Now we have socialism

Various states throughout the country have pursued lawsuits against this bbill over states rights THis is the worong way to do it. The best way to have this law overturned is to use the fourth, fifth, and thirteenth amendments to challenge the legislation. The thirteenth amendment is the no slavery emndment- meaning that involuntary servitude is illegal. Yet you are required- bound by law to serve an insurance company woth your patronage. Then there are the fourth and fifth amendments- theese two detail the right of the people to be secue in their persons papers properties and effects against unreasonable searches and siezures (amendment four), and that no person shall be deprived of life liberty or property without due process of law. Just for good measure, you could throw Roe vs. Wade between you and this law- just to show liberals that they are going to have to walk a very fine line if they want to keep this law.
In a more general sense the entire definition of rights may come up during the argument. If you take a look at all of the rights together, there is but one that I can find- the right to an attorney- that is a product or service that can be provided, bought or sold by other people. The reason for this is that if the government that places a burden on a person, it is the government's responsibility to pay the bill if he can't afford it- otherwise rights are not something you can go to the store and buy. You can't get them from another person, and the constitution itself isa founded on the principal that rights are provided to us by our creator. Since the government is not my creator, the fact that they are trying to establish this is nothing short of an obscenity.

I know that I haven't posted anything on this site in a long time. But here's thescoop. The best way of fighting ObamaCare at this point is to drop your employer sponsored health insurance, thereby eliminating a significant portion of the revenue this bill is supposed to generate. They won't like this, but then again, Who is John Galt?

The Next Battle

This has been one of the most historic times in the United States that most people in this country have not had the privilege of living through- and succeeding in fighting this fire-for the time being. Yet another fire was set today by the Supreme Court. The court today just gutted a very large portion of the current campaign finance laws, That portion of the laws that deals with issue ads and whether corporations and Unions can have anything to say about candidates (as long as the aren’t (as long as they aren’t directly affiliated with them) . I applaud this ruling, but liberals* have been taken aback. They actually think that they can come up with a bill this year that will “deal” with the Supreme Court’s ruling, as if the Supreme Court needs to put in its place.

*I have an asterisk here because their are a number of Republicans whose act needs to be cleaned up on this- in particular- John McCain (yes that John McCain), and Lindsay Graham. This fight to supposedly restore the impositions that the Supreme Court has removed are nothing short of censorship, and they MUST be stopped. This is going to be the next big fight in DC. I hope you’re ready, because this may be as big as healthcare.

The Politics of Compromise and the Compromise of Politics

In the world we live in, politics is the only field where compromise is good. If I were to say that someone's immune system were compromised, most would say that's bad. If I were to say that the engine in your car was compromised, you would be upset. If my doctor said he wanted to compromise, I would ask "with what?" But in the field of politics I know how mad liberals are. I was as mad as this when the Republicans compromised with Medicare Part D. I imagine that liberals are incensed and disheartened. But they should know that they have the entire winter break to face their congressmen and women, and their Senators, as will I. While I know what they feel at watching their hopes wind up in the toilet, I wish they would know that this is what happens when you call medical care a right. You try to enslave doctors or insurance companies, or whoever it is that you want to pay for someone else's product, they are going to do their damndest to enslave you to them. Apparently the right of healthcare has not only been bound to us, we have also been bound to it. So much for compromise.

So much evidence with so little to say

The Obama administration is giving Americans more and more reasons not to trust Obama, but to fear him. There is so much evidence that this administration has no good intent for the US, yet there is so little to say, because I am speechless that they have even tried half the stuff they have. I only hope that my thought on George W. Bush are true: He accomplished more for liberlaism in his 8 years than the Dems would in their wildest dreams: (Attempted) immigration reform, campaign finance reform, medicare part D (the largest expansion of Gov't since Medicare), No Child left behind, and the Iraq war. Three of the five of those were compromises with Ted Kennedy, the Medicare Bill was opposed by the waterboy, and then there is the Iraq war, which motivated liberals more than anything. I just hope I'm right.

Tragedy in Fort Hood

While observing the horrendous tragedy that occurred today at Fort Hood in Texas, http://m.www.yahoo.com/_ylt=ArL9Vll9YaVIP1r4FrKcerObvZx4/SIG=11tl2f3ds/**http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_fort_hood_shooting_suspect, and honoring the men and women of the US military who have had their lives taken over this horrible event. It should be recognized that as a result of this act, The Guantanamo Bay Prison will not be closed. Not now, not next year, not as long as there are people such as this in the world. This is not a political statement, nor is it a prediction, it is a simple fact. No one is that stupid, that they would want the terrorists who committed this act improsoned on American soiil. Period.

So What's the sense?

It is said by many of the more liberal (Chuck Schumer, et al.) Senators that this so-called opt out plan has the support of almost enough of the Senate to get the 60 votes necessary to pass. Liberal Senators like it because their states will benefit, but what do the states that don't support it get? Why would a moderate Democrat support something like this when there is nothing to be gained in supporting it, only the risk that supporting it is a shoe-in to socialized medicine, and my body being public property? In all of this nonsense, has anyone considered the principles of individual liberty and personal resopnsibility? That it is these traits that made this country what it is, and we are simply flushing them down the toilet?

Does Anyone Care?

So now the Democrats (Harry Reid in particular) when they once said that a public option won't fly in the Senate, are now saying they want to put it in at the State's option. Option of what, and under what conditions will it be mandatory? Have those famous Blue Dogs forgotten whyo they are? Was this spast summer protest over this whole thing nonsense? I really don'ty think the idiots get anything. Just remember, when medicine is socialized, your body will be public property.

Conflict of Interest

So now here we are again rushing with this disaster healthcare bill, and the more that Glen Beck, Limbaugh and all of the others expose the administration, (for being Nixonian, Maoist, the faster they go. They are apparently engaging in a conflict of interest by violating the separation of powers when they sit down and negotiate with the president about what they can and cannot do. Each house is supposed to have separate votes on their own versiions of the bill, which they either pass or (hopefully) they do not pass, then the versions go to a conference committee, at which point they bills get merged into one , and then sent back to their respective houses for a vote. The President is NOT supposed to have a direct influence in this process until the fi\nal legislation winds up on his desk, at which point he vetoes it or not. What is happenening now is that the presidennt is having a direct influence on the legislative process, a violation of the separation of powers and bypassing the idea of separation of powers. Where is it written in the Constitution that this sort of thing is OK?

Lipstick on a Pig

So the media now seems to think that because the Senate finance committe has almost passed a bill, that somehow the bill that it passes will be the greatest thing since sliced bead. What amazes me about this whole fraud is that ultimately, what you are going to get for healthcare is exactly the same thing as the guy who pushes the shopping carriage around the block every day. The inabalility or deliberate ignorance of the proponents of health insurance reform to this very simple fact is a crime in itself. Why should someone who works for a living be treated the same way as someone who doesn't? The better question is, what makes the government think they can make your decisions better than you can? For all the hype, for all of the so-called momentum that proponents of this legislation say they are now getting (which is simply a lull in the opposition to the bill because people are tired of this issue, and Our Dear Leader has not shown his face on the news in a relatively long time), the facts have not changed. the greatest price to be paid in this bill is the price of liberty. You will not have the choice of not dealing with the governemt; your body will be public property (because every decision made by a doctor will be public policy, and as such will (or has to be) fully auditable (under the freedom of information act), and therefore the public has the right to participate in every single decision meade by every single doctor in the country. When the scope of this is really taken into account, when you really consider the disaster that this pholospophy begs for society, you can come to no conclusion but that the people who support such legislation are simply evil.

Single Payer Here we Come

While the state of Massachusetts is far more "progressive" than the rest of the country, here is what we have to show for it: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/10/04/health_executives_wary_of_proposed_payment_system_appeal_to_patrick/

This Romneycare situation is leading very quickly to a single payer type system, one which will no doubt be a living hell. Just remember folks, there is no such thing as medical privacy coexisting with fiscal transparency when someone else is paying the bills. That situation only goes from bad to worse when you go from the isurance company hegemony to the government hegemony.

Unwanted Interference

So the president started out by using his bully pulpit to influence not only the Democratic legislature in the state of Massachusetts http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27329.html, but also the New York Governor's race. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/20/nyregion/20paterson.html?_r=2 It apopears to me that this President has crossed the line in so many ways, and so many times, that I think he has gone way over the top on this. I think it is now time to call for inpeachment proceedings to begin.

Has President Obama ever read the constitution of the United States? Has he ever thought of that amendment that is the tenth? It goes like this: "The powers not delegated to the the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the SAtates respectively, or to the people." A good article to read on the issue is here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL30315.pdf. People must come to realize that the states are not the toys of the president, and the legislative process therein cannot be compromised.

The Sneeze Police

So apparently, President Obama is now breaking out The Sneeze Police: Watch here: http://www.fox4kc.com/wdaf-sebelius-sneeze-scold-091809,0,4029781.story?track=rss
This really disturbs me considering the context with which the Obama administration has been playing up how your behaviour will be controlled in the future under ObamaCare. If people don't see this as downright disturbing, then I don't know what's wrong with society.

What a blast!

So I was at the DC protest over the weekend, and it was one of the most exciting things I have ever experienced. The crowds were unbelievable, the atmosphere waslike a giant carnival. I've got some pictures here for you. Something that strikes me as so important in this debate is the way in which the Obanma administration has said that healthcare is a right. I am no man's slave, nor will I bow to any, nor will I ever enslave any. It has become apparent to me that we are on the verge of a taxpayer strike. I saw so many signs at the rally that asked : "Who is Jon Galt?" Well, liberals are about to find out.

The Nancy Pelosi Show

You know, I watched the debate hoping that I might hear something new. There was nothing new, but I'll tell you what: The President had his thunder stolen by Nancy Pelosi. When I get some pictures I'll post them, but boy, did her facial expressions come out tonight!

What a Mess!

I have done a lot of researching over the past few weeks (the investigation that I had been doing on PhRMA somehow turned into a more global ionvestigation of ObamaCare itself, when I came across the original plan that the House Democrats had proposed (as opposed to the one that the Republicans had drawn up as a model for HR 3200) the one that the Dems proposed is a lot more insidious than the one that the Republicans. The Democrats worked hard to keep this out of the hands of the Republicans (who aren't very bright to begin with) Here are the two versions:

Republican:

The realor Democrat version:




Youu can't imagine how much the Democrats wanted to keep this out of the hands of people like me, but here it is. (I used the following articles in researching this.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090819/pl_politico/26240
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/53491762.html
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=23889
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/19/consulting-firm-tied-white-house-given-millions-health-care-ad-campaign/
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090821/pl_politico/26312_1
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/26240.html
http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/17/obamacare-doctors-ama-business-healthcare-obamacare.html
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2009/08/firms_with_obama_ties_profit_f.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090818/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_overhaul_47
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/05/25/obamas-lobbyist-problem-david-axelrod/
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/06/24/who’s-funding-the-obamacare-astroturf-campaign/
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95744
http://www.jeremiahfilms.com/released/WhiteHouse/Obamacare/908030519
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2009/08/prweb2761844.htm
http://www.newsweek.com/id/138519
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090820/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_health_special_interests_2
http://rsmccain.blogspot.com/2009/04/axelrod-doesnt-get-tea-party-concept.html
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/lobbyists-leveraging-schip-bill-2007-10-16.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/08/17/eveningnews/main5247916.shtml?tag=stack
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/20/AR2009082003557.html?hpid=moreheadlines
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090821/pl_mcclatchy/3296784_1
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/08/17/white-house-phrma-memo-surfaces-again/

Ted Who?

An Open Letter To President Obama

Dear President Obama,

I am writing this letter as an open letter to President Barack Obama in an effort to clear some things out of the air in the healthcare debate. From what I have gathered, proponents of healthcare “reform”, Republicans and Democrats alike seem to be saying that healthcare is a right. I would like to respectfully disagree and detail my disagreement in this letter. In the Bill of Rights, as well as throughout the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth amendments, with the exception of the right to an attorney when a person is charged with a crime (whose exception lies in the principle that the state is the one leveling the charges), every one of those rights has one thing in common: they are all non-material in nature. The right to speak freely, the right to keep and bear arms, the right to be free from soldiers living in your home, the right to be secure in your persons houses papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, etc. these rights describe a nature of humanity which cannot be provided or taken away by any government, and if there is a government which believes that these qualities exist it its expense, then said government has no business existing in the first place. That the rights I have mentioned above have been equated to a product and a service that must be provided by other people is why I have taken offense, and why I write this letter today. It is because of this equation that I fear will result ultimately in the death of the both.
For what it’s worth, the proponents of this plan charge its opponents of unfair tactics, fear mongering, and of things, that, if the Bush administration had accused its opponents of, these very same people would charge censorship. Below are two aricles from time magazine that detail the dangers of even coming remotely close to anything like this, that the risks themselves of anything like this happening are simply too great, and we cannot proceed with this out of the simple fear of creating our own worst nightmare.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,875801,00.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,870894,00.html

More details on the history of the fraud of the HMO

I have just been reading online, and the history of the situation is more contrived than I thought it was. Apparently the HMO was created by Congress in response to the increasing costs of Medicare. When people are busy blaming HOM's for rationing their care, they should be blaming congress. Read here.

http://www.cchconline.org/aboutus.php3

http://www.cchconline.org/privacy/hmoart.php3

A formal challenge

I am resident of Lowell, MA, and being such, Niki Tsongas is my congressman. I am hereby making a formal challenge to Ms. Tsongas: Afetr the accusations of disingenuousness that have been made by Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barachk Obama, that we might be manifestations of Rush Limbaugh, insurance companies, or the Republican party's dreams, (which is false), after Barack Obama's setting up of a ratline for citizens to rat each other out on, nothing could enfuriate and motivate me more than the suggestion that my concerns for my own self interest are not legitimate. If you do not extract an apology out of Nancy Pelosi when you return to congress, or even before then, than those of us that are in this fight will do it for you, and we will take it out in spades.