Thursday, July 16, 2009

House Democrat Plan Outlaws Individual Private Health Insurance

House Democrat Plan Outlaws Individual Private Health Insurance

"Investor's Business Daily, a great editorial today on the Obama health care plan passed by the House of Representatives. How many of you have heard President Obama say, "Hey, if you like your plan, if you like your doctor, you'll get to keep 'em"? "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 after this bill becomes law, nobody in the insurance business can offer anybody and you can't buy private medical insurance. "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." You will have to go to the public option. "From the beginning, opponents of the public option plan have warned that if the government gets into the business of offering subsidized health insurance coverage, the private insurance market will wither." And you don't need to be an expert to understand this. The government can print money, it doesn't have to make a profit. Private sector people do or they go out of business. So you can't compete with somebody who's not worried about profit.

"Drawn by a public option that will be 30% to 40% cheaper than their current premiums because taxpayers will be funding it, employers will gladly scrap their private plans and go with Washington's coverage." We also know this. We know that many companies are looking very forward to off-loading their health care expenses to the government. "The nonpartisan Lewin Group estimated in April that 120 million or more Americans could lose their group coverage at work and end up in such a program. That would leave private carriers with 50 million or fewer customers. This could cause the market to, as Lewin Vice President John Sheils put it, 'fizzle out altogether.' What wasn't known until now is that the bill itself will kill the market for private individual coverage by not letting any new policies be written after the public option becomes law. The legislation is also likely to finish off health savings accounts." Do you know HSAs are dead? And the reason health savings accounts are dead is because you have control.

This is something that Obama and his cronies want to get rid of, and it's in the legislation. Democrats have wanted to get rid of health savings accounts for years. They want to get rid of that because nothing gives individuals more control over their Medicare and the government less than health savings accounts. It took Investor's Business Daily just 16 pages of reading the health care bill, over a thousand pages, to find this naked attempt by the political powers to increase their reach. So that's page 16, and they wonder what other horrors await us as we read the additional 1,002 pages here. So the day this private option becomes law nobody can buy and nobody can sell individual, private coverage. (interruption) Well, that's a good point. Obama has said, no, we need to offer this competition. We need to compete. The government competing, and they're already over a thousand insurance companies in competition out there. The governor, well, we need to really put pressure on them.

So the way they're going to put pressure on them is put them out of business. It's a horror story. It really is. This is why they're trying to push this through, folks, this is why they're trying to get all this done 'cause they know their buds in the State-Run Media are not gonna report this to you. This is not going to be told. Now, this is interesting from the Dow Jones News wire just now: "U.S. Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark., a leader of fiscally conservative House Democrats, said Wednesday a House plan to overhaul the U.S. health-care system is losing support and will be stuck in committee without changes. 'Last time I checked, it takes seven Democrats to stop a bill in the Energy and Commerce Committee,' Ross told reporters after a House vote. 'We had seven against it last Friday; we have 10 today.' Three House committees are slated to begin considering the $1 trillion-plus bill this week, but the Energy and Commerce looms as the biggest challenge. That's because it counts among its 36 Democratic members seven members of the Blue Dog Coalition," conservative Democrats that are opposing House Democrats' efforts in general on health care.

Mike Ross said that the bill doesn't include provisions adequate to curb rising health care costs including what the government spends on health care. So he says that his committee has the votes to block it. Yeah, well, he might think so, but he hasn't gotten a phone call from Rahm Emanuel yet. This really is going to be, I have to think, the overreach, the tipping point 'cause the Republicans can't stop this. Not with their votes. They might be able to do it in other ways. It's called television ads. I mentioned this chart in the New York Post earlier on the tax rates and what it's gonna cost various income levels in New York City where the top rate will go to 58%. And somebody at $80,000 a year in New York City will pay an effective 36% of their income in taxes. That New York Post chart, that graphic, I said, "If every newspaper in the country would put one of these together." Screw waiting on the newspapers, this is what the RNC ought to. Michael Steele ought to get busy getting some people to go to every major city and put this chart out and get it out in every city, what Obama health care is going to cost you, family of four, this income group, this income level.

You know, the Republicans have put together a pretty good flow chart to show the bureaucracy, but it's complicated. The numbers are what people will understand. How much it's going to cost them above and beyond what everything costs them now. Seventy-seven percent of the American people are happy with their health care. When they find out how much this reform is going to cost them, it could be killed. It's time to choose. Yesterday we said it. Got a great caller on this, said it's time to choose up here. Republican Party needs to put aside these little petty arguments over how they're going to go out and get that group to vote for them and that group and so forth. This is standing up for America and doing so, standing up for our traditions and our founding, standing up for the institutions and traditions that made and define our greatness. That's where their electability resides. That's where their reelectability is. Not in cherry picking votes from various groups with mindless little policy twitters.

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

Meet your government approved ObamaCare Doctor!

Monday, July 13, 2009

There Can Be No Justice In Empathy

To Judge Sotomayor,

Your Honor, I am very concerned about your desire to have empathy as a jurist.

Article III, Section 2 of the United States Constitution states “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States…”

Empathy isn’t mentioned there, nor in any other part of Article III.

And in some prominent cases adjudicated at the Supreme Court level where a form of prejudicial empathy was the rule above equal justice of the law, tragic rulings came down:

Dred Scott was NOT given justice, but rather the opponents of his case received the empathy that became a standard presumed law until the Fourteenth Amendment.

In Plessy v. Ferguson, a false empathy was schilled out to try to maintain a status quo while still not violating the constitution. But America had to learn that “Separate but Equal” can never truly be equal. If the Supreme Court had ruled with true justice, the farces of the Jim Crow laws would have been dealt with and done away with a lot sooner!

Again, in 1944, prejudicial empathy was applied when Fred Korematsu evade internment for being Japanese. Had true and equal justice been applied, this nation would have known what a horrible indecency it had done, again, because of racial discrimination.

Finally, in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Justice was applied as the rule of law as one of the first steps in uniting the divided races of this nation. The Supreme Court didn’t apply empathy at all.

Why have the examples given been primarily about racial issues? With the nomination of Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, race has become an issue. Not because the citizenry of this nation is overwhelmingly racist, but because she herself has made racist comments and even ruled in appellate cases in an empathetic way based on race.

Political correctness and affirmative action has brought this country to a point in history where it is now racist to examine and criticize someone for behaving with a racist skew. At what point will we wake up from the dream Martin Luther King had about judging someone based on character and merit? When will we wake up LONG ENOUGH FOR THE DREAM TO BECOME REALITY?

There are no illusions about this, folks. She will more likely than not get confirmed and be an Associate Justice. But will she adjudicate with empathy or justice in the law?

Remember that the founders of this nation listed many grievances against King George in the Declaration of Independence. Not once did they call for empathy. Justice or Liberty was what they wanted and what they knew they deserved.

The U.S. Constitution didn’t set up anything based on empathy, nor did the Framers even think of empathy when debating the elements and attributes therein. Why?

For one reason and one reason only – JUSTICE IS BLIND, EMPATHY IS NOT.

Friday, July 10, 2009

Hmm....You be the judge!


GEORGE W. BUSH DOING CHORES


RONALD WILSON REAGAN DOING CHORES.


BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA DOING CHORES.

Better Homes and Garden LOOK OUT!!!!!!

Tuesday, July 7, 2009

10 Reasons why Michael Jackson's Life and Death Matter

Friday, July 3, 2009

Palin's Priorities

She seems pretty straightforward about it to me:

1. FAITH
2. FAMILY
3. ALASKA


Gee, I wish my governor would have those priorities

SANFORD:
1. SANFORD
2. SANFORD
3. SANFORD

Josh had to explain himself.... because too many people just didn't get it!

This is from our good friend Joshua P. Allem

On Friday, June 26th, Josh posted the following:

I'm A Human Being

“It's been a rough week. We all witnessed the death of Neda, had to suffer through the apology of Mark Sanford and now we're grieving the loss of Michael Jackson. But what's worse is all the typical B.S. from all sides that follows in the blogosphere. I'm sick of it all.”


Find more videos like this on JPA Live TV


He has had quite a response. But apparently there are those who just didn’t get it. So, on Thursday, July 2nd, he had to post this:

"I'm A Human Being" Explained

“Apparently, I was misunderstood after publishing my last video. Either that, or my video hit the nail on the head and some folks didn't like that. When I said, "instead of calling myself a conservative, I'm going to start calling myself a human being with conservative and Christian ideals", what did I mean by that? If nothing else, it means I certainly don't wanna be that guy in the picture down below.”





AND AGAIN, I SAY "HERE, HERE"

Thursday, July 2, 2009

LET FREEDOM RING!!!!

Let Freedom Ring



This Saturday, July 4th 2009, our nation, The United States of America, will be 233 years old. We have survived so many things that have destroyed so many other nations throughout history. We have even survived horrid and wretched things that we wrought on this nation by our own hands and by the ink of pens. The peoples that first sparked the flame that ignited this nation 140 years before America was born sought to be free from whatever oppression they experienced. And when oppressed, the nature of our forefathers in this land was to fight bravely with courageous conviction to bring a new level of freedom that would have to continually grow and be fought over through the years, even until today.

All of us take precious freedom for granted…. And we should NOT! The freedoms we say we enjoy have been paid for time and time again by words, deeds and even by the blood of the ones we love. Freedom has NEVER been free.

Freedom cost the lives of those who strived in agonizing steadfastness to start this nation.

Freedom cost the lives of those enslaved Americans who helped grow this nation against their will and with stripes on their backs.

Freedom cost the lives of those who felt the Union was no longer that. And it cost the lives of those who fought to preserve it.

Freedom cost the lives of those brave adventurers who sought to grow this nation’s territory.

Freedom cost the lives of those who gave up all to keep other nations around this world free.

Freedom cost the dignity of those who have been downtrodden because of the color of their skin or the shape of their eyes.

And now freedom is on the brink of going bankrupt because there are so many in our government who have either squandered it or seized it outright for their own agendas.

This nation has been, is and will be the greatest nation this world has ever known. The “great experiment” that was born 233 years ago has long shown true success. By God’s grace, we have survived so very much, much more than other, longer-lived nations could. And that is what gives me hope. Not hope to change everything at the expense of the fruition of our greatest strides or even our tremendous struggles. But hope to continue the great successes we have had, hope to venture into and conquer the unknown and hope that we can and will improve upon those things in which there is always room for improvement. But the freedom to achieve all of that will cost one way or another. What more will freedom cost us?

Before we can begin to answer that or even think of appreciating the freedoms we say we enjoy, we first have to gain an appreciation for freedom itself and from where freedom originates.

Our Founding Fathers did indeed know and understand the truth and origin of freedom.

“Rendering thanks to my Creator for my existence and station among His works, for my birth in a country enlightened by the Gospel and enjoying freedom…” – John Dickenson, Signer of the Constitution

“Unto Him who is the author and giver of all good, I render sincere and humble thanks for His manifold and unmerited blessings,” – John Jay, 1st Chief Justice of SCOTUS

““We hold these truths to be self-evident: – that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”
“We, … the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world …, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, … And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.” – The Declaration of Independence.

From the sermon on Liberty by Jacob Duche to Patrick Henry’s “Liberty or Death” speech, the source of freedom and liberty is proclaimed as God Almighty.

Even in the Constitution of the United States, in the context of those who wrote it and why, the phrase “…secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity…” gives direct acknowledgment to God Almighty as the provider of freedom.

The first amendment in the Constitution is specifically about the freedoms of certain entities not being controlled by Congress. Singularly, the freedom of religion is mentioned.

The debate over the “wall of separation” is not the important thing that it has been made out to be and is most often misunderstood and misrepresented. That is for another treatise at another time.

Since God is established as the author of liberty in whole, the freedom of religion is of His creation as well. By creating a government that would not interfere with the free practice of religion, the Founding Fathers gave ultimate credit and glory to God. Compared to every other religion in the world, which rely on the works of the follower to obtain salvation or advance to a higher existence, Christianity is a religion of freedom. Since Christ did it all by paying all, there is nothing that man can do to make himself a Christian. Man must accept his wretched depravity in sin and that Christ paid the price for that sin by dying on a cross. Christ broke the bonds of enslavement to deeds and indulgences so that mankind could be free to follow Him!

Our Founding Fathers knew that by letting religion be a choice in how and what we worship, and that such choice could only be given by a Holy and Perfect God, then those who would follow God would do so with a solemn and true repentance, surrendering their lives to the Divine Will of the Judge of the Universe. That is a level of precious freedom that is so blindly taken for granted in this nation today.

There are so many poems, stories and songs written about our nation as a nation blessed by God. And whether you believe in God or not is irrelevant. God IS AND WILL ALWAYS BE the Divine Providence of anything having to do with America’s success or failure.

Yes, failure! God’s ultimate purpose for mankind and especially Christians is for HIM TO BE GLORIFIED. And if this nation falls further and further into the depths of things that dishonor God, then our failure by His hands through our immoral and unrighteous actions, words and thoughts will be that which glorifies Him.

I urge each and every one of you Christians to first reconcile yourself to surrendering to God so that He can be glorified through you. And then promulgate the things that have always made this country thrive in striving for the highest of ideals that have continually led to America’s greatness.

Jesus confirmed that the Greatest Commandment was to love God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength. By doing that, along with following the Golden Rule of loving your neighbor (your fellow human beings) as you love yourself, God will be Honored and Glorified. And when non-believers see that in you, it will be like a magnet for them to understand why you are doing what God commands – which is not to connect with God (Jesus already did that by His sacrifice on the cross) but rather to make Him known so that others may know Him.

For you non-Christians, please know that it is a commandment for Christians to witness the Good News of Jesus Christ to you (we do that because we care about you and your eternity), and it is part of the freedom of religion in which we enjoy that privilege. But do worship as the dictates of your faith instruct, or don’t worship at all. Just remember that your right to worship or not as you please is a freedom that can only be given by a God who wants to be loved and glorified in freedom. Check to see if your faith allows for freedom of worship. If it does not, look into the one that does.

Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. – 2 Corinthians 3:17

For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. – Galatians 5:1

Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. – 1 Peter 2:16

As we begin another year in the life of this great nation, take a moment to reflect on freedom, where it comes from, and why it is so important. And enjoy the following. The song, “Let Freedom Ring” is one that captivates the essence of true freedom and gives Honor to Liberty’s Author.



Happy Independence Day and May God Bless the United States of America!

Monday, June 29, 2009

Obamopoly!



Found it at mikesamerica Photobucket site and had to share.

Saturday, June 27, 2009

By Any Other Name, Part 2

See if this sounds familiar:

The Administration took several steps to improve American relations with other countries. In one instance, the U.S. reached out (with what the president thought of as an unclenched fist) in recognition to a government that had been in place for a while but was resistant in dealing with this regime because of the strong disagreement many Americans had with its brutal policies. However, the President believed that reinstating diplomatic relations was in America’s strategic best interest. Two immediate and practical reasons were behind the move. First the U.S. hoped that this nation could eventually become a lucrative trading partner. Second, America believed that better relations with this nation would positively influence and lead to a cessation of differences and hostilities in that regime’s region of the world.

Am I talking about Iraq, Iran, or Pakistan? Nope! Let’s go back to the pre-war 1930s:

The Roosevelt Administration did take several steps to improve American relations with other countries. In 1933, for instance, the U.S. gave official recognition to the Communist government of the Soviet Union that had been in place since 1917. America had resisted offering legitimacy to the Communist regime because of the strong disagreement many Americans had with Communism. However, Roosevelt believed that replacing diplomatic isolation with normalized relations was in America’s strategic best interest. Two immediate and practical reasons were behind the move. First the U.S. hoped that the Soviet Union might become a lucrative trading partner. Second, America believed that better relations with Russia might help stop Japanese aggression in Asia and the Pacific.

When diplomatic recognition was being discussed between Russia and the U.S., the Soviets promised to stop pro-Soviet propaganda in America. However, Russia proved to be an unreliable friend. The propaganda did not stop. Moreover, no significant trade developed with Russia. In addition, among the complicated treaties and alliances leading up to World War II, Japan and Russia signed a mutual non-aggression treaty.

Now, see if this is recognizable:

The President pursued an easing of relations with other nations in the Western Hemisphere. He backed away from the role of policeman and moved toward being a neighbor and a partner with the nations of the Caribbean and Latin America. The U.S. withdrew some forces and installations from a Caribbean island nation, signed a promise not to intervene in the domestic affairs of Latin America. This change was seen as noble principle with practical necessity. The United States wanted to increase trade with its hemispheric neighbors to help alleviate the effects of a world economic crisis. In addition, the U.S. hoped better relations would lessen the risk of the countries in the Americas aligning themselves with other dictatorial powers that were gaining strength.

Do you think this is about Cuba and Guantanamo Bay or Chaves in Venezuela? Wrong again:

During the 1930s, President Roosevelt also pursued an easing of relations with other nations in the Western Hemisphere. He backed away from the role of policeman and moved toward being a neighbor and a partner with the nations of Central and South America. The U.S. withdrew its troops from Haiti, signed a promise not to intervene in the domestic affairs of Panama, and gave up the Platt Amendment which had allowed American intervention in Cuba. This change combined noble principle with practical necessity. The United States wanted to increase trade with its hemispheric neighbors to help alleviate the effects of the Great Depression. In addition, the U.S. hoped better relations would lessen the risk of countries in the Americas aligning themselves with the dictatorial powers that were gaining strength in Europe.

Cuba eventually fell to communism, many South American Countries aligned themselves with the Axis, and there are still banana republics today that just don’t seem to know what they are doing. We gave away the Panama Canal. So how effective was Roosevelt in all of that?

And what about this?

In a heatedly contentious election, one political party was overwhelmingly victorious, gaining control of the executive and legislative branches of government. The previous administration was decried in the media and by its detractors as ineffective, and the country had not apparently gained much from its involvement in an unpopular war. In actions that have become the pattern for what happens in many countries, the president demonstrated shows of feigned strength and was seen by many as the nation’s savior; and many of the people endorsed his actions of power. The government started taking over aspects of business and life in the nation, and all opposition to this president was portrayed as prejudice and treason. The people at first cheered this man’s rise, but soon they started to become victims themselves of his lust for greater power.

Hmmm….Who could this be? Barack Hussein Obama? Sorry:

Benito Mussolini seized control of Italy in 1922. The previous Italian government had been ineffective, and the country had not gained much from its involvement in the Great War. Mussolini called his approach Fascism, from the Latin word fasces, a bundle of rods that was a symbol of strength in ancient Rome. In actions that became the pattern for what happened in many countries, Mussolini demonstrated a show of strength and claimed to be the country’s savior; and the people endorsed his seizure of power. The government under Mussolini took over almost every aspect of business and life in Italy, and all opposition and dissent were ruthlessly oppressed. Italians at first cheered Mussolini’s rise, but then they became victims themselves of his lust for greater power.

The point here, folks, is that the stuff Barack Obama is implementing today, is stuff that has failed time and time again. Stop letting those who are elected to SERVE get power to RULE because once it’s gone, the only way to get it back is through bloodshed!

That piece of crap still stinks. Or in a quote from someone I respect. “That dog just won’t hunt.”

* With all due credit and respect to Ray Notgrass

And I say, here, here!

From out good friend JOSHUA P. ALLEM


Find more videos like this on JPA Live TV

Friday, June 26, 2009

Sign the Petition - Stop the Energy Tax!

SIGN THE PETITION!

Stop the Energy Tax!

By Any Other Name???

Before Obama forces us into his version of the New Deal, let’s look at some of the things that he is trying to do that FAILED during the new deal.

Yes, New Deal programs were having an impact on the depression, but it still had a solid grip on the nation. Just like today, to pay for government programs, taxes were raised and money was printed and inflation ensued. Also it began deficit spending to get immediate funding with disregard to the future.

In 1935 the unemployment rate was still 20%, which meant that 10 million Americans were out of work. Also in 1935, the Supreme Court weighed in and began striking down one piece of New Deal legislation after another. The Court decided against the Administration in seven of nine cases that it heard BECAUSE the federal government tried to unconstitutionally seize powers not mandated in the constitution.

In Schechter v. the U.S., the Supreme Court declared the National Industrial Recovery Act unconstitutional because it delegated too much power to the executive branch. It said that the industrial codes could not be legally binding and that the government could not control business in the way that the law called for. Then in U.S. v. Butler (1936), the Court struck down the Agricultural Adjustment Act, declaring that Congress had no power to impose controls on agricultural production. Agriculture was to be regulated by the states since growing crops and livestock did not involve interstate commerce.

These were stinging defeats for a popular Democratic president. Do we have one of those today?

In 1936, Roosevelt was renominated by the
Democrats. The Republicans selected Kansas
Governor Alf Landon as their candidate. Landon
did not call for the dismantling of all New Deal programs. He said that government spending was too high and that some programs were poorly administered. Roosevelt’s popularity meant that Landon’s “me too, just not as much” approach did not resonate with the voters.

Sound familiar? McCain was simply Obama’s “almond joy” without the nuts.

More generally, because of the New Deal, America has been influenced by the legacy of the Federal government continuing to take a more active role than just regulating business.

The Federal government is involved in managing the economy, and Congress passes laws that deal with many aspects of American life. The regulations set by the bureaucracy of the executive branch have the effect of law. It is rare to hear of anyone saying that proposed legislation in Congress is an encroachment on states’ rights and powers or is not an appropriate subject for Federal action.

And in fact, the New Deal did NOT fully accomplish its goal of restoring the American economy. In 1939 unemployment was still at 17%, which meant that nine and a half million people in the labor force were out of work. ONLY THE STIMULUS OF WARTIME PRODUCTION in the early 1940s brought the economy to full recovery.

So, before you really think that Universal, Government-run, single payer healthcare is a good thing. Or that government regulation of energy will save the planet. Remember that a piece of crap by any other name will still stink. It hasn’t worked before, folks. IT WON’T EVER WORK!

Cap & Trade - Yes or Maybe Voters

Cap & Trade - Yes or Maybe Voters

Forwarded from a message from Tony Leach.

Call them now!!

Rep. Michael Ross (AR) 202-225-3772
Rep. Charlie Melancon (LA) 202-225-4031
Rep. G. Butterfield (NC) 202-225-3101
Rep. Zack Space (OH) 202-225-6265
Rep. Michael Doyle (PA) 202-225-2135
Rep. Bart Gordon (TN) 202-225-4231
Rep. James Matheson (UT) 202-225-3011
Rep. Rick Boucher (VA) 202-225-3861
Rep. Peter Welch (VT) 202-225-4115
Rep. Jay Inslee (WA) 202-225-6311
Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX) 202-225-8885
Rep. Charles Gonzalez (TX) 202-225-3236
Rep. Al Green (TX) 202-225-7508
Rep. Gene Green (TX) 202-225-1688
Rep. Steve Driehaus 513-684-2723

The Energy Act...uh...Bureaucratic Nightmare

Found this at Power Line