Video: Getting Back to Normal
Sunday, June 30, 2013
Justice Antonin Scalia wrote: "Today's (Wed June 26, 2013) opinion aggrandizes the power of the court to pronounce the law," Scalia wrote in the dissenting opinion. It will have the predictable consequence of diminishing the "power of our people to govern themselves," He was joined in his dissent by Justices Clarence Thomas and Chief Justice John Roberts, while Justice Samuel Alito wrote a separate dissenting opinion.
Scalia described the "assertion of judicial supremacy over the people’s representatives in Congress and the executive" as "jaw-dropping."
"It envisions a Supreme Court standing (or rather enthroned) at the apex of government, empowered to decide all constitutional questions, always and everywhere 'primary' in its role," said Scalia. "This image of the court would have been unrecognizable to those who wrote and ratified our national charter."
Scalia had particular disdain for fellow Justice Anthony Kennedy's ruling in the 5-4 case, saying it opened the door for a federal law allowing same-sex marriages.
“It takes real cheek for today’s majority to assure us, as it is going out the door, that a constitutional requirement to give formal recognition to same-sex marriage is not at issue here — when what has preceded that assurance is a lecture on how superior the majority’s moral judgment in favor of same-sex marriage is to the Congress’s hateful moral judgment against it,” he wrote.
He went on to say, "To defend traditional marriage is not to condemn, demean, or humiliate those who would prefer other arrangements, any more than to defend the Constitution of the United States is to condemn, demean, or humiliate other constitutions. To hurl such accusations so casually demeans this institution.
"In the majority’s judgment, any resistance to its holding is beyond the pale of reasoned disagreement. To question its high-handed invalidation of a presumptively valid statute is to act (the majority is sure) with the purpose to 'disparage,' 'injure,' 'degrade,' 'demean,' and 'humiliate' our fellow human beings, our fellow citizens, who are homosexual. All that, simply for supporting an Act that did no more than codify an aspect of marriage that had been unquestioned in our society for most of its existence — indeed, had been unquestioned in virtually all societies for virtually all of human history."
The court’s decision takes issue especially with Section 3 of DOMA, which defined marriage on a federal basis as "only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife" and the word "spouse" referring "only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife."
"DOMA rejects this long-established precept" of states themselves determining the definition of marriage, said the court’s the majority opinion, written by Kennedy.
However, the court’s action goes well beyond merely rejecting a federal definition of marriage, Scalia says.
"By formally declaring anyone opposed to same-sex marriage an enemy of human decency, the majority arms well every challenger to a state law restricting marriage to its traditional definition. Henceforth those challengers will lead with this court’s declaration that there is 'no legitimate purpose' served by such a law, and will claim that the traditional definition has the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure the 'personhood and dignity' of same-sex couples.”
Many would add that this decision is an all out attack on religion and American traditional culture and societal beliefs.
"The result will be a judicial distortion of our society's debate over marriage — a debate that can seem in need of our clumsy 'help' only to a member of this institution," said the 77-year-old justice.
Forbes Magazine wrote: Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissent in U.S. vs. Windsor is a masterpiece of withering conservative criticism, excoriating Justice Anthony Kennedy and his liberal collaborators for declaring the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional when they should have left well enough alone.
Judge Scalia once said, “Activism or restraint depend on the case.”
A few samples:
In the majority’s telling, this story is black-and-white: Hate your neighbor or come along with us. The truth is more complicated.
In the majority’s judgment, any resistance to its holding is beyond the pale of reasoned disagreement.
And this classic Scalia broadside:
We have no power to decide this case. And even if we did, we have no power under the Constitution to invalidate this democratically adopted legislation. The Court’s errors on both points spring forth from the same diseased root: an exalted conception of the role of this institution in America.
In Scalia’s eyes, the Supreme Court had no business deciding whether DOMA is unconstitutional, because there was no real dispute before the court. Plaintiff Edith Windsor had won her case in the federal courts below and the Obama administration was urging the Supreme Court to leave those judgments intact. To proceed with the appeal anyway, when both sides of the case sought the same result, violated the Constitution’s Article III limiting federal-court jurisdiction to real “cases or controversies.” To do otherwise, Scalia said, “is jaw-dropping.”
It is an assertion of judicial supremacy over the people’s Representatives in Congress and the Executive. It envisions a Supreme Court standing (or rather enthroned) at the apex of government, empowered to decide all constitutional questions, always and everywhere `primary’ in its role.
All good stuff, and Scalia makes the perfectly reasonable point that by declaring DOMA unconstitutional without logically explaining why that’s so (he dismissed Justice Anthony Kennedy’s arguments as “legalistic argle-bargle”) the Supreme Court insured it will have to decide later whether state laws banning gay marriage are equally unconstitutional.
Buit Scalia’s passionate cry for judicial restraint in DOMA contrasts with his dissent in the Affordable Care Act case just a year ago. In NFIB vs. Sibelius, he writes on for 65 pages about the many ways in which Congress overstepped its authority and passed a law that should have been struck down in its entirety. When it came to Obamacare, Scalia wrote (it is assumed he wrote the dissent, although it is also signed by Justices Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito), “the case is easy and straightforward.”
The Federal Government can address whatever problems it wants but can bring to their solution only those powers that the Constitution confers, among which is the power to regulate commerce. None of our cases say anything else. Article I contains no whatever-it-takes-to-solve-a national-problem power.
Scalia breaks down the ACA into its component parts, devoting paragraphs to each section of the law. Nowhere in his dissent is the sort of detailed analysis of standing that he lays out in the DOMA case, however. He seems untroubled by the question of whether the National Federation of Independent Business and other plaintiffs suing over Obamacare really had suffered injuries from the law, most of whose provisions kick in next year. He accuses the majority of judicial overreach by upholding the law.
In the name of restraint, it overreaches. In the name of constitutional avoidance, it creates new constitutional questions. In the name of cooperative federalism, it undermines state sovereignty.
Scalia has a knack for these Churchillian phrases. Here’s what he says about the majority’s opinion in the DOMA case:
Some will rejoice in today’s decision, and some will despair at it; that is the nature of a controversy that matters so much to so many. But the Court has cheated both sides, robbing the winners of an honest victory, and the losers of the peace that comes from a fair defeat. We owed both of them better. I dissent.
There are fundamental differences between the cases. In Obamacare, for example, the parties disagreed. But Scalia admonishes us that disagreement alone isn’t enough to draw the Supreme Court into a political squabble. Surprisingly, for a conservative, he says President Obama could have simply refused to enforce DOMA if he found it unconstitutional.
The matter would have been left, as so many matters ought to be left, to a tug of war between the President and the Congress, which has innumerable means (up to and including impeachment) of compelling the President to enforce the laws it has written.
If Congress doesn’t like how the President is enforcing the laws, Scalia wrote, “its only recourse is to confront the President directly.”
“Unimaginable evil this is not,” he said. “Our system is designed for confrontation.”
Reading Scalia’s dissent, I can’t help but conclude that the important difference between Obamacare and DOMA is the subject matter of the laws. Scalia believes in the power of We The People to legislate morality, and he points to laws banning child pornography, polygamy and all manner of other perceived sins to support his position. For him, DOMA was a legitimate exercise of legislative power to declare, on a federal level, what the rules governing marriage will be, and there was no constitutional question at stake.
The Constitution neither requires nor forbids our society to approve of same-sex marriage, much as it neither requires nor forbids us to approve of no-fault divorce, polygamy, or the consumption of alcohol.
Scalia’s objections can be prescient. He makes some excellent points, including the chaos that will shortly ensue as couples march into court to determine whether the child-custody laws of their state of residence trump the laws of the state in which they were married, or even which state’s choice-of-law statutes control.
But Scalia’s ire is undermined by his equally passionate defense of judicial activism in the Obamacare case. Like a precocious but volatile child prodigy, he can reason with the best of them and score rhetorical points at will. But Kennedy in DOMA, and Chief Justice Roberts in the Obamacare case, followed the wiser courses. The Supreme Court only has so much institutional power to squander, and fighting Congress or clearly solidifying public sentiment on the truly big questions can be a fool’s errand.
The New Yorker’s Cover Story on June 28th
Bert and Ernie’s “Moment of Joy” - June 28, 2013
“It’s amazing to witness how attitudes on gay rights have evolved in my lifetime,” said Jack Hunter, the artist behind next week’s cover, “Moment of Joy.” Hunter, who originally submitted his image, unsolicited, to a Tumblr.
You be the judge… Take part in the:
Friday, June 28, 2013
That’s Right Folks… CA Public Schools Are Spending $990,000 To Train Kids To Sell Obamacare
Marion Algier – Ask Marion - h/t to TLA
One of the worst things about totalitarian socialist type regimes is that they specifically target children to be their propaganda arms. Instead of trying to sell their ideas to the parents, they sell them to the kids, who then in-turn police their parents. Children are obviously the perfect spokespeople, since they’re blind to problems, corruption, and in the case of your public school educated kids…blind to history.
California is now sending money to schools to indoctrinate children into being spokespeople for ObamaCare.
The Los Angeles Unified School District (“LAUSD”) is receiving a $990,000 grant from the state of California (which is releasing prisoners right and left to help control their debt) to train teens to sell ObamaCare to their families. This money is just a part of the $37 million total California is spending to try to get people to cooperate with ObamaCare, despite its many and obvious problems.
American Thinker: So in another desperate attempt "the Obama administration created a marketing campaign for Obamacare that made it cool and hip" by "reaching out to the NFL, the NBA and Hollywood for help, and counting down the days to Oct. 1, when enrollment in the exchanges officially begins." Further, "The administration is in a good position to secure splashy endorsements, as Obama's 2008 and 2012 campaigns had a deep bench of celebrity surrogates."
Well ok, nothing personal but those who will be influenced by endorsements from sports figures and entertainment types are probably already in agreement with the President Barack Hussein Obama (D) agenda; these plugs will merely further validate and rationalize previously held beliefs. And for those who disagree, especially some of the owners and major stockholders, well, in true Chicago Way fashion the Obama administration has ways of making them agree.
In a recent update after hearing from the public the NFL says it has no (or changed) plans to promote ObamaCare
We have responded to the letters we received from members of Congress to inform them we currently have no plans to engage in this area and have had no substantive contact with the administration about PPACA’s implementation.
But what is truly disturbing--actually repellent and frightening--is the government's plan to abuse the concept of public education by turning public schools into indoctrination factories, forcing children to spout the joys of Obamacare. Or else!
In California, the educrats of the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), the second largest school district in the country with over 640,000 students, will be force feeding students to sell Obamacare to their families, funded by a nearly million dollar state grant (though the state is broke) from Covered California according to this article in Human Events
The district listed as a primary outcome for its project, "Teens trained to be messengers to family members."
Covered California spokeswoman Sarah Soto-Taylor said staff have not questioned this goal.
"We have confidence that the model LA Unified brought to the table will be successful in reaching our target population, which includes family members of students," she said.
LAUSD will also use tax-paid staff to promote ObamaCare through phone calls to students' homes, in-class presentations, and meetings with employees eligible for ObamaCare's taxpayer-covered healthcare, the grant award says.
The district listed adult education students, part-time, and contract employees as its target population. Teens will be trained to be messengers not to those groups, but to their own families, to get more people enrolled in taxpayer-subsidized healthcare.
If the project is successful, Los Angeles families can expect more use of students to push government-preferred messaging.
"Teens are part of a 'pilot' program to test whether young people can be trained as messengers to deliver outreach and limited education to family and friends in and around their homes," said Gayle Pollard-Terry, a LAUSD spokesman, in an email. "Teens will be educating adults that they already know (e.g., family or friends) and not other adults."
'Paid in the Rear'
Grant recipients like LAUSD will be held accountable by the state for fulfilling their promised activities for outreach, said Larry Hicks, another LAUSD spokesman.
"At a minimum, grantees will be required to submit to Covered California monthly, quarterly, and annual reports on their activities and progress towards agreed upon outcomes. If project benchmarks are not met, grantees may be required to submit additional ad hoc reports upon Covered California's request. Grantees will also be required to report any proposed adjustments to their approved outreach and education plan using the information management system... Additionally, field monitors will be assigned to grantees to verify their progress," Hughes said.
Disturbing comparisons with using children and government education facilities to deliver "government-preferred messaging" in the past and in other societies today instantly spring to mind. And so do the questions.
If the parents disagree with ObamaCare and their children's message will the children then be compelled to report them to the "field monitors...assigned to grantees to verify their progress"?
What if a parent hangs up on an intrusive government caller or worse not so politely, or even politely, argues with the "outreach" drone?" Can parents protest the "use of students to push government-preferred messaging"? If so, will the parentsr be compelled to attend parent-school meetings and labeled unfit and abusive?
And what will happen to the students if they mock their assignment of "educating adults they already know", or educate their trainers on the perils of Obamacare, or refuse "to be trained as messengers" or even just don't do their "homework" as students are wont to do? What if kids fail at "educating adults they already know"? All of these outcomes happen every day in homes and schools across America over minor issues. Will the students be shamed and punished by teachers and/or the school administration for their failure to do the assignment? Will the other kids make fun of them?
Perhaps even in California some teachers or administrators will have doubts about violating the basic education principles of a free society which prohibit political advocacy of only one viewpoint. If they voice their concerns about this misuse of the schools or if they too express concerns about ObamaCare will they be fired and sent to special in service workshops or re education camps, joining protesting parents and students? What will happen to their children, their families?
Unfortunately, these questions and others similar to them are not far fetched or speculative. Oh sure, the practices against dissenters will probably not outwardly mimic those of North Korea, Nazi Germany or Communist Russia - certainly no parent or student will be executed. But... Obama Youth is live and well!
Woe to those who publicly deviate from politically correct or government approved thought. Using vulnerable students "to push government-preferred messaging" though is a new low. And alas, this is probably not even the lowest of the desperate, all encompassing government mandates regarding ObamaCare, the environment or any other "government-preferred" thought or action.
A record number of voters want the 2010 Affordable Care Act repealed entirely, while sizable majorities say they are worried about their health care under the new law and expect their medical costs will go up, according to a new Fox News poll. The poll, released Wednesday, finds that 58 percent of voters favor repealing all (39 percent) or some (19 percent) of President Obama’s signature legislative achievement. Another 19 percent would leave the law as is, while 17 percent would expand its coverage further…A 62-percent majority of independents favors repealing at least some of the law.
NewsMax: Most voters continue to favor repeal of the national healthcare bill, but nearly half see repeal as unlikely. A plurality believes repeal would be good for the economy.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 58 percent of voters favor repeal, including 48 percent who strongly favor it. Thirty-seven percent are opposed to repeal, with 28 percent who are strongly opposed.
Support for repeal is up two points from a week ago but is consistent with findings recorded over the past several months. Weekly tracking surveys have found support for repeal has ranged from 52 percent to 63 percent.
Forty-four percent believe repeal of the healthcare bill would be good for the economy. Twenty-eight percent say repeal would hurt the economy. These views have not changed since earlier this month.
But just 39 percent think it even somewhat likely that the new law will actually be repealed. Forty-eight percent of voters see repeal as unlikely. Those figures include nine percent who say repeal is very likely and 10 percent say it’s not at all likely.
Democrats continue to be much more supportive of the healthcare bill and much more confident of its benefits than are Republicans and voters not affiliated with either party…
Thirty-four percent of voters say the healthcare plan is good for the country, but most voters (53 percent) see its impact as bad. Fifty percent or more of voters have said the plan is bad for the country since late March.
While a solid plurality of voters believe repeal would be good for the economy, just 27 percent say repeal would create new jobs. Thirty-six percent disagree and say new jobs would not be created and a sizable 37 percent are not sure.
Earlier this month, 45 percent said repeal was unlikely, but in April 51 percent felt that way.
Forty-nine percent of mainstream voters think repeal is likely, but 72 percent of the political class feel otherwise and believe repeal is unlikely to take place.
The political class also champions the healthcare bill much more strongly than mainstream voters. Fifty-four percent of mainstream voters, for example, think repeal of the bill would be good for the economy. However, 72 percent of the political class say repeal would have a bad impact on the economy.
But then 70 percent of mainstream voters favor repeal of the healthcare bill. Ninety-five percent of the political class are opposed.
Sixty-eight percent of all voters nationwide believe the nation’s political class doesn’t “care what most Americans think” anyway.
Voters strongly believe that more competition and less regulation would be better for the economy and job creation.
Looking back, voters remain unhappy with the government bailouts of the financial industry and troubled automakers General Motors and Chrysler.
The survey of 1,000 likely voters was conducted on July 24-25, 2010, by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95 percent level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC.
© All Rights Reserved.
On health security and costs:
Nearly three times as many voters say the health care law makes them feel more worried (66 percent) rather than reassured (23 percent). And the anxiety is rising — the number feeling worried is up 15 percentage points since July 2012, soon after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the law constitutional last year. Concern is widespread, as more than 60 percent in every age group feel worried about their health care in the future. It peaks at 70 percent among those ages 65 and over. Overall, 65 percent of voters think their health care costs will increase under the law. Few — eight percent — say their costs will go down, while 24 percent thinks costs will stay about the same.
Eight percent of Americans now believe the president’s central promise will come true. That’s half the percentage of Americans who approve of Congress, which really puts that abysmal number in perspective. Nearly three-fifths of the population wants Obamacare repealed, and almost two-thirds of Americans expect their costs to rise. But keep on laughing at the GOP for trying to undo this monstrosity, media folks — especially now that the hyper-credible Internal Revenue Service is prominently tied to the law.
Comment: “Liar liar pants on fire. Obamacare, in fact, will increase individual-market premiums in California by as much as 146 percent.” …EddieFry
Cross-Posted at True Health Is True Wealth
Thursday, June 27, 2013
Welcome to the Watcher’s Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the ‘sphere, and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council.Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday.
Council alum Trevor Loudon’s new book, “The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress” is due out August 20th, and if you’re familiar with his last one, you know you’re in for a superb read.
Superbly written and well sourced, it details the real roots of the toxic alliance between progressives, communists and socialists in America and connects the dots on a great deal of what’s going on today.
You can preorder “The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress” by clicking on the above icon.
Today’s a special day…the birthday of our own Michael Haltmann, The Political Commentator!
Actually, the big day was yesterday, but sometimes you need a little extra time to plan a proper party. Plus this way, I bet he thought I forgot…..
Michael’s a tireless and prolific writer, blogger and a good friend I really value. You can always count on him to step in and make a difference when it counts, and that’s an increasingly rare quality.
And in honor of his special day, we celebrate!
Only New York’s finest,a nifty raspberry swirl cheesecake from Junior’s in Brooklyn will do.
And to go with, straight outta the Finger Lakes, some fine Genuine New York State Champagne, Great Western’s Extra Dry:
A special birthday do for a very special person. Many more, Michael…here’s to you!
And without further ado, let’s see what we have this week…
- The Noisy Room – The Bracken Effect: An American Communist Putsch
- The Political Commentator – China and Russia bogarting the ‘joint’ in the Snowden espionage scandal!
- Simply Jews – PRISM and you: how endangered you are, my friend?
- Liberty’s Spirit – Modern Punditry, Bullying and the Channeling of Bitchy Adolescents: Shame on US
- Joshuapundit - Fear And Loathing In DC – The Gang Of Eight’s Amnesty Bill Is A Disaster
- The Mellow Jihadi – The New Yorker Blows Off the Navy
- VA Right! – New Video:Broken Children
- GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD – President Obama’s rush towards US unilateral disarmament
- The Razor – Was Michael Hastings’ Car Hacked?
- The Colossus of Rhodey – Hube’s Favorite Conspiracy Movies of All Time
- The Right Planet – The Spirit of Defeat
- The Glittering Eye - Cui Bono?
- Bookworm Room – The Democrat’s’ attacks on free speech on their approach to the immigration bill demonstrate what good strategists they are.
- Rhymes With Right – Joe Biden’s Bad Theology
- Nice Deb – Re The Bill Cunningham and Tamara Holder “Cage Match” (Video)
- Ask Marion – McCaughey: Obamacare is About Funding Democrats
- The Pirate’s Cove – Fifteen Republicans Duped By Shumer-Corker-Hoeven Border Amnesty Bill
- Bill Gertz/The Washington Free Beacon – Obama Directs New Limits on Pentagon Nuclear Weapons Use submitted by The Noisy Room
- Family Security Matters/Jim Horn -The Deception Marathon of Benghazigate/Bostongate – a Conspiracy?submitted by The Political Commentator
- The Sad Red Earth – “It goes without saying”: the Further Rhetoric of Terrorist Apologia submitted by Simply Jews
- Gatestone Institute/Peter Huessey – The World’s policeman Goes On Coffee Break submitted by Liberty’s Spirit
- Victor Davis Hanson – If Only Our Foreign Enemies Were Republicans submitted by Joshuapundit
- Roger L. Simon – What Snowden Knew submitted by The Mellow Jihadi
- The New American - Supreme Court Bombshell: No Right to Remain Silent submitted by VA Right!
- Small Wars Journal – The Future of Military Innovation submitted by GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD
- Guy Somerset/Taki’s Mag – The Importance Of Hatred submitted by The Razor
- The First Street Journal – President Obama Gets Bitch Slapped submitted by The Colossus of Rhodey
- N. A. Halkides/Frontpagemag.com – Inside the Progressive Mind submitted by The Right Planet
- Neo-Neocon – Michael Hastings, Obama, and the swoon submitted by The Glittering Eye
- Michael Totten - Hezbollah’s Disneyland submitted by Bookworm Room
- Doug Ross – Crime Pays: And the Rubio-Schumer Amnesty Bill Proves It submitted by Rhymes with Right
- White House Dossier - Michelle to Stay in $3,300-a-Night Dublin Hotel Suite submitted by Nice Deb
- PJ Media – The Elephant in the Room: A Review of Dr. Helen Smith’s Revelatory New Book, Men on Strike submitted by The Watcher
- Gates Of Vienna – The Istanbul Process Continues submitted by The Watcher
Monday, June 24, 2013
By Marion Algier Ask Marion - h/t to MJ
McCaughey was a guest on the Mark Levin Show and talked about how O-care funds are being used – and that the illegal immigration bill also contains the same slush fund mechanisms in it. Here’s a very brief write-up...
Betsy McCaughey, one of the few people on Earth who’s actually read the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” (aka Obamacare), wrote this recent article which I believe is worth adding to the echo chamber.
If you have to keep it a secret, you probably shouldn’t be doing it.
But the California legislature and the new Covered California health insurance exchange are conspiring to keep secret how they will dole out more than half a billion dollars in taxpayer dollars to contractors. The lion’s share of the money is going for what the exchange budget terms “outreach.”
In truth, the money is going to build Democratic Party enrollment.
The Obama administration granted a whopping $910 million to California to set up its insurance exchange. That money is not for bandages, surgery, nurses and doctors to care for the sick. Nor is it for insurance plans, though $910 million could buy generous coverage for at least 113,000 people!
Shockingly, the $910 million is slated for bureaucracy, including rich compensation packages for exchange employees ($360,000 a year for the executive director) and contracts for computer equipment, public relations and “outreach.”
Outreach is the largest expenditure and where the real monkey business occurs.
Amazingly, California legislators passed a law that the exchange could keep secret for a year who received the contracts and indefinitely how much they were paid. California’s open-records laws would otherwise prohibit such secrecy.
Last week, Republican U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and four other Republican senators on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee called for an investigation of California’s concealing information on contracts awarded using federal taxpayer money.
What is known so far suggests that California politicians are exploiting health reform to enroll millions of the uninsured in the Democratic Party and fill the coffers of left-wing interest groups with taxpayer money.
Here are the facts to back up that cynical picture:
California lawmakers passed a law (Senate Bill 35) requiring that voter registration be part of the health insurance exchange.
Last month, Covered California announced $37 million in grants to 48 organizations to build public awareness about the opening of the health exchange on Oct. 1.
Of the 48 organizations that got grants, only a handful are health-care related. The California NAACP received $600,000 to do door-to-door canvassing and presentations at community organizations.
Service Employees International Union, which says its mission is “economic justice,” received two grants totaling $2 million to make phone calls, robo-calls and go door to door.
The Los Angeles County Federation of Labor AFL-CIO got $1 million for door-to-door, one-on-one education and social networking. It describes its role as “engaging in both organizing and political campaigns, electing pro-union and pro-worker candidates.”
Community Health Councils, a California organization with a long history of political activism against fracking, for-profit hospitals, state budget cuts and oil exploration, got $1 million to conduct presentations at community and neighborhood meetings and one-to-one sessions.
These organizations, closely allied with the Democratic Party, are being funded by your tax dollars to conduct “outreach,” meaning the kind of phone banking and door-to-door canvassing that activists do to turn out the vote. They will turn out the uninsured to enroll on the exchanges and in the Democratic Party.
The $37 million awarded last month is only the first installment of California’s $190.4 million to be spent on contracts for “outreach” through December 2014.
In addition to outreach, California’s actual enrollment process is also outsourced to employees of community organizations, unions and health clinics. These enrollment “assisters” will be paid $58 for each enrollee they sign up. An additional $49 million is budgeted to pay them the first year, but in future years, assisters will be paid out of the premiums collected by the exchange.
The template is repeated in every state. The Obama health law creates a permanent stream of funding for unions and community activists by outsourcing insurance enrollment to them.
Assisters will also guide the uninsured to sign up for whatever non-health social services they may be eligible for, including welfare, food stamps and housing assistance, according to the manual prepared by the Community Health Councils for California’s implementation.
Anyone who remembers the days of James Curley, Boss Tweed and Tammany Hall gets the picture. If you were poor or a newcomer to this country, you went to the local ward boss and got whatever you needed in exchange for your vote.
The difference is that back then, politics was local. Now the Obama health law is institutionalizing this corrupt style of politics across the country. Whether you live in California or New York, local community activists and unions will be recruiting people to enroll in ObamaCare and sign up to be part of the permanent, beholden Democratic voting majority.
And just ask anyone who comes from a country with a one-party system… they will tell you horror stories upon horror stories.
Her basic premise is that Obamacare is not about health care (even a synopsis of the bill tells you that), it’s about funding a permanent Democrat majority.
How? McCaughey believes that this is done through “awareness” programs using typical Democrat muscle (unions, community organizations, the usual suspects) to receive much of this government funding to help get the word out about Obamacare. It’s a money laundering scheme using taxpayer’s money to ultimately assist Democrat get-out-the-vote drives, very much like what the Stimulus was used for.
Sean Hannity, Neil Cavuto, Governor Huckabee and Rush Limbaugh also featured similar discussions on their radio shows this past week:
RUSH: I hate to do this to you, but the Investor’s Business Daily had an editorial yesterday, and they have discovered the purpose of Obamacare. It has nothing to do with health care. The purpose of Obamacare got nothing to do with your health, and nothing to do with your insurance.
It’s about building a permanent, undefeatable, always-funded Democrat majority. One example: The exchanges. We’re being told that the government’s running way behind on setting up the exchanges, and we’re being told it’s because the bill so complicated, big, unmanageable. Nobody could possibly get this done on time. IBD has tracked how these exchanges are being set up, and basically the health care exchanges in these states are going to be Democrat political action committees, funded with your tax dollars.
They’re going to operate under the guise of selling you your health insurance when in fact what they’re going to be doing is providing employment for Democrats and Democrat voters and Democrat operatives. They are going to use the exchanges to give out money to sympathetic Democrats and people who vote for other Democrats. I’ll give you the details. It’s on a par with how I’ve tried to explain that the stimulus was a money-laundering operation for Democrat campaign coffers.
Because the vast majority of stimulus money went to keep government union employees working. It went to make sure they weren’t laid off in a really bad and down economy. State and local union employees pay dues. They’re required to pay it. The dues are collected by Democrat union leaders. They run all the union organizations, and the dues are what fund Democrat campaigns. Well, you can’t collect dues if the people aren’t working. If you’re the Democrats, you can’t (not yet, anyway) just write a check for $900 billion to the US Treasury and then start giving it away.
But you can come up with a “stimulus” bill that you tell people it’s all about creating jobs and roads and bridges and building up infrastructure. Then you get the check, and you are in charge of how the money is spent and where it goes, and you see to it that it ends up ultimately in the back pockets of union employees so that they continue to be employed and paying dues. So it’s a roundabout way of getting $900 billion, or a percentage of it, back to the Democrat Party in campaign contributions.
That’s what the stimulus bill was!
I’ll take a break. Take a couple phone calls, and then I will share with you the dirty details of the Investors Business Daily editorial on what is really happening with Obamacare and the exchanges.
RUSH: Now, on to the Investor’s Business Daily. They have an editorial that explains in quite extensive detail how Obamacare is actually a funding operation for Democrat Party operatives and a technique for improving increasing Democrat Party voter registration.
“The Obama administration granted a whopping $910 million to California to set up its insurance exchange. That money is not for bandages, surgery, nurses and doctors to care for the sick. … Shockingly, the $910 million is slated for bureaucracy, including rich compensation packages for exchange employees.” In fact, the executive director of the exchange in California will make $360,000 a year. The exchange money, this $910 million, is being used for computer equipment, public relations, and outreach.
What is the exchange? It’s supposedly where you go, by mandate, to buy your health insurance. The exchange is supposed to just be a catalog, basically. And the only thing in the catalog are insurance policies, and you go there and you pick yours. You go there, decide what you want. That’s what the exchange is. Instead, the regime has decided to use these exchanges, probably part of the original plan, as Democrat get-out-the-vote efforts complete with walking-around money and employment for loyal Democrats.
“California lawmakers passed a law (Senate Bill 35) requiring that voter registration be part of the health insurance exchange.” California lawmakers, again, passed Senate Bill 35 that requires voter registration be part of the health insurance exchange. Now, you think you’re going to the exchange to pick your insurance policy. Guess what? You’re gonna get pressured to register to vote, if you’re not, and maybe even if you already are. “Last month, Covered California announced $37 million in grants to 48 organizations to build public awareness about the opening of the health exchange on Oct. 1.”
In other words, they’re treating this as the grand opening of a great shopping center, a great mall. They’re doing this to attract all kinds of people. It’s a government bureaucracy. It would be no different than if the DMV started running ads to get you to show up.
“Of the 48 organizations that got grants, only a handful are health-care related.” For example, Covered California announced $37 million in grants to 48 organizations to build public awareness about the opening of the health care exchange. Now, why in the world would the California NAACP get $600,000? But they did. The California NAACP got $600,000 of Obamacare money, California exchange money, to go door-to-door canvassing and registering voters, and to create presentations at community organizations, presentations about the Democrat Party, presentations about registering and supporting the Democrat Party and its candidates.
“Service Employees International Union, which says its mission is ‘economic justice,’ received two grants totaling $2 million to make phone calls, robo-calls and go door to door.” Now, what in the world does a health exchange need a union going door-to-door for? I’m talking about in the strict structure of these exchanges. Remember, our low-information people have no clue what’s gonna hit them here, folks.
You think they know what a health care exchange is? You and I know what it is. It’s a place where we’re gonna have to go to get our insurance policy. Little do we know that when we show up we’re going to be hit with Democrat Party propaganda. Little do we know that the insurance exchanges are gonna be giving money to the NAACP and the Service Employees International Union to go out and do “voter outreach,” voter registration drives, show up at community organizing centers.
They’re gonna be making robo-calls, phone calls all about getting out the vote. “The Los Angeles County Federation of Labor AFL-CIO got $1 million for door-to-door, one-on-one education and social networking.” For what? An insurance policy? “It describes its role as ‘engaging in both organizing and political campaigns, electing pro-union and pro-worker candidates.’” That’s the AFL-CIO. That’s how it describes itself.
So we have the NAACP in California getting 600 grand to go door-to-door to register voters, to do this or that. “Service Employees International Union, which says its mission is “economic justice,” received two grants totaling $2 million to make phone calls, robo-calls and go door to door,” to the outreach, open community centers, make phone calls, robo-calls, register voters, get them to the polls. The AFL-CIO getting another million. So just in three groups, we’re at $3,600,000 from a health exchange to basically gin up support for the Democrat Party.
“Community Health Councils, a California organization with a long history of political activism against fracking, for-profit hospitals, state budget cuts and oil exploration, got $1 million to conduct presentations at community and neighborhood meetings and one-to-one sessions.” So health care exchange money for California has been given to a group that opposes fracking, for-profit hospitals, and opposes state budget cuts, opposes oil exploration.
They get a million bucks to “conduct presentations at community and neighborhood meetings” against all of these things. In other words, Community Health Councils, California group, got a million dollars to promote the Democrat Party. The AFL-CIO, $1 million to promote the Democrat Party. The Service Employees International Union, $2 million to promote the Democrat Party. The NAACP, $600,000 to promote the Democrat Party.
It’s $910 million total of taxpayer money to the state of California — and by the way, gonna happen in every state. This is not just California. But you might be asking, “Wait a minute, Rush! Wait a minute! What about getting people actually signed up for health care, insurance policies?” Well, guess what? That has also been assigned to constituencies in the Democrat Party. Basically what’s happening is Obamacare’s exchanges are being funded, money is being given.
The same people who got stimulus money, folks. You didn’t. Your shovel-ready job didn’t. Your school didn’t. Your road, your bridge, none of those things got it. Your job didn’t get it. Democrat loyalists got the money. The same thing is happening with the Obamacare exchanges. Democrat supporting groups are being given millions of dollars to promote the Democrat Party, register Democrat voters, and get them to the polls on Election Day. The purpose? To set up a permanent one-party system in this country.
RUSH: The Investor’s Business Daily. This story, it’s actually an editorial, it’s written by Betsy McCaughey. And folks, what’s happening with these health care exchanges, again, we’re gonna link to this Investor’s Business Daily editoral at RushLimbaugh.com and it’s gonna be in our Rush in a Hurry. You know what? I don’t pitch this enough, but I really should.
We have an e-mail alert that we send out within a half hour of every program, and it’s free. All you have to do is go to our website and sign up for it. And there are no strings attached to it. Now, it does have banner advertising in it, but there are no strings. You don’t have to sign up for anything else. It’s called Rush in a Hurry, and it is a summary with some transcripts and some audio, and it has links to the full website, with full details on everything. But it is a great, comprehensive summary of the highlights, which is everything that happened on this program every day. Millions of people already get it, and you can get it, too. So when I sit here and tell you, “Well, you don’t want to miss this IBD editorial,” if you’re subscriber to Rush in a Hurry, it automatically comes to whatever e-mail address you submit, and the link to it will be right there about 30 minutes after the program.
Now, we are able to update our website on the fly now because of advancements in website technology. We used to have to wait ’til six o’clock Eastern time every day to have the whole site up. You had to do it all at once and then go live with it. But now we can supplement it as we go, update it as we go. So the Rush in a Hurry is an absolutely great way — if you haven’t had a chance to listen to the program on a particular day, you get the Rush in a Hurry, two things are gonna happen. You’re gonna know what happened. You’re gonna wish that you had been near a radio. But it is really well done. It is done with html graphics. It’s not just a straight, flat text e-mail. It is a miniature website into itself in an e-mail. All you have to do to get it is go to RushLimbaugh.com and sign up for Rush in a Hurry. That’s what it’s called.
Now, the Investor’s Business Daily editorial written by Betsy McCaughey details what the health care exchanges in Obamacare really are about. And she focuses on California because they’re getting $910 million to set up the exchanges in California. Now, the exchanges, folks, are for one purpose and that’s for you to go get your health care insurance. Every American, if you don’t get your health care from your employer, you’re gonna have to go to one of these exchanges to get it. It’s a marketplace, it’s a clearinghouse, theoretically. It’s a catalog. You go pick the policy that you want based on what you want to pay — they’re all gonna be expensive. But it turns out these exchanges are just being used for Democrat Party outreach. I’ve detailed how.
The NAACP is getting $600,000 from the California exchange. The AFL-CIO is getting $1 million. The Service Employees International Union is getting $2 million. And for what? To go door-to-door, to register voters, to show up at community centers and make presentations on the Democrat Party and sell the Democrat Party agenda. A group called Community Health Councils, which is a California bunch that opposes fracking, for-profit hospitals, state budget cuts and oil exploration, got $1 million to conduct presentations at community and neighborhood meetings. “California’s actual enrollment process is also outsourced to employees of community organizations, unions and health clinics.”
So when you show up to get your insurance at a California exchange, you might be dealing to somebody from the AFL-CIO. You might be dealing with somebody from the Service Employees International Union. Planned Parenthood is trying to get in on some of this money. Planned Parenthood wants some exchange money to promote their cause, which is abortion. It’s another slush fund, folks. The health care exchanges are slush funds just like the stimulus bill was.
California’s Democrat controlled legislature does not want voters to know who exactly is getting close to $200 million in outreach funding, so they passed a law that creates an exception to the state’s open records law. A grand total of $200 million in Democrat Party outreach will be allocated from the $910 million to set up the exchanges. That’s the brunt of it, but I tell you, you need to see the whole thing. And we’ll link to it at RushLimbaugh.com.
Washington Examiner: “The popularity of Obamacare has crashed to its lowest level in nearly two years, according to a new Kaiser Family Foundation poll.” Thirty-five percent support Obamacare. “Kaiser’s monthly tracking poll found that just 35 percent have a favorable view of the health reform being put into place Jan. 1 while 43 percent view it unfavorably. The favorability rating of Obamacare has been worse only once, in October 2011, when it fell to 34 percent.” So it’s heading south.
Another story from Wall Street Journal: An ObamaCare Board Answerable to No One.
This is a story about the death panel. “An Obamacare Board Answerable to No One.” A story from the Wall Street Journal about death panels. It’s a disaster. Immigration reform, it’s a disaster. This, Obamacare, is a disaster, folks. No other way to describe it.
RUSH: About these health care exchanges, let me present to you a picture. Hypothetically, Obamacare is implemented, and along the way, guess what? Amnesty happens, the Gang of Eight bill is passed, and all of a sudden we’ve got 11 million people now that we’re gonna put on a pathway to citizenship. Who’s gonna be in charge of it? Obama, the Democrat Party will be with pamphlets, ads on TV and in publications, about how to go to the pathway to citizenship.
The pathway to citizenship’s gonna take ‘em right to a health care exchange. They’re gonna need health care. They’re gonna be sent right to an exchange where they’re gonna be hit up by unions to become Democrats. That’s the first thing that’s gonna happen to these illegals! Once we put ‘em on the pathway, they’re gonna be met on the path by the nearest union worker with a Democrat voter registration form. That’s exactly how this is gonna happen.
After the IBD article, Limbaugh and Hannity also featured discussions of the above articles on their radio shows and Dr. Ben Carson, who is working on an alternative solution to ObamaCare and our present healthcare system, was a guest on Cavuto. Huckabee featured three doctors on his weekly Fox TV show who have found their own solutions to circumvent ObamaCare and the ObamaCare exchanges.
Everything done by this administration is connected and part of a greater agenda… an agenda to control the US economy, create a one party system, and to control everything about our lives, a fundamental transformation of America. Our job is to connect the dots… and then start disconnecting them.
Thursday, June 20, 2013
Cavuto with Jim DeMint and Jeff Flake
Wednesday, June 19, 2013
June 17, 2013: US first lady Michelle Obama, center, with her daughters Sasha, and Malia, are escorted by Patrick Prendergast, far left, President/Provost of Trinity College, during their visit to the Old Library at Trinity College, in Dublin, Ireland. (AP photo/Fox) Girls seemingly not impressed so far with their extra (2-day) $5Million dollar taxpayer paid side trip to Ireland, as millions of Americans are still unemployed, under-employed or have left the market place completely out of discouragement. But what the heck… Mama got her new wardrobe (about which articles are being pulled from the Internet quicker than anyone can read them), so let them eat cake~
“President Obama’s trip this month to Africa, with the first family tagging along, is projected to cost taxpayers as much as $100 million, sparking criticism as the federal government scrimps along during sequester-related budget cuts.
Among the related costs will be fighter jets; hundreds of Secret Service agents; a Navy ship with a full trauma center; and military cargo planes to bring 56 vehicles including 14 limousines and three trucks loaded with sheets of bulletproof glass to cover the windows of the hotels where the first family will stay. The details were reported by The Washington Post, based on a confidential planning document.”
Understandably, the President has to travel and that accounts for much of the spending, but where is the shared sacrifice? When school kids can’t take White House tours the least the first family could do is show some solidarity and at least a little restraint. Oh… I almost forgot, ‘they’ did say they wanted us to feel the pain of sequestration… after all, how else can they keep blaming it on the Republicans?
This Week’s Watcher’s Council Nominations
Summertime, and the livin’ is easy! At least for some of us.
Just a little 8 day excursion with family,entourage and friends at a mere $12 million plus per day.
Welcome to the Watcher’s Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the ‘sphere, and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council.Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday.
So, let’s see what we have this week….
- The Noisy Room – The Sandbagging of America
- Liberty’s Spirit – Caroline Glick on the Jewish-American Community’s Affair with Leftist-Jew-Hatred
- Simply Jews – What Do The Russians Really Want
- GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD – The al Qaeda Nation States of 2018
- The Colossus of Rhodey – “White privilege” and those who’ve “made it”
- Joshuapundit - Epic Fail! GM Recalls 500,00 Cruze Cars Over Engine Fire Risk
- The Political Commentator – Politics Obama-style: The Obama Lie-Clock and Obama lies!
- Bookworm Room – Regressive Progressive’s strike again, spending hundreds of thousands of education dollars on recycled liberal claptrap
- The Right Planet – Angry Wacko Bird
- The Glittering Eye -The Past Is a Bucket of Ashes
- Nice Deb – Pedophile Ambassador Protected By State Dept ID’d as Major Obama Bundler & Political Appointee
- The Razor – Multiculturalism Turns Out To Be A Disguised Form of White Supremacy
- Rhymes With Right – Now That She Has The Lungs
- VA Right! - NSA Snooping Incompatible with the Right to Privacy in Roe v. Wade Ruling
- The Mellow Jihadi – No More Navy Uniform Changes
- Right Truth – Eighth-Grader Who Refused to Remove NRA Shirt Could Face Year in Prison
- Tina Trent.Com – Don’t Let Anyone Silence You On The Illegal Immigrant Amnesty Bill . . . Especially Other Republicans
- Ask Marion – Sarah Palin Back as Fox News Analyst…
- The Pirate’s Cove – Ted Cruz Files Amendment Requiring ID, Citizenship To Register To Vote
- Mark Steyn – Big Politically Correct Brother submitted by The Noisy Room
- Boker Tov Boulder – I agree With Chelsea Clinton submitted by Liberty’s Spirit
- BBC Watch – BBC’s Knell uses F1 to amplify PA propaganda on Jerusalem submitted by Simply Jews
- Telegraph Blogs – North Korea’s State-Sanctioned Girl Band submitted by GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD
- Mona Charen/NRO – The Unmentionable Injustice submitted by The Colossus of Rhodey
- Answering Muslims.com – Sacrificing Our Daughters: On the Psychology of Islamic Rape-Gangs submitted by Joshuapundit
- The American Spectator - The Era Of Contempt submitted by The Political Commentator
- Elbert Guillory - Elbert Guillory: “Why I Am a Republican” submitted by Bookworm Room
- Own The Narrative – The Progressive “Reality” submitted by The Right Planet
- Real Clear Politics – Bill Ayers: Try Obama for War Crimes submitted by The Glittering Eye
- John Hayward/The Conversation - The all-seeing State averts its gaze submitted by Nice Deb
- Gavin McInnes/Taki’s Mag – 10 Misconceptions About Being a Parent I Had Before I Became A Parent submitted by The Razor
- Althouse – “What’s so ‘ugly’ about the mockery?” submitted by Rhymes with Right
- Angry White Dude – Marco Rubio Comes Out Of The Closet – He’s A Democrat submitted by VA Right!
- PJ Tatler – Ms. Magazine‘s ‘My Month with a Gun’ Story Shooting Blanks? submitted by The Mellow Jihadi
- Heather McDonald/City Journal – The Real Risks of Amnesty submitted by The Watcher
- David Gerstman/Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion – Is Hassan Rouhani Really a Reformer? submitted by Watcher