The Founding Father's Real Reason for the Second Amendment
And remember the words of Thomas Jefferson "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." See Video of Suzanna Gratia-Hupp’s Congressional Testimony: What the Second Amendment is REALLY For, below (u-tube HERE).
The Leaders Are Here... Palin, Cruz, Lee, Paul, Chaffetz....
T'S A WONDERFUL LIFE
Can You Really Still Believe That None of These People Would Have Done a Better Job???
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has fallen for Iran's line that it is not developing nuclear weapons, but only wants the ability to develop one to achieve its place in the sun among the great nations of the earth.
In an interview on a Sunday show and in a leak in The New York Times that seems to have come from her (since it uses the same language), she notes that "there's a small space for doubt [about Iran's intention to build a bomb] because there are some contrary indicators. There is no doubt in my mind that they want nuclear energy and nuclear power, which they are entitled to, to be able to use it for peaceful purposes. The real problem is once you do that and you get what's called a breakout capacity, it's not long before you could do the other [build a bomb]. So that's why this is so important to address now."
Pressed to comment on a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that it was clear Iran was headed toward building a bomb, Hillary demurred.
"Well, they -- we -- we are doing this [pushing for sanctions] because we think they're heading there. But whether they want to get what's called the breakout capacity and stop, knowing that they could then move forward, that's where the question comes."
Wow. The same theme -- that Iran just wants to be able to make a bomb, not to actually make one -- was annunciated in a New York Times story that likely had its origins in Hillary's newfound doubts.
Why the hell would Iran want to develop highly enriched uranium if not to make a bomb? And why would it enrich uranium in the first place if it did not want to enrich it enough to build a weapon? Why would it spend billions and incur all manner of international obloquy and sanctions just to get bragging rights and be able to say that it could build a bomb?
Does the nation with the world's second-largest reserves of oil really need nuclear power to turn on its lights? Or is Iran so green that it can't stand to contribute to global climate change? That our secretary of State is naïve and inexperienced enough to fall for this line is incredible. That she might have been president is worse. And that the real president may be falling for it, too, is beyond worse.
Ever since the Cold War started, it has been an article of faith that, in assessing enemy power, we measure his capacity and not his intentions. Intentions can change in the blink of an eye. Capacity endures forever.
Iran has a huge incentive to try to fool the world for just a few more months. Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton warns that it has purchased from Russia -- and already paid for -- a highly advanced anti-aircraft missile system that would be exceedingly effective against every bomber except for stealth aircraft, of which Israel has none.
Has it been delivered? Is it installed? Are the Iranians trained to use it? Nobody knows. But Bolton is clear that once it is operational, as he puts it, "the military option is out."
So Iran's game is obviously to stall Israeli action by deceiving the world into believing that it merely wants the capacity to go nuclear -- "breakout" capability -- rather than to build an actual bomb. Iran even proffers a willingness to lend its stock of somewhat enriched uranium to other nations -- presumably its buddy Russia -- for further enrichment. (Presumably, the Russians would not enrich it all the way to the point where it could be weaponized.)
Iran says it wants enriched fuel to power a medical research facility. The West hopes that if Iran lent out its supply of slightly enriched uranium, it would not have enough in situ to enrich the amount it would need for a bomb. But, obviously, once it gets the uranium back, it can do with it as it pleases. If it agrees to inspection, it can always kick the inspectors out.
While Iran is negotiating "in good faith," there would be hell to pay if Israel attacked "prematurely." So, by enticing the world with this complex scheme, all the while enriching God knows how much uranium in secret, Iran hopes to prolong the negotiations until it has the air defense system. Then the military option -- which is Iran's sole motivation for even participating in these talks -- will be closed and Israel will not be able to attack.
That Hillary Clinton would allow herself to be conned into believing that Iran doesn't really, really, really want to build -- much less use -- a big, bad bomb would be laughable if it weren't so dangerous.
By Dick Morris, Author of Catastrophe - TheHill.com
Just about the time the Center for Immigration Studies was holding a press briefing at the National Press Club about the immigration and health reform connection, proponents from President Obama on down were denying that illegal aliens would receive taxpayer-funded health care under pending legislation.
I’m here to tell you, as I told the Press Club crowd, the legislation on the table does, honest to goodness, effectively extend coverage to illegal aliens.
Take the premium subsidy in the House bill, H.R. 3200. This lies in the part of the legislation (Division A, Title II) that creates a Health Choices Administration, adds the infamous “public option,” sets up and runs the “exchange” clearinghouse for getting insurance, and controls a graduated premium subsidy program through allocation of “individual affordability credits.”
The subsidy, found in Section 242, will give a voucher to people earning between 133 percent of the official poverty level and 400 percent of that income level (or, up to about $88,000 a year for a family of four).
Legal immigrants certainly qualify under H.R. 3200 for this subsidy. Section 242(a)(1) makes eligible "an individual who is lawfully present in a State in the United States (other than as a nonimmigrant described in a subparagraph (excluding subparagraphs (K), (T), (U), and (V)) of section 101(a)(15) of the Immigration and Nationality Act)."
A political fig leaf purports to keep illegal aliens from receiving the subsidy. Section 246 says, "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."
However, reading the legislation as a whole, its glaring omission is any requirement to verify someone’s immigration or citizenship status. For instance, H.R. 3200 makes no reference to the verification system in current law that’s used for nearly all government welfare and other public programs. If lawmakers wanted enrolling agents, including bureaucrats at the new Health Choices Administration, to use the Systematic Alienage Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system, the bill should include a reference and authorize SAVE’s application to this government program.
In other words, the silence of H.R. 3200 regarding SAVE and mandatory verification makes Section 246 just empty words. In fact, the Ways and Means Committee outright voted down an amendment by Rep. Dean Heller to require eligibility verification before qualifying someone to receive a taxpayer subsidy. Also, "lawfully present" covers a lot of ground. Does it include someone here under Temporary Protected Status, for instance? Again, the absence of eligibility verification requirements leaves open a lot of room for waste, fraud, and abuse.
A similar situation of setting up blinders occurs in H.R. 3200’s Medicaid provisions. Division B’s Title VII, Section 1701 expands Medicaid eligibility to those with incomes a third above the federal poverty level. This provision dictates that "the State shall accept without further determination the enrollment under this title of an individual determined by the Commissioner to be a non-traditional Medicaid eligible individual." In other words, the bill prohibits asking any further questions about new Medicaid enrollees.
Rather, the bill section promotes "presumptive eligibility" concerning Medicaid expansion. Read it for yourself, right from Section 1702(a):
(ii) PRESUMPTIVE ELIGIBILITY OPTION- Pursuant to such memorandum, insofar as the memorandum has selected the option described in section 205(e)(3)(B) of the America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, the State shall provide for making medical assistance available during the presumptive eligibility period and shall, upon application of the individual for medical assistance under this title, promptly make a determination (and subsequent redeterminations) of eligibility in the same manner as if the individual had applied directly to the State for such assistance except that the State shall use the income-related information used by the Commissioner and provided to the State under the memorandum in making the presumptive eligibility determination to the maximum extent feasible. (emphasis added)
And, once again, the lack of any provision mentioning or requiring verification, mandatory use of the SAVE system under this part of the bill, or any other accountability requirement opens the process up to signing up illegal aliens for Medicaid.
In the Energy and Commerce Committee, a mandatory verification amendment was voted down when Rep. Nathan Deal offered it. A political fig leaf amendment was added by voice vote, but the loopholes and potential for waste, fraud, and abuse remain wide open in the Medicaid provisions.
Whatever you think of health reform, a combination of things makes it certain that illegal aliens will receive government health coverage. The most obvious is the omission — heck, the outright rejection of corrective amendments — of eligibility verification requirements. The other factor is the designed ease of enrolling people in Medicaid, for "affordability credits," and the like.
Bottom line, the health legislation Congress is considering establishes an "enroll now, don’t ask questions later" regime. That’s a recipe for covering more people, but many of whom may not actually qualify. A huge number are almost guaranteed to be illegal aliens or legal immigrants still in their first five years in the country who are supposed to turn to their visa sponsor for financial support. And having more people in a public program translates pretty quickly into higher costs. In this case, we’re talking on the order of tens and hundreds of billions of dollars.
For anyone who still doesn’t believe that ObamaCare intends to cover illegal aliens while rationing elderly Americans and Legal Aliens… check this out: free translation services of non-English Speaking patients?!?
Health Care Reform legislation now pending in Congress would require doctors and hospitals to provide interpreters and translation services free of charge to non-English speaking patients.
That will add $billions to the cost of health care and give immigrants even less incentive to learn English.
The "America's Affordable Health Choices Act," H.R. 3200, Section 1221 (b) says Medicare health care providers that fail to "substantially provide language services to limited English proficient beneficiaries" face severe fines and penalties.
This is outrageous. Medicare is already bankrupt. Now medical providers also will have to provide free translation services.
Send a free email message to your congressional representatives and demand that they remove entitlements to language translation services from health care reform legislation!
Please "Take Action" now!
And please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to ProEnglish. We receive no government support and depend entirely on voluntary contributions from people like you. Clickhere to make a secure donation online. Thank you!
I have gotten madder and madder at the AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) for claiming to represent America's elderly when, in fact, it is just a vendor seeking to get revenue under the Obama health care plan. It was just such a conflict of interest that impelled the AARP to endorse Bush's prescription drug plan. The AARP has morphed from a group that speaks for seniors to one that tries to make money from them.
My wife, Eileen, and I were thrilled to learn of a rival to the AARP that has sprung up -- The American Seniors Association (ASA) -- which opposes Obamacare and is willing to be an independent, disinterested voice speaking up for the elderly. We reached out to Stuart Barton, its President, and suggested that we send a letter from him to our readers (this is not a paid mailing; we are sending it around because we deeply believe in fashioning an alternative to AARP).
We both suggest that you do as we are doing -- join ASA -- as a way of showing AARP that they do not speak for America's seniors. Obama's proposals represent a wholesale transfer of medical services away from the elderly and will force government rationing and denials of care for the very old and very ill. We need to fight against them and that is what ASA is doing and AARP is not!
The letter from ASA's President, Stuart Barton, is below.
The American Seniors Association (ASA) invites any members of the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) to mail us your torn AARP card in order to receive a 2-year-for-1-year ASA membership. Indeed, anyone of any age can become an ASA member -- especially since young people, baby boomers, seniors, and just about all Americans are now under assault by various Obama healthcare proposals and by the sell-out AARP leadership.
ASA is fighting congressional healthcare proposals that could cost perhaps $1.8 trillion or more over the next 10 years, to be accompanied by cuts in Medicare of $500 billion. ASA opposes a government-run plan that increase taxes and limit doctor-patient choice. We object to one House bill that would actually force individuals or their employers who do not have approved health insurance plans to pay a fine. Furthermore, none of these congressional proposals have a provision that people enjoying healthcare benefits must have their citizenship and legal residency status verified by all 50 states. That opens the door for citizen taxpayers to be gouged for the healthcare coverage of possibly 15-20 million illegal aliens!
Please visit our website at AmericanSeniors.org and consider joining our important crusade. We are for targeted healthcare reforms, but Obamacare and a dismantling of our private enterprise system is not the cure! Also check out the rich variety of membership benefits that ASA provides.
With kindest regards, Stuart Barton
News exposes AARP and reveals ASA as an excellent option for seniors.
I have been sitting quietly on the sidelines watching all of this national debate on healthcare. It is time for me to bring some clarity to the table by explaining many of the problems from the perspective of a doctor.
First off, the government has involved very few of us physicians in the healthcare debate. While the American Medical Association has come out in favor of the plan, it is vital to remember that the AMA only represents 17% of the American physician workforce.
I have taken care of Medicaid patients for 35 years while representing the only pediatric ophthalmology group left in Atlanta, Georgia that accepts Medicaid. For example, in the past 6 months I have cared for three young children on Medicaid who had corneal ulcers. This is a potentially blinding situation because if the cornea perforates from the infection, almost surely blindness will occur. In all three cases the antibiotic needed for the eradication of the infection was not on the approved Medicaid list.
Each time I was told to fax Medicaid for the approval forms, which I did. Within 48 hours the form came back to me which was sent in immediately via fax, and I was told that I would have my answer in 10 days. Of course by then each child would have been blind in the eye.
Each time the request came back denied. All three times I personally provided the antibiotic for each patient which was not on the Medicaid approved list. Get the point -- rationing of care.
Over the past 35 years I have cared for over 1000 children born with congenital cataracts. In older children and in adults the vision is rehabilitated with an intraocular lens. In newborns we use contact lenses which are very expensive. It takes Medicaid over one year to approve a contact lens post cataract surgery. By that time a successful anatomical operation is wasted as the child will be close to blind from a lack of focusing for so long a period of time.
Again, extreme rationing. Solution: I have a foundation here in Atlanta supported 100% by private funds which supplies all of these contact lenses for my Medicaid and illegal immigrants children for free. Again, waiting for the government would be disastrous.
Last week I had a lady bring her child to me. They are Americans but live in Sweden, as the father has a job with a big corporation. The child had the onset of double vision 3 months ago and has been unable to function normally because of this. They are people of means but are waiting 8 months to see the ophthalmologist in Sweden. Then if the child needed surgery they would be put on a 6 month waiting list. She called me and I saw her that day. It turned out that the child had accommodative esotropia (crossing of the eyes treated with glasses that correct for farsightedness) and responded to glasses within 4 days, so no surgery was needed. Again, rationing of care.
Last month I operated on a 70 year old lady with double vision present for 3 years. She responded quite nicely to her surgery and now is symptom free. I also operated on a 69 year old judge with vertical double vision. His surgery went very well and now he is happy as a lark. I have been told -- but of course there is no healthcare bill that has been passed yet -- that these 2 people because of their age would have been denied surgery and just told to wear a patch over one eye to alleviate the symptoms of double vision. Obviously cheaper than surgery.
I spent two years in the US Navy during the Viet Nam war and was well treated by the military. There was tremendous rationing of care and we were told specifically what things the military personnel and their dependents could have and which things they could not have. While I was in Viet Nam, my wife Nancy got sick and got essentially no care at the Naval Hospital in Oakland, California. She went home and went to her family's private internist in Beverly Hills. While it was expensive, she received an immediate work up. Again rationing of care.
For those of you who are over 65, this bill in its present form might be lethal for you. People in Britain face rationing of care in that there is an eight month wait for cataract surgery, 11 for hernia and the same for disc and total hip The government wants to mimic the British plan. For those of you younger, it will still mean restriction of the care that you and your children receive.
While 99% of physicians went into medicine because of the love of medicine and the challenge of helping our fellow man, economics are still important. My rent goes up 2% each year and the salaries of my employees go up 2% each year. Twenty years ago, ophthalmologists were paid $1800 for a cataract surgery and today $500. This is a 73% decrease in our fees. I do not know of many jobs in America that have seen this sort of lowering of fees.
But there is more to the story than just the lower fees. When I came to Atlanta, there was a well known ophthalmologist that charged $2500 for a cataract surgery as he felt the was the best. He had a terrific reputation and in fact I had my mother's bilateral cataracts operated on by him with a wonderful result. She is now 94 and has 20/20 vision in both eyes. People would pay his $2500 fee.
However, then the government came in and said that any doctor that does Medicare work cannot accept more than the going rate ( now $500) or he or she would be severely fined. This put an end to his charging $2500. The government said it was illegal to accept more than the government-allowed rate. What I am driving at is that those of you well off will not be able to go to the head of the line under this new healthcare plan, just because you have money, as no physician will be willing to go against the law to treat you.
I am a pediatric ophthalmologist and trained for 10 years post-college to become a pediatric ophthalmologist (add two years of my service in the Navy and that comes to 12 years). A neurosurgeon spends 14 years post-college, and if he or she has to do the military that would be 16 years. I am not entitled to make what a neurosurgeon makes, but the new plan calls for all physicians to make the same amount of payment. I assure you that medical students will not go into neurosurgery and we will have a tremendous shortage of neurosurgeons. Already, the top neurosurgeon at my hospital who is in good health and only 52 years old has just quit because he can't stand working with the government anymore. Forty-nine percent of children under the age of 16 in the state of Georgia are on Medicaid, so he felt he just could not stand working with the bureaucracy anymore.
We are being lied to about the uninsured. They are getting care. I operate at least 2 illegal immigrants each month who pay me nothing, and the children's hospital at which I operate charges them nothing also. This is true not only on Atlanta, but of every community in America.
The bottom line is that I urge all of you to contact your congresswomen and congressmen and senators to defeat this bill. I promise you that you will not like rationing of your own health.
Furthermore, how can you trust a physician that works under these conditions knowing that he is controlled by the state. I certainly could not trust any doctor that would work under these draconian conditions.
One last thing: with this new healthcare plan there will be a tremendous shortage of physicians. It has been estimated that approximately 5% of the current physician work force will quit under this new system. Also it is estimated that another 5% shortage will occur because of the decreased number of men and women wanting to go into medicine. At the present time the US government has mandated gender equity in admissions to medical schools .That means that for the past 15 years that somewhere between 49 and 51% of each entering class are females. This is true of private schools also, because all private schools receive federal funding.
The average career of a woman in medicine now is only 8-10 years and the average work week for a female in medicine is only 3-4 days. I have now trained 35 fellows in pediatric ophthalmology. Hands down the best was a female that I trained 4 years ago -- she was head and heels above all others I have trained. She now practices only 3 days a week.
(Now there will also be mandated racial equity in admissions… rather than admissions based on ability).
Background: Dr. Zane F. Pollard I did my undergraduate work at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois. I graduated Tulane University medical School Alpha Omega Alpha ( medical school's top 10% of graduating class). Internship at the Univ. of Southern California in Los Angeles, one year of General surgery residency at the U. of California in San Francisco. Two years in the US Navy. Residency in Ophthalmology at the U.of S. California in Los Angeles, fellowship in pediatric Ophthalmology at the Wills Eye Hospital in Philadelphia. In practice with Eye Consultants of Atlanta for the past 35 years. Published 90 papers in peer reviewed Scientific Ophthalmology Journals. Member of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, American Academy of Ophthalmology and the American Ophthalmological Society. Board certified in Ophthalmology.
-----------------
Barbara Wagner wanted to live, but Oregon Government-Run Healthcare would not pay for her cancer treatments. What they would do, was give her the meds for assisted suicide.
Washington is all atwitter about "death panels": President Obama derides the idea that his health-care reform calls for them; the Senate is stripping "end of life" counseling language from its bill -- and last Friday the voice of the liberal establishment, The New York Times, ran a Page One story "rebutting" the rumor that ObamaCare would create such boards to decide when to pull the plug on elderly patients.
But all those protests miss the fundamental truth of the "death panel" charge.
Even without a federal board voting on whom to kill, ObamaCare will ration care extensively, leading to the same result. This follows inevitably from central features of the president's plan. Specifically, his decisions to (1) pay for reform with vast cuts in the Medicare budget and (2) grant insurance coverage to 50 million new people, vastly boosting demand without increasing the supply of doctors, nurses or other care providers.
Whether or not he admits it even to himself, Obama's talk of cutting "inefficiencies" and reducing costs translates to less care, of lower quality, for the elderly. Every existing national health system finds ways to deny state-of-the-art medications and necessary surgical procedures to countless patients, and ObamaCare has the nascent mechanisms to do the same. With the limited options that Obama's vision would leave them, many will find that "end of life counseling" necessary and even welcome.
"Reform" would cut care to the elderly in several ways: * Slash hundreds of billions from Medicare spending, largely by lowering reimbursement rates to doctors and hospitals for patient care.
If a hospital gets less money for each MRI, it will do fewer of them. If a surgeon gets paid less for a heart bypass on a Medicare patient, he'll perform them more rarely. These facts of the marketplace are not only inevitable consequences of Obama's cuts but are also its intended consequence. Without them, his savings will prove illusory. * Expanding the patient load by extending full coverage to 50 million Americans (including such "Americans" as illegal immigrants) without boosting the supply of care will force rationing decisions on harried and overworked doctors and hospitals.
People with insurance use a lot more health-care resources -- so today's facilities and personnel will have to cope with the increased workload. Busy surgeons will have to decide who would benefit most from their treatment -- de facto rationing. The elderly will, inevitably, be the losers.
* The Federal Health Board, established by this legislation, will be charged with collecting data on various forms of treatment for different conditions to assess which are the most effective and efficient. While the bills don't force providers to obey the board's "guidance," its recommendations will still wind up setting the standards and protocols for care system-wide.
We've already seen Medicare and Medicaid lead a similar race to the bottom with their formularies and other regulations. With Washington dictating what every policy must cover and regulating all rates, insurers and providers will all have to follow the FHB's advice on limiting care to the elderly -- a de facto rationing system. * In assessing whether to allow certain treatments to a given patient, medical professionals will be encouraged to apply the Quality-Adjusted Remaining Years system. Under QARY, decision-makers seek to "amortize" the cost of treatment over the remaining "quality years of life" likely for that patient. Imagine a hip replacement costing $100,000 and the 75-year-old who needs it, a diabetic with a heart condition deemed to have just three "quality" years left. That works out to $33,333 a year -- too steep! Surgery disallowed! (Unless of course, the patient has political connections . . . )
Younger, healthier patients would still get the surgery, of course. The QARY system simply aims to deny health care to the oldest and most infirm, "scientifically" condemning them to infirmity, pain and earlier death than would otherwise be their fate.
In short, ObamaCare doesn't need to set up "death panels" to make retail decisions about ending the lives of individual patients. The whole "reform" scheme is one giant death panel in its own right.
The new president of the Canadian Medical Association, Dr. Anne Doig, has made comments that indicate that Canada's public run healthcare system is running on empty.
We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize...We know that there must be change...We're all running flat out, we're all just trying to stay ahead of the immediate day-to-day demands.
These comments come as the outgoing CMA President Dr. Robert Ouellet, is expected to report that Canada's government-run system needs to become more patient-centered.
And the list goes on… The more time we have to study ObamaCare and other government run healthcare systems, the more negative and scary information keeps surfacing.
One of the Senate's most powerful Democrats said Sunday that President Obama should take an "incremental" approach to fixing health care and argued that the country should postpone adding nearly 50 million new patients to the government system until after the recession is over.
"We morally, every one of us, would like to cover every American with health insurance," Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, told CNN's John King on the "State of the Union" program.
"But that's where you spend most of the $1 trillion plus, a little less that is estimated, the estimate said this healthcare plan will cost," he said.
"I'm afraid we've got to think about putting a lot of that off until the economy's out of recession," he added.
"There's no reason we have to do it all now, but we do have to get started. And I think the place to start is health delivery reform and insurance market reforms."
John King asked Lieberman if it was "time for the president to hit the reset button? Forget sweeping healthcare reform this year, do three or four incremental things that are less costly?"
Lieberman responded: "In a word, yes. I don't think -- I give the president tremendous credit for taking on the healthcare problem. And it really is a problem that we've got to deal with. But he took it on at a very difficult time that was not of his making.
"In other words, we're in a recession. People are very worried about their jobs, about the economic future. They've watched us add to the debt of this country. We're projected to run a $1.8 trillion deficit this year, September 30th, more than $1 trillion next year. You mentioned the 10-year numbers. People are nervous, I think the protests coming out at the public meetings around the country this month are as much to do with that larger environment as they are with questions about healthcare reform. I think great changes in our country often have come in steps. The civil rights movement occurred — changes occurred in steps. Let's focus now on how to reduce costs. That's been a central theme of the president.
"Let's talk about how to change the way health care is delivered. Let's talk about protecting people from not getting insurance because of pre-existing illness. Let's take off the caps on the amount of insurance coverage you can get over the years. Let's pay for preventive services for health from the first dollar. Here's the tough one. We morally, every one of us, would like to cover every American with health insurance. But that's where you spend most of the $1 trillion plus, a little less that is estimated, the estimate said this healthcare plan will cost."
Lieberman also said he oppose any attempt his colleagues to use a Senate maneuver called "reconciliation," in which only 51 votes — rather than 60 — would be needed to overcome opposition to a health care bill.
"I think it's a real mistake to try to jam through the total health insurance reform, healthcare reform plan that the public is either opposed to or of very, very passionate mixed minds about," he said. "It's just not good for the system, frankly, it won't be good for the Obama presidency."
Both syndicated columnist host Mark Steyn and author and former political advisor to Bill Clinton, Dick Morris, said today in separate interviews… “beware of the rhetoric on healthcare”!
“ObamaCare is not about healthcare reform, it is about a power grab and taking 40% of Medicare funds (from the elderly) and redirecting them to illegals. The key to this program is not the public option or end of life counseling, it is taking funding from the elderly, giving it to younger illegals and then rationing care. So the protestors’ victories in the past few days are not what they may seem” …Dick Morris
“Fraiser Care in British Columbia (their socialized medicine) just announced that they would again be cutting healthcare for seniors as well as 15 to 20% of elective surgeries for everyone. Obama and the Dems will do whatever they can to pass an embryonic healthcare program and then burn the bridge behind them, so that there is no going back, because their ultimate goal is to get to a single-payer government-run healthcare program as part of their re-making of America program. Their entire Healthcare Program (Obamacare) is a death system with them in charge. It is the nationalization of your body.” …Mark Steyn
They both say that the co-op plan that the Dems have now started talking about is the same thing as the public option plan… which will ultimately result in a single-payer plan and government running who is covered and who isn’t, price setting, and what procedures and drugs will be given to whom!! They will also cover abortions with government money, have full access to your medical records and your bank account, if this passes.
“One third of the uninsured are 18 to 25-year-olds categorized as ‘the invincibles’ who think they are just that and don’t have a lot of money, so choose not to purchase health insurance if not covered by their parents or their employer.
Another quarter of the uninsured are adults between the ages of 50 and 65, the pre-Medicare boomers, who have lost jobs or coverage through their employer and either can’t get coverage because of pre-existing conditions of themselves or someone in their family, or can’t afford the premiums, so they are waiting and praying they will be fine until Medicare kicks in.
And then there are another 12 to 19 million illegals depending on who is supplying the figures that are not covered but will be under Obamacare. Covering illegal aliens not specifically addressed because if something or someone is not specifically excluded… they are included, which is the goal of the left!
Medicaid (coverage for the poor) is broke, primarily because of fraud and waste caused largely by duplication and could be cleaned up.” …Ceci Connolly, Washington Post
The balance of people not insured is about 5 to 8 million people who could be covered and covered cheaper by:
Trashing all 5-bills that are presently being considered in the house and Senate
Clean up Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Veterans Affairs and Reservation Benefits… by controlling fraud and waste.
Invoke serious tort reform… stopping frivolous lawsuits and restricting the awards
Do not cover abortions with public funds
Do not cover people in the United State illegally
Allow individuals and small businesses to for groups and co-ops to get better rates
Allow the purchase of health insurance across state lines
Allow portable coverage (allowing you to take your insurance with you when you leave a job or move)
Pay on results not on number of procedures
No more exclusions because of pre-existing conditions by insurance companies
Crack-down on insurance fraud
Allow coverage of natural supplements, natural and holistic procedures like chiropractic care, acupuncture etc by insurance coverage
Force Big Pharma to honor price reduction they offered Team Obama
Allow generic medications to be covered by insurance, Medicare and Medicaid, etc.
Allow sharing of information and encourage the reduction of duplication of records… but not kept and managed by the government or in a central database by a company like GE, who is in bed with Team Obama. In today’s world if large companies and groups like Kaiser, Blue Cross, Medicaid, Cigna etc kept their own central databases, forwarding information electronically or giving a copy to the patient to hand carry to avoid the duplication of procedures or tests is and would be easy. Perhaps some the unspent stimulus money could go toward helping some of these companies updating their record systems, which would also create some permanent and temporary jobs. A central database of everyone’s information is just to tempting for future problems.
If the above measures were enacted, we could pay for the 5 to 8 million who are not insured and not are insurable, lower or at least maintain our costs without changing the quality of our medical care in the United States, keep additional government intrusion out of our lives and prevent rationing.
Add to this the ideas of dozens and dozens of present and ex-Governors, Senators and Congress people plus CEO’s of companies and experts in economics and medical care from the financial end, we could perhaps level the cost increase for a few years and improve our care for everyone.
Everyone agrees that we need some kind of reform. This kind of reform, not the ObamaCare versions (any of them)
HUGE PRO-OBAMA HEALTH CARE AD CAMPAIGN UNDER WAY
As you can see from the link below, the Obama people are launching a huge TV ad blitz to restore momentum behind their health care proposals. Funded by money from drug companies and other vendors who have been bought off to back the plan, it tries to refocus the campaign for his legislation on the supposed benefits of his plan for the average person.
Click here to watch the ad. We need to counter this offensive with all our resources.
The supposed benefits of the Obama package that are enumerated in the ad are all: 1. Easily available by federal or state regulatory legislation and need not be part of an overall change in the health care system; and
2. Have largely already been agreed to by the insurance companies at their White House meetings; and
3. Were, in many cases, solved by the Kennedy Kassenbaum bill, passed in 1996, that prohibited insurers from discriminating against patients whose pre-existing conditions were covered in their old jobs.
Yet, in a bid to drum up support for the bill and its inevitable rationing of care to the elderly, Obama is presenting these measures as integral to his legislation when, in fact, they are quite extraneous to it.
Strategically, he is trying to focus the debate on the needs of the younger population and avoid addressing the catastrophe that his plan would represent for the elderly. None of the people in the ad are old and the issues are those that concern the younger, working population.
The answer is to keep the debate focused on the elderly. If their opposition to these proposals grows and reaches a tipping point (as it is doing as we speak), the Democrats will not dare pass their legislation.
PLEASE...Go here and donate funds so we can run ads attacking Obama's plan and zeroing in on what it means for the elderly. We are now on the air in Montana, North Dakota, Arkansas, and Maine. We are about to go on in South Dakota, Nebraska, and Louisiana.
We need money to advertise in North Carolina, Wyoming, Indiana, and Connecticut. Please give generously so we can reach these Senators!
Thanks, Dick Morris
If you have the time and inclination to read the healthcare bill (HR-3200 - full report) yourself it would be great, most of the Congresspeople who are holding town halls have not.
Contact your Senator and Congressperson, any Blue Dogs or moderates in pivotal states and attend a local healthcare Townhall, healthcare Tea Party on 9/12 or the Big One in Washington. Read the Bill or at least some Reviews, Read Catastrophe, educate yourself on this and related issues And then please speak out America!!!
Call the switchboard for Congress in Washington today... your Senator, Congressperson and Nancy Pelosi and tell them “NO” on Government-Run Healthcare Takeover, "NO on Cap and Trade" & NO on the Carbon Tax… and to pay back the unspent stimulus money!!!
I am supporting only one organization to stop Obama's healthcare program: the League of American Voters. And I am encouraging concerned Americans to funnel their support to the League as their main venue for donations.
I believe the League has the most effective program to confront directly and stop Obama's radical healthcare takeover plan.
Obama is moving to ram through Congress his plan and all our resources need to be focused to stop him.
Please donate today and help put its powerful ad on air by Going Here Now.
Also read the League's urgent message below!
Dick Morris
Obama Caught in AARP Lie, More to Come
Dear Supporter:
In our last message, we warned that Obama was on the run, desperate to get his radical health plan rammed through Congress.
But Obama's falling poll numbers, and the fact that outlets such as Fox News and Newsmax are fully informing Americans about the dangers of the plan, have hurt him and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's efforts for their healthcare fiasco.
They are desperate. Obama out-and-out lied this week when he claimed that the AARP, the nation's largest seniors organization, backed his healthcare plan.
The organization does not support it.
Nancy Pelosi has even compared citizens protesting against the health plan with Nazis.
These futile attempts of Obama and Pelosi to twist reality prove that our efforts are working!
This weekend, we will begin our national TV ad campaign. We are rolling out our powerful new TV ad — devised by Dick Morris, our chief strategist.
Dick's ad exposes how Obama's plan will lead to healthcare rationing if he succeeds in adding 50 million people to the government system.
P.S. Next week, we want to roll out our powerful TV ad to eight more states. We have a goal to raise $5 million for our campaign to stop Obama's plan. We are well on our way to this goal, but we need more help. Please take a moment today and show your support — Go Here Now.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) is worried that the Obama administration is actively compiling an enemies list of citizens and organizations that do not agree with the president's plan to reform health care. On Wednesday, he penned a letter to Obama voicing his strong objections to a recent posting on the White House website that asked concerned Americans to forward instances of misinformation being put forth on the proposed legislation. Here's part of Cornyn's letter:
"I can only imagine the level of justifiable outrage had your predecessor asked Americans to forward e-mails critical of his policies to the White House."
The original blog post at Whitehouse.gov was titled "Facts Are Stubborn Things," and included a video clip from Communications Director Linda Douglass refuting a Drudge Report headline claiming Obama wanted to "eliminate" private health coverage. Later, the post made the following pitch to readers:
"There's a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from out of control personal finances to end-of-life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain e-mails or through casual conversation. Since we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking for your help. If you get an email or have seen something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."
White House spokesman Adam Abrams denied that the e-mail request had anything to do with creating an enemies list, saying that it was simply a way to keep track of "intentionally misleading" information:
"We want to be sure people have the facts about health insurance reform that will lower costs, protect consumers from insurance regulations that deny them coverage and assure quality and affordable health care for all Americans."
Obama used the reach and viral power of the Internet to help him get elected, and he knows that staying on top of a story in this day and age requires a rapid-response approach on the web. No president has borne the brunt of Internet rumors more than Obama (the birth certificate issue and the rest), but that may simply be a function of increased cultural fluency with the technology. But could the flagging of sites and individual users who oppose health care reform constitute a modern-day enemies list?
Socialized Medicine: The final committee mark-up in the House for the socialized medicine bill finished late Friday evening with the bill passing by a vote of 31-28. Five of the "Blue Dog" Democrats (Gordon, Hill, Harman, Ross, and Space) who had previously opposed the bill, voted in favor of it, with the announcement of some minor modifications. Three other "Blue Dogs" (Matheson, Barrow, Melancon) voted ‘No.’ In essence, the bill is the same as it was before. What’s interesting here is that Committee Chairman Henry Waxman called for the vote on the bill when there were still 52 amendments pending that had neither been debated nor voted upon. The Chairman provided a vague promise that those amendments would be heard in September.
So why take a vote on a bill that supposedly isn't done yet? This is pure speculation on my part, but I suspect that those who are pushing this mess (including the President and the Speaker) want to show momentum before the August recess. That’s to be expected, but the Republicans in Congress and the majority of Americans, who oppose this increase in taxes, costs, deficit, debt, and the incumbent reduction in the quality of care and competency of caregivers, will not be silent during these next 5 weeks either. I intend to tell the truth about this government-run healthcare plan every chance I get in every medium.
In all practicality, I believe that there will be a healthcare reform bill passed at some point this Congress, and It will likely be directionally opposite from where I think we ought to go. We should be moving further away from the government run systems we have now, and instead be moving toward a true open market where everyone buys the plan they want. Those who cannot afford it are subsidized, and pre-existing conditions are handled through a high-risk pool. The best we can probably hope for in this Pelosi-led Congress, is legislation that will not completely destroy private medicine in this country. With this Congress and this President, this is the new standard for the definition of winning.
Here is an article I wrote for last Sunday's Washington Times which explores some of the deeper consequences of the push for socialized medicine. I hope you enjoy it.
Cost-benefit analysis vs. American citizens' lives Sunday August 2, 2009 By Rep. John Campbell
Click here to go to WashingtonTimes.com Prior to the founding of the United States, political theorist and philosopher John Locke developed the theory that government derives its power and authority from the consent of the governed. Benjamin Franklin once wrote that "in free governments the rulers are the servants and the people their superiors and sovereigns."
These are the principles that are fundamental to the American system and have helped shape the nation we know and love today. Flash forward to the current setting and context. President Obama has made his intent clear on health care: Medical decisions will no longer be made by doctors and patients, but by the omnipotent prowess of the federal government. By proposing creation of a bureaucracy to ration care and determine the cost-effectiveness of care for individuals, he has violated at least one fundamental tenet of America's founding.
The House version of the bill creates fifty-three new departments, agencies and commissions, but one stands out: the ‘National Institute of Comparative Effectiveness.’ Though it may sound benign, this bureaucracy will be used to ration care.
A similar institution exists in Britain, called the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, given the curious acronym of N.I.C.E. Rulings on whether people live or die are made frequently in Britain and Canada, and if an individual has a pre-existing condition, is elderly, or for some reason deemed "unfit" for a lifesaving procedure, his chances of being granted that lifesaving procedure become uncertain. With health care rationing, lives will literally hang in the balance, subject to the whims of government. In fact, it is documented that in countries where socialized medicine is in place, citizens suffer from drastically lower survival rates from ailments such as cancer and heart disease. On balance, survival rates range from around 30 percent to 50 percent below that of countries with private medicine.
This socialized-medicine package is a giant leap in a direction that changes the dynamic of government as a servant to the people, violating the widely acknowledged precept of democratic government, that it derives its power from those which it governs. Mr. Obama and other big-government advocates are now effectively forcing a shift in how the government views those it serves. The American government will begin to view its citizens as liabilities rather than assets.
By definition, a liability is an item to be categorized, managed, and ultimately dispensed with. If government views its citizens through the prism of structured assets and liabilities, a terrible precedent has been set.
I and my Republican colleagues view the American people as assets with the intelligence and power to decide for themselves what is best for them and their families. This is something we are committed to fight for, and we continue to do so.
Our grand republic was founded on the premise that the government derives its power from the "consent of the governed." If Mr. Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have their way and this bill passes, perhaps we should change that to "consent of the governed, unless they represent too high of a liability."
Until next time, I remain respectfully, Congressman John Campbell Member of Congress
The only way to stop socialized medicine which will include loss of control and choice over your health care decisions, rationing, more government control in our lives, and tax increases for less services and worse care is to stand up.
Morris (author of Catastrophe and former advisor to President Clinton) notes that senior citizens will pay the biggest price under the overhaul.
Dick Morris is worried that complacency among citizens could result in a disastrous healthcare overhaul costing Americans for generations to come.
In an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV, Morris was asked if he thinks Democrats will do what Senator Chuck Schumer has alluded to: ram health reform through without any Republican support using a process called “reconciliation.” That requires only a simple majority instead of 60 votes.
“Yeah, I think they’re going to try it. I think there’s no chance that they’ll get 60 votes, there’s no chance of any real Republican support,” Morris said. “They’re going try and jam this thing through, and of course, it will pass the House because they march in lockstep.”
See Video: Dick Morris warns that complacency could destroy America’s healthcare system - Click Here Now
“So it is absolutely crucial for us to be aggressive and active in taking the steps to fight it,” he said.
The key is spreading information about the mammoth healthcare bills, Morris said, and mobilizing the conservative grassroots.
“Newsmax.com has a lot of the information; my website DickMorris.com does as well. We need to run ads in all of the states that swing-state senators live in, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Arkansas, Louisiana, North Carolina, Indiana, Connecticut, whole bunch of those states, and really force those senators to vote as their constituents want.”
“The fact that public opinion is moving against this legislation does not guarantee its defeat, because he (Obama) can still ram this thing through.”
Morris notes that senior citizens will pay the biggest price under the overhaul.
“This healthcare reform proposal really is the repeal of Medicare,” Morris said. “That’s really what it comes down to, because they’re going to provide medical care to 50 million new people without expanding the number of doctors or nurses,” he says.
“You can’t do that; you can’t just write a check for more healthcare, got to have more doctors or more nurses to administer it,” he added. “That means there’s going to be less health care for each person and that will force rationing.”
What will endanger the elderly most, Morris said, is the rationing of heart and hip operations – which comprise the bulk of elder care.
“Rationing involves a decision that is supposedly rational as to who should get care and who doesn’t get it,” Morris explained. “And inevitably that’s going to mean saying no to the elderly, no to people that want hip transplants, no to people that need new knee surgery, or no even to people who have bypass surgery.”
Morris cites the medical care system in Canada as an example of why socialized medicine doesn’t work.
“In Canada, where they have a system like this . . . there is an eight-week wait for cancer radiation: you have cancer, you have to wait eight weeks. There’s an eight month wait for colonoscopies and as a result the incidences of colon cancer in Canada is 25 percent higher than in the United States,” he said. “The top drug we use to treat colon cancer, Avastin, is not permitted in Canada and the result is 41 percent of Canadians who get colon cancer die of it as against only 32 percent in the United States. Sounds horrific, but those are the stakes,” Morris said.
And remember the Dems are set on covering the illegal aliens, meaning a younger illegal will get the treatment before a senior who has paid into the system all their life, if rationing goes into affect.
Since Democrats have enough votes to pass the overhaul without any Republican support, why are they trying to win some GOP votes?
“They’re worried about needing Republican support because they know how unpopular this thing is going to be when it’s adopted and after it’s taken effect, and we’re not just talking about the medical portion, we’re talking about the tax hikes, too,” Morris said. (Probably big tax hikes).
“So they want to be able to say this was a bipartisan bill, don’t blame the Democrats, Republicans put it over the top, too, just like they do with the stimulus package now where they got three Republicans to come on board. But I don’t think the Republicans are going to bite on this one.”
See Video: Dick Morris warns that complacency could destroy America’s healthcare system - Click Here Now
August is THE crucial month! While the Senators and Congressmen are home in their districts, let's give them a barrage of attacks on Obama's proposals to deform our health system! Even as public opinion has turned against the plan, he still has sixty votes in the Senate and an ample margin in the House to pass it. Unless we unleash a FIRESTORM of public outrage, the bill will pass! And your own personal health care will never be the same.
Here's how to fight it:
1. Arm yourself with the facts: Read Chapter 4 in Catastrophe, "Obama's Health Care Catastrophe", which details how Obamacare will destroy American health care and explains what has happened in Canada!
2. Donate Money: The League of American Voters is running an advertisement Dick wrote in the swing states with key Senators. Give them as much as you can to run these ads.
The League of American Voters 4152 West Blue Heron Blvd, Suite 1114 Riviera Beach, FL 33404 FedEx if possible! Time is of the essence. We need to run these ads this month!
3. Email your friends, family and associates: We need a massive outpouring of public opinion. Email your Christmas card list, your colleagues from the office, your friends, and your family. Bring them the facts about health care and Obama's dangerous proposals. Think particularly of anyone you know in the following states
(where the key Senators live):
a. Maine (Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snow) b. New York (Senator Kirsten Gillibrand) c. Virginia (Senator Mark Warner and Jim Webb) d. Indiana (Senator Evan Bayh) e. Ohio (Senator John Voinovich) f. North Carolina (Senator Kay Hagan) g. Florida (Senator Mel Martinez) h. Louisiana (Senator Mary Landrieu) i. Arkansas (Senators Mark Pryor and Blanche Lincoln) j. Nebraska (Senator Ben Nelson) k. South Dakota (Senator Tim Johnson) l. Iowa (Senator Chuck Grassley) m. North Dakota (Senators Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan) n. Montana (Senators Max Baucus and Jon Tester) o. Wyoming (Senator Michael Enzi)
4. Write or call your Senators and Congressman: Then sit down and write (by hand if possible) a letter to each of your Senators and your member of Congress. If you are not sure who your Congressman or Senators are, go to these links to find out: https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
Your Senator or Congressman: US Senate or US House of Representatives, Washington DC 20510 (Senate) or 20515 (House)
Sending a letter by snail mail is much more effective than by email.
They haven't really caught up with the 21st Century in Washington. So buy a real live postage stamp and mail your letters directly. Use the info from Catastrophe in your letter. Explain how your personal health care and that of our family will be adversely affected.
Even if your Senator or Congressman is a liberal Democrat or a Republican, write then anyway. It can influence the atmosphere in Washington. Senators and Congressmen talk and the more mail they get, the more public opinion weighs on them all. Even the ultra-liberals.
After President Obama promised last week that he would sit down with any and all Republicans and any other Congresspeople and Senators that wanted to and review the Healthcare Bill line by line, Robert Gibbs said today that President Obama would not read the Healthcare Bill.
Let us hope that he will have to read it multiple times as congressional leaders to to the White House and hold Obama to his word that her would review any of the present bills and final bills with them!!
It is a disgrace and an insult to the American People that anyone would pass sign bills like Cap and Tax, Healthcare Reform and multi billion and trillion dollar Stimulus and Budget Bills without reading them!!!!
thecommunists, I remained silent; I was not a communist.
Then they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat.
Then they came for the trade unionists, I did not protest; I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics, I did not protest; I was a Protestant.
Then they came for the Jews, I did not speak out; I was not a Jew.
When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.
Election 2014 - What Is Really At Stake
Help Stop Voter Fraud!! Stand for the Constitution and God
Time to remember that: "We Surround Them", not the other way!
Stand Up Against Voter Fraud... Demand Re-Counts and Verification Until It is Right!! A Little Ink Goes a Long Way Toward Honesty... 1 Person 1 Vote... No More Mickey Mouse or Dead People Voting
"The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about IT! --Albert Einstein
Call Congress Today and Tell Them To Vote Against Cap and Trade
The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those who in a period of moral crisis, maintain their neutrality -- Dante Alighieri / Often Quoted by Mark Twain
Thanks for calling the Congressional switchboard. Keep up the pressure: "NO on Cap and Trade"!!! "NO Vote on Obamacare", NO on another Stimulus Bill, NO to the never ending parade of "Power Grab Bills", and ABSOLUTELY NO on the Climate Change Treaty in Copenhagen!!
"No" on Cap and Trade and "No" on Government Controlled Healthcare!!! And Keep up the good fight! Keep up the Pressure on both the House and Senate! These are 2-fights the American People cannot afford to lose!!!
If you choose not to go this route… call and fax your Senator and as many of them on the list yourself, but don’t sit idly by!!
United States Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121
We apologize in advance for any Videos or links that are not functioning in these or other older posts. Internet information... like 'true' history in our student's textbooks are under constant attack by the Progressive Movement and even more so under the present administration. Try to save what you can to your own computer.
"...there comes a time, ladies and gentlemen, when ideology can cause death. I am so tired, so tired, of zealots, primarily on the left, putting their insane personal agendas above the safety of fellow Americans. Do you think the brave soldiers and Marines operating in dangerous areas right now want [unreleased photos of alleged abuse of prisoners] all over al-Jazeera and the terror websites? So let's look out for the military, OK? Nancy Pelosi has an obligation to get the loons in her party under control. If the Speaker can't do that, she doesn't deserve her position." ... Bill O'Reilly
Updated:If you'd like to contact Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, here's the contact information that you'll need.
.png)
Click here to read the DHS extremism report.
