirm what former Marxist SDS radical Tom Hayden, leader of “Progressives for Obama,” has written about the Obama-Chavez relationship. Based on his own inside sources of information, Hayden said that he thinks Obama and Chavez are working together on Honduras and have an “understanding,” which he even describes as “collaboration.” The call Chavez made to Shannon suggests that Chavez is calling the shots.

Ultimately, according to a very detailed report by the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, part of the Israel Intelligence Heritage and Commemoration Center, this would benefit Iran, a terrorist state developing nuclear weapons which is developing a vast network throughout Latin America. A recent report from the organization examines the deep Iranian connections to Venezuela as well as Bolivia.

If the Obama Administration is, in effect, acting as an agent of Venezuela (and Iran) in Honduras, such a foreign policy could be described not only as anti-American but potentially treasonous, considering that the outcome could be the loss of another country in Latin America to the Chavez brand of communism.

It is time for some investigative reporting into the nature of the Chavez-Obama axis.

© 2009 Cliff Kincaid - All Rights Reserved


Cliff Kincaid, a veteran journalist and media critic, Cliff concentrated in journalism and communications at the University of Toledo, where he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree.

Cliff has written or co-authored nine books on media and cultural affairs and foreign policy issues. One of Cliff's books, "Global Bondage: The UN Plan to Rule the World" is still awailable.

Cliff has appeared on Hannity & Colmes, The O’Reilly Factor, Crossfire and has been published in the Washington Post, Washington Times, Chronicles, Human Events and Insight.

Web Site:


Are Americans finally waking up?

By Ben Stein
Now, Americans are waking up to the truth that ObamaCare basically means that every time you are sick or injured, you will have a clerk from the Department of Motor Vehicles telling your doctor what he can and cannot do.

The American people already know that Mr. Obama's plan to lower health costs while expanding coverage and bureaucracy is a myth, a promise of something that never was and never will be -- a bureaucracy lowering costs in a free society. Either the costs go up or the free society goes away.
Read the whole thing

Obama's Misleading Medicine

By Robert Samuelson
WASHINGTON -- The most misused word in the health care debate is "reform." Everyone wants "reform," but what constitutes "reform" is another matter. If you listen to President Obama, his "reform" will satisfy almost everyone. It will insure the uninsured, control runaway health spending, subdue future budget deficits, preserve choice for patients and improve quality of care. These claims are self-serving exaggerations and political fantasies. They have destroyed what should be a serious national discussion of health care.

The health care conundrum involves a contradiction that the administration steadfastly obscures:
Read more

Obamacare: It's Even Worse Than You Think

The reasons for the public revolt are easy to see. The Democrats want to spend $1.5 trillion over a decade, impose an $800 billion tax increase in the midst of the worst recession in a generation, increase federal borrowing by $239 billion (on top of the $11 trillion the Obama budget already requires us to borrow through 2019), impose costly mandates on employers that will discourage hiring as unemployment nears 10 percent, force individuals to buy one-size-fits-all government defined insurance, and insert the government in countless new ways between doctors and patients. All of that would occur whether or not the plan includes a "public option," which at this point it does include and which will exacerbate all of these problems.

As these facts have become clear, Obama's standing has fallen and public opinion has grown decidedly less enthusiastic for the administration's approach. The trend is likely to continue, because the details of the plan reveal that its two most serious drawbacks--its cost and the prospect of government rationing--are worse than even most of their critics have grasped.
Read the whole thing!

Sunday, July 26, 2009

Top Obama Health Advisor Supports Ethanasia: Wants Health Care For Non-Disabled "Participating" Citizens

There's more proof today that the Democrat's health bill promotes euthenasia. Democratic Leaders, including House Speaker Pelosi and Cap-&-Tax author Henry Waxman, are excited about their socialized health care plan that rewards the "participating" members of society. The top health advisors believe medical care should be reserved for non-disabled "participating" members of society.
Read more

Take off your clothes, open your books, spread your legs, and bend over--there ain't nothin' gonna be private in your life again ever

Take a look at what actually is in the Health Care bill. Obama makes disingenuous comments like "You'll still keep your doctor" or "You'll keep your existing health care." He is either lying to us or he has no idea what is in it. Take a peek at the full report, or look at some of the highlights here:

Pg 22 of the HC Bill mandates the Government will audit books of all employers that self insure. Can you imagine what that will do to small businesses? Every one will abandon “self insurance” and go on Government insurance. So when Obama says that there will still be private health care, it’s simply a lie: this mandate will force employers to abandon their private plans.

Pg 30 (Sec 123) of HC bill – A Government committee (good luck with that!) will decide what treatments/benefits a person may receive.

Pg 29 (lines 4-16) in the HC bill - YOUR HEALTHCARE WILL BE RATIONED! (We all knew this, because health care is rationed in Canada and Britain, but Obama kept saying it would not be).

Pg 42 of HC Bill – The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC Benefits for you. You will have no choice!

Pg 50 (Section 152) in HC bill - HC will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise.

Pg 58 HC Bill – Government will have real-time access to individual’s finances and a National ID Healthcard will be issued!

Pg 59 (lines 21-24) HC Bill - Government will have direct access to your bank accounts for election funds transfer!

Pg 65 (Sec 164) is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions and community organizations (read: ACORN).

Pg 72 (Lines 8-14) Government will create an HC Exchange to bring private HC plans under Government control.

Pg 84 (Sec 203) HC bill - Government mandates ALL benefit packages for private HC plans in the Exchange.

Pg 85 (Line 7) HC Bill - Specifics of Benefit Levels for Plans = The Government will ration your Healthcare!

Pg 91 (Lines 4-7) HC Bill - Government mandates linguistic appropriate services. Example - Translation for illegal aliens.

Pg 95 (Lines 8-18) HC Bill - The Government will use groups, i.e. ACORN & Americorps, to sign up individuals for Government HC plan.

Pg 85 (Line 7) HC Bill - Specifics of Benefit Levels for Plans. AARP members - your Health care WILL be rationed.

Pg 102 (Lines 12-18) HC Bill - Medicaid Eligible Individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. No choice.

Pg 124 (lines 24-25) HC - No company can sue Government on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Government Monopoly.

Pg 127 (Lines 1-16) HC Bill - Doctors/ AMA - The Government will tell YOU what you can earn.

Pg 145 (Line 15-17) An Employer MUST auto enroll employees into public option plan. NO CHOICE.

Pg 126 (Lines 22-25) Employers MUST pay for HC for part time employees AND their families.

Pg 149 (Lines 16-24) ANY Employer with payroll $400k and above who does not provide public option pays 8% tax on all payroll.

Pg 150 (Lines 9-13) Businesses with payroll between $251k and $400k who don’t provide public option pay 2-6% tax on all payroll.

Pg 167 (Lines 18-23) ANY individual who doesn’t have acceptable HC according to Government will be taxed 2.5% of income.

Pg 170 (Lines 1-3) HC Bill - Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (Americans will pay.)

Pg 195 HC Bill - Officers and employees of HC Admin (the GOVERNMENT) will have access to ALL Americans’ finances and personal records.

Pg 203 (Lines 14-15) HC - "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax..." Yes, it says that.

Pg 239 (Lines 14-24) HC Bill Government will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors, low income, poor affected.

Pg 241 (Lines 6-8) HC Bill – Doctors – doesn’t matter what specialty – will all be paid the same.

Pg 253 (Lines 10-18) Government sets value of Doctor’s time, professional judgment, etc. Literally, value of humans.

Pg 265 (Sec 1131) Government mandates and controls productivity for private HC industries.

Pg 268 (Sec 1141) Federal Government regulates rental and purchase of power driven wheelchairs.

Pg 272 (SEC. 1145) TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!

Pg 280 (Sec 1151) The Government will penalize hospitals for what Government deems preventable readmissions.

Pg 298 (Lines 9-11) Doctors who treat a patient during initial admission that results in a readmission - Government will penalize you.

Pg 317 (Lines 13-20) OMG!! PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Government tells Doctors what/how much they can own.

Pg 317-318 (Lines 21-25, 1-3) PROHIBITION on expansion - Government will mandate hospitals cannot expand.

Pg 321 (Lines 2-13) Hospitals have opportunity to apply for exception BUT community input required. Can u say ACORN?!

Pg 335 (Lines 16-25) Pg 336-339 - Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures which of course forces health care rationing.

Pg 341 (Lines 3-9) Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc., forcing people into Government plan.

Pg 354 (Sec 1177) - Government will RESTRICT enrollment of Special needs people!

Pg 379 (Sec 1191) Government creates more bureaucracy - Telehealth Advisory Committee. HC by phone.

Pg 425 (Lines 4-12) Government mandates Advance Care Planning Consultations. Think "Senior Citizens end of life prodding".

Pg 425 (Lines 17-19) Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney. Mandatory!

Pg 425 (Lines 22-25), Pg 426 (Lines 1-3) Government provides approved list of end of life resources, guiding you in how to die.

Pg 427 (Lines 15-24) Government mandates program for orders for end of life. The Government has a say in how your life ends.

Pg 429 (Lines 1-9) An "Advanced Care Planning consultant" will be used frequently as patients’ health deteriorates.

Pg 429 (Lines 10-12) "Advanced Care consultation" may include an ORDER for end of life plans. AN ORDER from the Government to end a life!

Pg 429 (Lines 13-25) - The Government will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order.

Pg 430 (Lines 11-15) The Government will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life.

Pg 469 Community Based Home Medical Services/Non profit orgizations (ACORN Medical Services here?)

Pg 472 (Lines 14-17) PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATION. One monthly payment to a community-based organization. (Like ACORN?)

Pg 489 (Sec 1308) The Government will cover Marriage and Family therapy. Which means they will insert Government into our marriages.

Pg 494-498 Government will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, rationing those services. You’d better speak up now before you are on the "Advanced Care consultation" list.

Read the whole thing at Family Security Matters


Saturday, July 25, 2009

Some Inconvenient Truths About Medicare and the New 'Public Plan'

By Regina Herzlinger and Robert Book

[Remember, Medicare is also a government program that has run, already, into serious trouble.]
The fundamental problem with health care reform is the absence of realistic plans to reduce unit costs. Without cost controls, tens of millions of newly-insured people will further cripple U.S. global competitiveness, which is already grievously injured because the U.S. spends roughly 70 percent more on health care, as a percentage of GDP, than other developed nations, yet cannot point to commensurate 70 percent increases in value.
[Those who ignore the past are condemned to repeat it!]
Medicare's alleged cost-controlling ability is illusory, driven by faulty math, regulatory power to shift costs to the private sector, and pricing formulas that pass expenses to taxpayers and future generations.

The 800-pound gorilla is Medicare's unfunded liability for future benefits, estimated by Medicare Trustees at $38 trillion. Medicare created this massive liability by charging current enrollees too low a price: government used the payments by working non-beneficiaries to make up the shortfall. If Medicare were a private insurance company, it would have to increase its costs by an additional trillion dollars annually to account for the interest on this debt (assuming 3% interest). But the federal government's accounting ignores this expense. [What would happen if you pretended that you really didn't have certain expenses? You'd end up in jail where I'm convinced at least half these crooks belong!]

Will government continue to rob Peter to pay Paul when it prices the new public plan? If so, an estimated 83 million people would eventually move out of private plans into a grossly underpriced Medicare, vastly increasing the liability. At $38 trillion, it already equals than two and a half times 2008 GDP.

Medicare's cost advantages are dubious in other ways...
Read the whole thing

5 freedoms you'd lose in health care reform

If you read the fine print in the Congressional plans, you'll find that a lot of cherished aspects of the current system would disappear.

By Shawn Tully, editor at large
July 24, 2009: 10:17 AM ET

NEW YORK (Fortune) -- In promoting his health-care agenda, President Obama has repeatedly reassured Americans that they can keep their existing health plans -- and that the benefits and access they prize will be enhanced through reform.

A close reading of the two main bills, one backed by Democrats in the House and the other issued by Sen. Edward Kennedy's Health committee, contradict the President's assurances. To be sure, it isn't easy to comb through their 2,000 pages of tortured legal language. But page by page, the bills reveal a web of restrictions, fines, and mandates that would radically change your health-care coverage.
Read more

Obamacare: Rationing will hit the elderly especially hard...

Since Medicare was established in 1965, access to care has enabled older Americans to avoid becoming disabled and to travel and live independently instead of languishing in nursing homes. But legislation now being rushed through Congress—H.R. 3200 and the Senate Health Committee Bill—will reduce access to care, pressure the elderly to end their lives prematurely, and doom baby boomers to painful later years.

Once the basic contours of ObamaCare are in place, they will be all but impossible to change, as Europe and Canada have demonstrated

Mostly 'wonkish' stuff, albeit critically important to the future of every single current and future American citizen, Mr. Grassley's Choice in the Wall Street Journal on July 23, 2009 contained two important paragraphs I'd like to share with you:
Once the basic contours of ObamaCare are in place, they will be all but impossible to change, as Europe and Canada have demonstrated. Decisions about delivering and paying for medical care will over time shift to political and bureaucratic control. The federal government will inevitably grow to a third or more of the U.S. economy from a fifth today, with taxes sure to rise to finance it. In short, this decision could fundamentally alter the nature of the U.S. economy and society—which is precisely the goal of Ted Kennedy, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Congressman Pete Stark and other liberals who are pushing this legislation.
Pray that Republicans do not fall into the trap that's been set for them (and call them just to make sure):
Democrats like Chuck Schumer are saber-rattling that they have the votes to pass a reform without Republicans, but this is bluster to lure Senate Republicans into his “bipartisan” trap. The reality is the difficulty that Democratic leaders are having trying to pass these bills with only Democratic votes, as the public begins to understand what a government takeover would really mean. And that’s even before seniors have been told how ObamaCare will steal hundreds of billions of dollars from future Medicare spending in order to appear to be “budget neutral.” As an architect of Medicare Advantage, the program for seniors that provides private options, Mr. Grassley should find that tactic especially galling.

The only way to get a sensible health-care reform in this Congress is to show Mr. Obama that a government takeover won’t work and that he needs to rethink his political strategy. That means exposing and defeating both the House bill and the very similar Senate version that Senator Chris Dodd is moving through Mr. Kennedy’s committee.

Friday, July 24, 2009

Health Reform’s Hidden Victims

Young people and seniors would pay a high price for ObamaCare.


Wall Street Journal, July 24, 2009
President Barack Obama’s health-care sales pitch depends on his ability to obfuscate who is likely to get hurt by reform. At Wednesday’s news conference, for example, he was asked “specifically what kind of pain and sacrifice” he would ask of patients in order to achieve the cost savings he promises.

He insisted he “won’t reduce Medicare benefits” but instead would “make delivery more efficient.” The most Mr. Obama would concede is that some people will have to “give up paying for things that don’t make you healthier.” That is simply not credible.

While Democrats on Capitol Hill dispute claims that individuals will lose their existing coverage under their reform plans, on other issues many Democrats privately acknowledge some people will indeed get whacked to pay for the new world of government-dominated health care.

Democrats have been brilliant in keeping knowledge about the pain and sacrifice of health reform from the very people who would bear the brunt of them. They’ve done so by convincing health-care industry groups not to run the kind of “Harry and Louise”-style ads that helped sink HillaryCare in 1993.

Sen. Tom Coburn (R., Okla.) says the pressure not to run ads has been “intense, bordering on extortion.” “Groups were told if they did they’d give up their seat at the table,” says former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. “What they weren’t told is that they’d be at the table as lunch.”

Here are some of the groups on the menu if anything like the existing Senate or House health plans become law:
The article discusses each of these
  • Young people.

  • Small Businesses.

  • Health Savings Account (HSA) holders

  • Medicare Advantage users.
And then it finishes with this warning:
In 1965, Sen. Allen Ellender (D., La.) dismissed promises that Medicare would be a modest program to save seniors from bankruptcy. “Let us not be so naïve as to believe that the Medicare program will not be increased from year to year to the point that the government will have to impose more taxes on the little man or else take the necessary money out of the Treasury,” he told colleagues.

Ellender was right, and his warning is even more relevant in our era of skyrocketing deficits and Medicare costs. The only way the House and Senate health plans can pass is if the costs they impose on vulnerable parts of the population continue to be hidden.

Conservatives now outnumber liberals!

Oh, so somebody's finally waking up! It's about time.

( - Americans who consider themselves conservatives now outnumber Americans who consider themselves liberal by almost two to one, according to a new poll by the Washington Post and ABC News.

Thursday, July 23, 2009

Obamacare for old folks: Just 'cut your life short'

This will shock decent people out there (one wonders what the hell kind of people think these things up):
--- "One of the most shocking things is page 425, where the Congress would make it mandatory absolutely that every five years people in Medicare have a required counseling session," she said. "They will tell [them] how to end their life sooner."

The proposal specifically calls for the consultation to recommend "palliative care and hospice" for seniors in their mandatory counseling sessions. Palliative care and hospice generally focus only on pain relief until death.

--- It also recommends a method for death: "the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration."

--- The law also allows preferences that treatment levels set up by patients "may range from an indication for full treatment to an indication to limit some or all … interventions."

McCaughey also said the Obama administration is suggesting that medical care be withheld from seniors based on the expected years they have left to live. Such a program already is in effect in the United Kingdom, where patients losing their eyesight to age-related macular degeneration cannot be given an eyesight-saving medication until they lose sight in one eye.
Read the whole thing!

Lessons For Health Care Reform

Tennessee was home to a failed attempt at universal single payer care, and has lessons to teach a President who has promised that in pursuing his goal of universal health care, he will learn from the policy failures of the past...

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

Mayo Clinic: "The real losers will be the citizens of the United States"

A world-renowned clinic that President Obama held up as an example of good medicine said Monday that the American people would be "losers" under the House's health care proposal, joining the growing chorus of critics the Obama administration is trying to fend off as the debate intensifies from Capitol Hill to Main Street.

Minnesota's not-for-profit Mayo Clinic, which Mr. Obama has repeatedly hailed as offering top quality care at affordable costs, blasted the House Democrats' version of the health care plan as lawmakers continue to grapple with several bills from each chamber and multiple committees.

The Mayo Clinic said there are some positive elements of the bill, but overall "the proposed legislation misses the opportunity to help create higher quality, more affordable health care for patients."

"In fact, it will do the opposite," clinic officials said, because the proposals aren't [R]patient-focused or results-oriented. "The real losers will be the citizens of the United States."
Mayo Clinic calls House plan bad medicine

Obama says: We'll give your Mom a pain pill instead of that pacemaker... reports: "This Marie Antoinette moment took place a month ago...but the video is definitely worth a revisit."
Jane Sturm told the story of her nearly 100-year-old mother, who was originally denied a pacemaker because of her age. She eventually got one, but only after seeking out another doctor.

“Outside the medical criteria,” Sturm asked, “is there a consideration that can be given for a certain spirit … and quality of life?”

“I don’t think that we can make judgments based on peoples’ spirit,” Obama said. … “Maybe you’re better off not having the surgery, but taking painkillers.“
And then Dr. Helen Smith says:
"Some heart arrhythmias are deadly, and a doctor telling a patient to take a pain killer to treat V-tach or V-fib should be guilty of malpractice..." then she asks: "Is Obama heartless, mean or just plain ignorant?"
Then says:
No more heartlesss, mean, or ignorant than the bureaucrats who will eventually make these decisions under ObamaCare, using their pocket Comparative Effectiveness Charts
Watch video here and read more

Why does Obama always side with evil?


250 Rabbis Sign Letter to Obama: Hands off Jerusalem


[Jim] DeMint is one of 17 Republican senators who wrote to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton this month asking the administration to reassess its stance on Honduras...DeMint asked why Washington would want to be on the same side as Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Cuba's Fidel Castro, in the Honduran crisis. "President Obama rushed to side with Chavez and Castro before getting the facts.


It causes me no small amount of embarrassment and shame as a proud American that Obama systematically sides with evil and the suppression of free men across the world as a matter of foreign policy. Nothing illustrates this as nakedly as Obama's support of the mullahcracy in Iran and the Chavez backed Zelaya coup on Honduran democracy.


Remember: There is no killer regime too violent or undemocratic that the Obama Administration will not reward: Obama Administration Signs Non-Aggression Pact With Killer Myanmar Regime

Sunday, July 19, 2009


Published on on July 17, 2009

In two weeks, Obama's health care plan is likely to become law, ending medicine as we know it in the United States! Unless we can stop him, our own personal access to medical care will be attenuated (no matter if we can pay for it ourselves) and we will all be subject to bureaucratic rationing.

Seeing his popularity draining away rapidly, President Obama has cynically decided to ram through the complex health care legislation in two weeks, without debate or amendment. He is going to give up the attempt to win sixty votes in the Senate and will use the budget reconciliation procedure - which is only used for budget bills - to push it through with fifty votes.

His plan would:

• Force employers either to offer health insurance to their employees or pay a tax of 8% of their payrolls. This would apply to all with payrolls of $250,000 a year or more (basically every business)

• Reduce medical fees to the Medicare Schedule Plus 5%, driving doctors out of the profession and increasing the need for rationing.

• Raise taxes on all making more than $250,000 a year ($350,000 for a couple) with a surcharge. Rates will go as high as 45%.

• Set up a government owned health care plan to compete with private plans. Getting a subsidy, it will soon put the private plans out of business and we will have a single payer Canadian style system.

In Catastrophewe enumerate the disaster of the Canadian health care system. A cancer death rate 16% higher than in the US. A colon cancer rate 25% higher due to waits for colonoscopies and a death rate once afflicted that is 41% as opposed to 32% in the US. An eight week wait for cancer radiation therapy.

We are organizing a media campaign to target swing state Senators to delay or kill the Obama bill. We will concentrate on:
Montana - Baucus and Tester

North Dakota - Dorgan and Conrad

South Dakota - Johnson

Nebraska - Nelson

Arkansas - Pryor and Lincoln

Louisiana - Landrieu

North Carolina - Hagan

Indiana - Bayh

Connecticut - Lieberman

Maine - Snow and Collins
The text of the ad will be:
How can Obama care for fifty million new people without more doctors? By cutting access to care for the elderly. End Medicare as we know it. The government decides who gets hip, knee, or heart surgery. Eight month wait for colonoscopies. In Canada, an eight week wait for cancer radiation. Say no to Obama's plan. Write Senator Evan Bayh today so you can still see your doctor tomorrow.
On Monday or Tuesday, we will email you info on how to donate to our campaign. [You must sign up at in order to receive these emails.] We need to raise $4 million in one week to impact this vote. With those funds, we can saturate these states and send the moderate Democrats scurrying for cover. But we need your quick response.

The stakes have never been higher.

Thank you.

********************************************************* provides the following Phone Call List of targeted Congressmen and their Congressional Committees. Call and tell them all to vote NO on Government Takeover of Healthcare:
CLICK HERE FOR LIST also provides a form to record your results from your calls, faxes, emails, and letters along with some "Tips for Questioning the Elected Officials and their Staff" as well as some HEALTH CARE TALKING POINTS


Mark Levin asks everyone to at least please "Call the 7 Blue Dog Dems!"

Don't want government run health care?

Call 202-225-3121 and tell the 7 Blue Dogs on Energy and Commerce to vote NO.

Reps. John Barrow (D-Ga.)
Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.)
Baron Hill (D-Ind.)
Jim Matheson (D-Utah)
Charlie Melancon (D-La.)
Mike Ross (D-Ark)
Zack Space (D-Ohio)

Saturday, July 18, 2009

"I was given the 'honor' to temporarily marry young girls before they were sentenced to death."

In the Islamic Republic it is illegal to execute a young woman, regardless of her crime, if she is a virgin, he explained. Therefore a "wedding" ceremony is conducted the night before the execution: The young girl is forced to have sexual intercourse with a prison guard - essentially raped by her "husband."
Pamela Geller covers this subject like no other:
Obama, our moral authority, is shilling for these cannibals. He makes my skin crawl. It is hard to get through this piece. But read it and know this is what your President is protecting. This is what your President feels confortable with, simpatico with. It's no wonder he hates the Jews.

Canada Free Press: How much sense does it make to put healthcare decisions into the hands of government bureaucrats?

...Canada, who along with Cuba and North Korea, is one of the world’s only three countries where private, for profit healthcare is illegal.
[see Pages 16-17 of the current healthcare legislation from the Obama administration...if passed, we will join this elite group]
Canada outlawed all private medical care with the passage of the Canada Health Act of 1984. Within the first decade governments were forced to control their healthcare expenses by rationing care. Rationing was achieved by limiting enrollments in medical schools, which served to reduce the number of healthcare professionals dramatically and, of course created huge shortages in the healthcare system. Twenty-five years after the enactment of the Canada Health Act, Canada’s healthcare expenditures are among the highest of all countries offering universal access to healthcare. In fact the only country out of 28 that spends more on healthcare than Canada is Iceland.
Be careful what you wish for:
So what does healthcare in Canada look like in tangible terms? For openers, access to medical specialists is so curtailed that it routinely takes upward of two months from the time a patient is referred to a specialist before the patient is even called back with an appointment. A four to six-month wait for an appointment with a specialist is the rule, not the exception, with some procedures, such as joint replacements, taking in excess of three years from initially being seen by a general practitioner to having the procedure completed.

As was predicted by many researchers back in 1984 when the Canada Health Act was first passed, the single payer healthcare model would end up with large percentages of the population having no access to primary care physicians at all. In fact in Canada it’s common for there to be doctor lotteries as new physicians entering practice are bombarded with “applications” by people desperate to acquire a family doctor. While 15% of the US population currently doesn’t have health insurance, 20% of the Canadian population does not have ready access to a family doctor.
Change. You asked for it!

How Obama plans to get rid of blogs and websites that don't support him

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs says:
It's coming folks, sooner than later. This bodes most ill. Free speech is our most unalienable right. I repeat what Ayn Rand said: "the principle of free speech is not concerned with the content of a man's speech and does not protect only the expression of good ideas, but all ideas. If it were otherwise, who would determine which ideas are good and where forbidden? The government?" Rand further said at a lecture, "Political Vacuums of Our Age", presented to a group of women in journalism in Indiana in 1961: "Once a country accepts censorship of the press and of speech, then nothing can be won without violence. Therefore, so long as you have free speech, protect it. This is the life-and-death issue in this country: do not give up the freedom of the press - of newspapers, books, magazines, radios movies, and other other form of presenting ideas. So long as that's free, a peaceful intellectual turn is possible."

Barack Obama's diabolical scheme to "save money" and fix social security at the same time!

Looks like Obama and his cohorts have taken a page right out of the famous 1970's science fiction movie Logan's Run described as: "An idyllic sci-fi future has one major drawback: life must end at 30."


They're going to begin with denying specific procedures and medications to "people over 65," but if you understand how socialized medicine works, that age limit will soon slip to 55, probably to 50 and will surely include ALL of the seriously infirm (regardless of age), children and fetuses with defects. Shades of the Nazi Party! In other words, they only want "quality health care" for the already healthy (who don't need health care). The "savings" will come from cutting short the lives of millions of utterly defenseless sick, weak and elderly Americans. Clever way to (1) save money on healthcare (after, of course, spending trillions to nationalize it), and (2) thin out that pesky herd of useless old folks to save Social Security.

Don’t believe me? Listen to one of experts:

Betsy McCaughey, Patient Advocate and Founder of the Committee to Reduce Invectious Deaths:

Interview July 16, 2009

(If you can't connect here, go to and click on "AUDIO" on the top toolbar, then click on Friday, July 17...Betsy's segment starts immediately.)

Here’s some of what she says (and here are a couple of Obama's fellow travelers):

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel
Head of the Department of Bioethics
The Clinical Center of the National Institutes of Health

Dr. Emanuel, the brother of white house chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, has written extensively of the benefits of "comparative effectiveness research." This concept is keystone in socialized health care policies, such as those in Canada and the UK. In essence, comparative effectiveness research promotes devoting health care resources to those who have the most time left to benefit from them. To put it another way, those who are considered too old or too sick to truly reap the benefits from expensive treatments would be denied such care. Can this be where medicine is heading? (Dr. Emanuel has also recommended against treating such diseases as dementia and other incurable or irreversible diseases!)

Dr. David Blumenthal
Department of Health and Human Services
National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

Dr. Blumenthal has been given the responsibility of developing a nation-wide medical monitoring system, which will "oversee" the choices your doctor makes when it comes to your health. Diagnoses, treatments, and recommendations will all be recorded in this system and analyzed by the government. If you doctor refuses to be a "meaningful user" of the system, he or she can expect to be penalized starting in 2014.

Find out more:

Betsy McCaughey’s website:

Ted Nugent: "I believe that we the people will eventually see the criminality of the Obama administration and eventually stop them one way or another"

Ted Nugent Says Obama Represents 'Tyranny and Slavery'

Why the health care mess to begin with?

From the CATO INSTITUTE blog (CATO is a Libertarian think-tank):
The health care system is a mess, largely because of perverse government incentives through its big health care programs, Medicare and Medicaid, and its tax break for employer-provided insurance. As a result, we now have a third party payment-dominated system which simultaneously encourages excessive spending and pushes insurers and providers to decide how to “ration” (i.e., limit) care.

What people need is a medical system that allows them to make the basic rationing decisions: what kind of insurance to buy, what kind of coverage to choose, what kind of trade-offs to make between spending on medicine and spending on other goods and services.
Read the whole thing

Friday, July 17, 2009

It is becoming increasingly clear that Obama ran for President because he hates America and wants very much to "change" it.

"There is also no question," Obama said, "that Guantanamo set back the moral authority that is America's strongest currency in the world."

No, Mr. President. Your position on Iran, Israel, Honduras, Chavez, Ukraine, Georgia, and the American taxpayer did that.

It is unconscionable that a President would invoke America's "moral authority" to pave the way for the advances of Islamic supremacism here and abroad. It is an abomination that he would sanction the actions of the Iranian mullahcracy while attempting to ethnically cleanse parts of Israel of the Jewish people. Denying the Jews' right to natural growth as a people is a crime against morality and humanity.

Obama's strange attraction to savages and despots is repugnant and enormously dangerous in a world teetering on the brink. I, for one, am sick of being preached to by a man who increasingly seems to be devoid of the basic decency that is inherent in those who have the genuine moral sense to distinguish between good and evil, right and wrong.
Read the whole thing

Government-Run Healthcare: A Prescription For Failure

In this exclusive series, Investor's Business Daily explores the real costs & consequences of the healthcare reforms being discussed in Congress.

Thursday, July 16, 2009

U.S. appeasement of Iran is making war inevitable: The Case for Preemptive Nuclear Strikes on Iran

Absent a miracle, such as a democratic revolution in Iran, or a maritime blockade that will bring the nuclear-arming, Islamist regime to its knees, the Israeli government will soon have to choose between two horrible alternatives: mass death in Israel or mass death in Iran.

Israeli leaders know this to be true. But they dare not express it for fear of antagonizing the Obama administraion, which is bent on appeasing Islamist Iran--and Islamism in general.

The situation boils down to this:

Page 16: private health insurance ILLEGAL

Congress: It didn't take long to run into an "uh-oh" moment when reading the House's "health care for all Americans" bill. Right there on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal.

When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee.

It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of "Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage," the "Limitation On New Enrollment" section of the bill clearly states:

"Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" of the year the legislation becomes law.

So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won't be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.
Obamacare Will Outlaw Private Health Insurance Plans!
- Watch the video!

Who do you believe?

Joe Biden:‘We Have to Go Spend Money to Keep From Going Bankrupt’


Congressional Budget Office Director's blog:
The Long-Term Budget Outlook: Today I had the opportunity to testify before the Senate Budget Committee about CBO’s most recent analysis of the long-term budget outlook. Under current law, the federal budget is on an unsustainable path, because federal debt will continue to grow much faster than the economy over the long run.

The 'Public Option' Health Care Scam

By Steve Chapman

Some statements are inherently unbelievable. Such as: "I am an official of the government of Nigeria, and I would like to deposit $60 million in your bank account." Or: "I'm Barry Bonds, and I thought it was flaxseed oil." And this new one: "I'm Barack Obama, and I favor more competition in health insurance."

That, however, is the claim behind his support of a government-run health insurance plan to give consumers one more choice. The president says a "public option" would improve the functioning of the market because it would "force the insurance companies to compete and keep them honest."

He has indicated that while he is willing to discuss a variety of remedies as part of health insurance reform, this one is non-negotiable. House Democrats, not surprisingly, included the government plan in the 1,000-page bill they unveiled Tuesday.

It will come as a surprise to private health insurance providers that they have not had to compete up till now. Nationally, there are some 1,300 companies battling for customers. Critics say in many states, one or two insurers enjoy a dominant position. But market dominance doesn't necessarily mean insufficient competition.
Read more

Government does not create wealth; it eats it

This is part of the entire problem with the "progressive" tax system. It punishes people for success and is at its most basic a real consequence of a grievance mindset, in which life is a zero-sum game and winners "steal" from losers. As the economy itself has proven consistently, real wealth expands and standards of living increase for the entire population when capital is allowed to work in the markets. Soaking the rich reduces that capital and stymies the expansion of wealth and creation of new jobs. Government does not create wealth; it eats it...
....Nowhere in the Democrats' plan do they explain why 2.1 million Americans should have to pay to reform the health-care system for 300 million Americans, nor does the Post explain why 2.1 million Americans should have to pay for the massive deficits created by Democrats in Congress and Barack Obama.
What about the rights of the rich?

The last honest person in Washington?

Maybe there are some people left in Washington that actually care about their reputations. After months of listening to the Obama administration's nonsense about reducing the deficit by taking over healthcare, it's refreshing to hear someone actually testify during this debate that such ideas are ridiculous. Kudos for Mr. Elmendorf for calling it like he sees it.
CBO Director Says ObamaCare Will Boost Deficit

Senator Assmaggot Gets Bitchslapped

Beautiful, just beautiful! Need a lift? Watch Barbara Boxer get put way down in her place by Harry C. Alford, Chairman and CEO of the National Black Chamber of Congress

So Long Free Market- Hello Bureaucratic Nightmare

Map shows nightmare of "Obamacare"

UK has 9-month wait for arthritis treatment: Delay can mean a lifetime of agony for victims

Read the whole story

Please: Contact your representatives (see toll free numbers at the top of this blog) and tell them you don't want their bloomin' health care reform!

And Duane Patterson (via Hugh Hewitt) just posted this: If you haven't done so already, go here and sign the online petition telling Barack Obama and the Democrats to keep their hands off your health care. Then you better start calling Democratic Congressmen. The head counting among the Republican Caucus hasn't found one yet that intends on voting for the health care bill. The Democratic Causus is a different matter entirely. There are somewhere around 50 of them who do not want to vote for it, but have one arm being twisted by Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama, and the other one is exposed for you to twist. Start twisting, America.

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Satans' work

Most of Satan’s work in the world he takes care to keep hidden. But two small shafts of light have been thrown onto his work for me just recently. The first, a short article in the Association of Catholic Women’s ACW Review; the second, a remark (which at first surprised me) from a priest in Russia who claimed that we now, in the West, live in a Communist society. These shafts of light help, especially, to explain the onslaught of officialdom which in many countries worldwide has so successfully been removing the rights of parents to be the primary educators and protectors of their children.

The ACW Review examined the corrosive work of the ‘Frankfurt School’ - a group of German-American scholars who developed highly provocative and original perspectives on contemporary society and culture, drawing on Hegel, Marx, Nietzsche, Freud, and Weber. Not that their idea of a ‘cultural revolution’ was particularly new. ‘Until now’, wrote Joseph, Comte de Maistre (1753-1821) who for fifteen years was a Freemason, ‘nations were killed by conquest, that is by invasion: But here an important question arises; can a nation not die on its own soil, without resettlement or invasion, by allowing the flies of decomposition to corrupt to the very core those original and constituent principles which make it what it is.'

What was the Frankfurt School? Well, in the days following the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, it was believed that workers’ revolution would sweep into Europe and, eventually, into the United States. But it did not do so. Towards the end of 1922 the Communist International (Comintern) began to consider what were the reasons. On Lenin’s initiative a meeting was organised at the Marx-Engels Institute in Moscow.

The aim of the meeting was to clarify the concept of, and give concrete effect to, a Marxist cultural revolution. Amongst those present were Georg Lukacs (a Hungarian aristocrat, son of a banker, who had become a Communist during World War I ; a good Marxist theoretician he developed the idea of ‘Revolution and Eros’ - sexual instinct used as an instrument of destruction) and Willi Munzenberg (whose proposed solution was to ‘organise the intellectuals and use them to make Western civilisation stink. Only then, after they have corrupted all its values and made life impossible, can we impose the dictatorship of the proletariat’) ‘It was’, said Ralph de Toledano (1916-2007) the conservative author and co-founder of the ‘National Review’, a meeting ‘perhaps more harmful to Western civilization than the Bolshevik Revolution itself.'

Lenin died in 1924. By this time, however, Stalin was beginning to look on Munzenberg, Lukacs and like-thinkers as ‘revisionists’. In June 1940, Münzenberg fled to the south of France where, on Stalin’s orders, a NKVD assassination squad caught up with him and hanged him from a tree.

In the summer of 1924, after being attacked for his writings by the 5th Comintern Congress, Lukacs moved to Germany, where he chaired the first meeting of a group of Communist-oriented sociologists, a gathering that was to lead to the foundation of the Frankfurt School.

This ‘School’ (designed to put flesh on their revolutionary programme) was started at the University of Frankfurt in the Institut für Sozialforschung. To begin with school and institute were indistinguishable. In 1923 the Institute was officially established, and funded by Felix Weil (1898-1975). Weil was born in Argentina and at the age of nine was sent to attend school in Germany. He attended the universities in Tübingen and Frankfurt, where he graduated with a doctoral degree in political science. While at these universities he became increasingly interested in socialism and Marxism. According to the intellectual historian Martin Jay, the topic of his dissertation was ‘the practical problems of implementing socialism.'

Carl Grünberg, the Institute’s director from 1923-1929, was an avowed Marxist, although the Institute did not have any official party affiliations. But in 1930 Max Horkheimer assumed control and he believed that Marx’s theory should be the basis of the Institute’s research. When Hitler came to power, the Institut was closed and its members, by various routes, fled to the United States and migrated to major US universities—Columbia, Princeton, Brandeis, and California at Berkeley.

The School included among its members the 1960s guru of the New Left Herbert Marcuse (denounced by Pope Paul VI for his theory of liberation which ‘opens the way for licence cloaked as liberty’), Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, the popular writer Erich Fromm, Leo Lowenthal, and Jurgen Habermas - possibly the School’s most influential representative.

Basically, the Frankfurt School believed that as long as an individual had the belief - or even the hope of belief - that his divine gift of reason could solve the problems facing society, then that society would never reach the state of hopelessness and alienation that they considered necessary to provoke socialist revolution. Their task, therefore, was as swiftly as possible to undermine the Judaeo-Christian legacy. To do this they called for the most negative destructive criticism possible of every sphere of life which would be designed to de-stabilize society and bring down what they saw as the ‘oppressive’ order. Their policies, they hoped, would spread like a virus—‘continuing the work of the Western Marxists by other means’ as one of their members noted.

To further the advance of their ‘quiet’ cultural revolution - but giving us no ideas about their plans for the future - the School recommended (among other things):

1. The creation of racism offences.
2. Continual change to create confusion
3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children
4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority
5. Huge immigration to destroy identity.
6. The promotion of excessive drinking
7. Emptying of churches
8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime
9. Dependency on the state or state benefits
10. Control and dumbing down of media
11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family
...continued: The Frankfurt School: Conspiracy to corrupt

See also: The Frankfurt School, The New Left, Cultural Self-Loathing and the Psychosis of Multiculturalism

Obama eligibility case will be heard on merits...FINALLY!!!

Monday, July 13, 2009
Obama eligibility case will be heard on merits!!


Please distribute everywhere.

Just got off the phone with Orly Taitz, the attorney in Keyes v. Obama.

At the hearing today at the Federal Court building in Santa Ana, Judge Carter said the following:

1. There will be a trial.

2. It will be heard on the merits.

3. Nothing will be dismissed on proceedural issues.

4. The trial will be expeditious, and the judge pledged to give case priority.

5. Being a former Marine he realizes the importance of having a Constitutionally qualified POTUS/CINC.

6. Judge stated that if Obama isn't Constitutionally qualifed he needs to leave the White House.

The DOJ will be involved with the case also....I wasn't clear if they would be trying to get to the truth or they would just be blindly representing Obama.

Orly will be adding members of the military from California as plaintiffs also.This is from what my interpretation of our conversation.Orly, asked me to disseminate this information out for her, she will be doing a posting later after she gets some sleep.

Please say a prayer of protection for Orly, her family, and Judge Carter. Please also pray that the truth will come to light regarding Obama and justice will be done.




Swearing is good for you

Cut your finger? Hurt your leg? [Got Marxist scum for a President?] Start swearing. It might lessen the pain.

Swearing can make you feel better because it can have a "pain-lessening effect," according to a study published in the journal NeuroReport.
Swearing Can Ease Your $#??//* Pain

I do let fly here on you'll know why and not be so shocked, right?


Sunday, July 12, 2009

Lawmakers knew of surveillance, ex-CIA chief says

An angry Michael V. Hayden insists that top members of Congress were kept informed and supported the post-9/11 program.

Associated Press
July 12, 2009

Washington -- Former CIA Director Michael V. Hayden angrily struck back Saturday at assertions that the Bush administration's post-9/11 surveillance program was more far-reaching than imagined and was largely concealed from congressional overseers.

In an interview with the Associated Press, Hayden said that top members of Congress were kept well informed all along the way, notwithstanding protests from some that they were kept in the dark.
Read more

HAT TIP: On the “Cheney Didn’t Tell Us” Lie



The Case of the Disappearing Documents



HAT TIP: Citizen Wells


  • During recession George Bush's economic plan saw 23.8% growth in six months.

  • During recession Barack Obama's economic plan has shown -5.2% growth in six months.
Just sayin'...

The Information War Against Israel

I've talked about the 'information war' being waged against Israel, and how her enemies and their supporters are constantly trying to delegitimize her historically, legally and morally — in order to weaken Western support and clear the path for the physical destruction of the Jewish state that is their ultimate goal:
  • Historically, they attempt to revise history to show that today's Jews have no roots in the Land of Israel

  • Legally, they try to prove that Israel's creation was not justified and that her actions violate international law

  • Morally, they accuse Israel as acting for the basest of motives and in the most despicable ways, to show that Israel does not deserve to exist as a nation
While reading the very biased Amnesty International report on alleged war crimes during the recent Gaza war, I started thinking about how they do these things. I've discussed the historical revisionism on several occasions. Today I want to write about how they try to distort perceptions of current events.

They use four basic tools:
The four tools of delegitimization

Beware one-party rule

On Saturday I received the following from one of my doctors:
After the backlash from Watergate came Carter and the Democrats controlling all of Washington. You can read below what Reagan said about that after he was elected. Because people fail to learn from their mistakes and because they fail to learn from history, history is bound to repeat itself.
In the 4 years before we got to Washington, they had it all. They had the whole enchilada. They controlled the Presidency, the United States Senate, the House of Representatives, all the committees of Congress, and the executive branch and hundreds of agencies and departments. They virtually had a free hand, and all they could think to do with that free hand was stick it in your pocket.
-- President Ronald Reagan, remarks at a Nevada Republican Party Rally, Las Vegas Convention Center, October 28, 1982.

Truthfully, I think it dangerous when any party has absolute power. After all, we are a nation of checks and balances.

On January 12, 2009, Armstrong Williams warned Beware one-party rule:
When Congress objects to an action (or inaction) by the executive, it can pass a law or withhold or increase an appropriation; the president can veto a bill passed by the Congress; Congress can with a two-thirds vote override the President's veto; the Supreme Court can hold a law passed by Congress and signed by the President unconstitutional; Congress can pass and the president can sign a new law overriding the court's decision; and so on and so forth. Therefore, it should not be a surprise that, in recent times at least, the legislative and executive branches both fare better when they are in different party hands and thus freer to pursue their institutional constitutional aims. Put another way, when he becomes president, Barack Obama may yet quietly celebrate the failure to attain a filibuster-free 60-vote Senate. Indeed, at some point, he may long for the divided government that saved Bill Clinton's presidency and could have greatly benefited his successors.
And, later in the article:
It is sometimes said that at the end of the day, the two national parties are not the Republican and Democrat, but rather the White House Party and the Congressional Party. As noted above, they were in fact supposed to compete as well as collaborate. But when they are controlled by the same party, the dynamics seem to bring out the worst in both - collaborating either to overspend or to paralyze.
I agree with both my doctor and Mr. Williams on this issue!

Saturday, July 11, 2009

Radical Muslims and Liberal Jews: "Made for each other"

The difference between radical Muslims and liberal American Jews is that the former seek to become martyrs, while the latter aspire to become victims. In an ironic twist of fate, radical Muslims and liberal American Jews were made for each other.

MSNBC: "Barack Obama is Kenyan"

From Modern Ghana last Thursday, July 9th:
For Ghana, Obama’s visit will be a celebration of another milestone in African history as it hosts the first-ever African-American President on this presidential visit to the continent of his birth.
History Beckons - As Prez Obama Arrives Tomorrow

01:15 - 01:20: MSNBC REPORTER SAYS: "Barack Obama is Kenyan...."

Information from Citizen Wells who wonders how long MSNBC will let the video stay up...

Obama saves government--not jobs!

During his Saturday radio address to the nation President Obama let slip his administration's real purpose for the stimulus legislation...Balancing state budgets that are under stress is an excellent electoral strategy because it prepositions allies that can be counted on in 2012.