Sarah Palin forces Obama bow down to her in full view of World; Forces Drop of ObamaCare Death Panels from the Legislation

Sarah Palin Throws Down the Gauntlet

Sarah Palin Dominates Obama; Forces Dropping of Obama Death Panels from ObamaCare

Sarah Palin addressed the ObamaCare Death Panels in two articles she wrote. In the first article she characterized the ObamaCare inclusion of Government Mandated (required) Death Panels as “EVIL.”

Sarah Palin’s second article Debunked Obama & Co’s Claim that Death Panels were not part of the ObamaCare bill; IT WAS PART OF THE LEGISLATION and Barack Obama had been lying to Voters saying there was no such thing.

obama socialism jokerWithin 24 hours of Sarah Palin’s second Article proving the factual existence of ObamaCare Death Panels for senior citizens, Obama & Co was forced to strike their Socialist Death Panels from the ObamaCare Bill.The Socialists realized they would not get away with lying about it any longer.

WAY TO GO SARAH!!!
KEEP KICKING SOCIALIST BUTT!!!

(For Reference, I included, at the end of this post, Sarah’s Death Panel Rebuttal of August 12, 2009 to Obama on her website which forced Obama to bow down to her and drop Death Panels from ObamaCare.)

Now that the Socialists have been forced by Sarah to eliminate their DEATH PANELS from ObamaCare, they will have to go silent on such crap as they spew in the below video:

Having Reset the ASSHAT Socialists on inclusion of their Government Death Panels, Sarah Palin now moves on to Target ObamaCare Rationing of Health Care for the American Public… and make no mistake folks, rationing is death dealing to all who need timely medical attention to prevent their deaths.

ObamaCare Rationing Will Send You to an Early Grave

ObamaCare's Services Rationing Will Send You to an Early Grave

An excerpt from Sarah Palin’s statement and charge against the Socialist’s ObamaCare legslation:

The rationing system proposed by one of President Obama’s key health care advisors is particularly disturbing. I’m speaking of the “Complete Lives System” advocated by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the president’s chief of staff. President Obama has not yet stated any opposition to the “Complete Lives System,” a system which, if enacted, would refuse to allocate medical resources to the elderly, the infirm, and the disabled who have less economic potential.

As Sarah states… there is not enough money to pay for all people to have health care without rationing health care services. That rationing puts the Socialists in the position of deciding which American lives and which American dies.

Sarah Palin Statement today, August 14, 2009…

Troubling Questions Remain About Obama’s Health Care Plan

Sarah Palin’s Notes

Troubling Questions Remain About Obama’s Health Care Plan
August 14, 2009 1:11am

I join millions of Americans in expressing appreciation for the Senate Finance Committee’s decision to remove the provision in the pending health care bill that authorizes end-of-life consultations (Section 1233 of HR 3200). It’s gratifying that the voice of the people is getting through to Congress; however, that provision was not the only disturbing detail in this legislation; it was just one of the more obvious ones.

As I noted in my statement last week, nationalized health care inevitably leads to rationing. There is simply no way to cover everyone and hold down the costs at the same time. The rationing system proposed by one of President Obama’s key health care advisors is particularly disturbing. I’m speaking of the “Complete Lives System” advocated by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the president’s chief of staff. President Obama has not yet stated any opposition to the “Complete Lives System,” a system which, if enacted, would refuse to allocate medical resources to the elderly, the infirm, and the disabled who have less economic potential. [1] Why the silence from the president on this aspect of his nationalization of health care? Does he agree with the “Complete Lives System”? If not, then why is Dr. Emanuel his policy advisor? What is he advising the president on? I just learned that Dr. Emanuel is now distancing himself from his own work and claiming that his “thinking has evolved” on the question of rationing care to benefit the strong and deny the weak. [2] How convenient that he disavowed his own work only after the nature of his scholarship was revealed to the public at large.

The president is busy assuring us that we can keep our private insurance plans, but common sense (and basic economics) tells us otherwise. The public option in the Democratic health care plan will crowd out private insurers, and that’s what it’s intended to do. A single payer health care plan has been President Obama’s agenda all along, though he is now claiming otherwise. Don’t take my word for it. Here’s what he said back in 2003:

“I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care plan…. A single payer health care plan – universal health care plan – that’s what I would like to see.” [3]

A single-payer health care plan might be what Obama would like to see, but is it what the rest of us would like to see? What does a single payer health care plan look like? We need look no further than other countries who have adopted such a plan. The picture isn’t pretty. [4] The only way they can control costs is to ration care. As I noted in my earlier statement quoting Thomas Sowell, government run health care won’t reduce the price of medical care; it will simply refuse to pay the price. The expensive innovative procedures that people from all over the world come to the United States for will not be available under a government plan that seeks to cover everyone by capping costs.

Our senior citizens are right to be wary of this health care bill. Medical care at the end of life accounts for 80 percent of all health care. When care is rationed, that is naturally where the cuts will be felt first. The “end-of-life” consultations authorized in Section 1233 of HR 3200 were an obvious and heavy handed attempt at pressuring people to reduce the financial burden on the system by minimizing their own care. Worst still, it actually provided a financial incentive to doctors to initiate these consultations. People are right to point out that such a provision doesn’t sound “purely voluntary.”

In an article I noted yesterday, Charles Lane wrote:

“Ideally, the delicate decisions about how to manage life’s end would be made in a setting that is neutral in both appearance and fact. Yes, it’s good to have a doctor’s perspective. But Section 1233 goes beyond facilitating doctor input to preferring it. Indeed, the measure would have an interested party — the government — recruit doctors to sell the elderly on living wills, hospice care and their associated providers, professions and organizations. You don’t have to be a right-wing wacko to question that approach.” [5]

I agree. Last year, I issued a proclamation for “Healthcare Decisions Day.” [6] The proclamation sought to increase the public’s knowledge about creating living wills and establishing powers of attorney. There was no incentive to choose one option over another. There was certainly no financial incentive for physicians to push anything. In fact, the proclamation explicitly called on medical professionals and lawyers “to volunteer their time and efforts” to provide information to the public.

Comparing the “Healthcare Decisions Day” proclamation to Section 1233 of HR 3200 is ridiculous. The two are like apples and oranges. The attempt to link the two shows how desperate the proponents of nationalized health care are to shift the debate away from the disturbing details of their bill.

There is one aspect of this bill which I have not addressed yet, but it’s a very obvious one. It’s the simple fact that we can’t afford it. But don’t take my word for it. Take the word of Doug Elmendorf, the director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. He told the Senate Budget Committee last month:

“In the legislation that has been reported we do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount. And on the contrary, the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs.” [7]

Dr. Elmendorf went on to note that this health care legislation would increase spending at an unsustainable rate.

Our nation is already $11.5 trillion in debt. Where will the money come from? Taxes, of course. And will a burdensome new tax help our economy recover? Of course not. The best way to encourage more health care coverage is to foster a strong economy where people can afford to purchase their own coverage if they choose to do so. The current administration’s economic policies have done nothing to help in this regard.

Health care is without a doubt a complex and contentious issue, but health care reform should be a market oriented solution. There are many ways we can reform the system and lower costs without nationalizing it.

The economist Arthur Laffer has taken the lead in pushing for a patient-center health care reform policy. He noted in a Wall Street Journal article earlier this month:

“A patient-centered health-care reform begins with individual ownership of insurance policies and leverages Health Savings Accounts, a low-premium, high-deductible alternative to traditional insurance that includes a tax-advantaged savings account. It allows people to purchase insurance policies across state lines and reduces the number of mandated benefits insurers are required to cover. It reallocates the majority of Medicaid spending into a simple voucher for low-income individuals to purchase their own insurance. And it reduces the cost of medical procedures by reforming tort liability laws.” [8]

Those are real reforms that we can live with and afford. Once again, I warn my fellow Americans that if we go down the path of nationalized health care, there will be no turning back. We must stop and think or we may find ourselves losing even more of our freedoms.

– Sarah Palin

[1] See http://www.scribd.com/doc/18280675/Principles-for-Allocation-of-Scarce-Medical-Interventions
[2] See http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/aug/14/white-house-adviser-backs-off-rationing/
[3]See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hsqzSKuC44
[4] See http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2M0ODk0OTNkZjkwNGM4OGMyYTEwYWY3ODUzMzFiOTc=
[5] See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/07/AR2009080703043.html
[6] See http://www.gov.state.ak.us/archive.php?id=1094&type=6
[7] See http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/07/cbo-sees-no-federal-cost-savings-in-dem-health-plans.html
[8] See
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574324361508092006.html

___________________________________________________________

Concerning the “Death Panels”
August 12, 2009 11:55pm

Yesterday President Obama responded to my statement that Democratic health care proposals would lead to rationed care; that the sick, the elderly, and the disabled would suffer the most under such rationing; and that under such a system these “unproductive” members of society could face the prospect of government bureaucrats determining whether they deserve health care.

The President made light of these concerns. He said:

“Let me just be specific about some things that I’ve been hearing lately that we just need to dispose of here. The rumor that’s been circulating a lot lately is this idea that somehow the House of Representatives voted for death panels that will basically pull the plug on grandma because we’ve decided that we don’t, it’s too expensive to let her live anymore….It turns out that I guess this arose out of a provision in one of the House bills that allowed Medicare to reimburse people for consultations about end-of-life care, setting up living wills, the availability of hospice, etc. So the intention of the members of Congress was to give people more information so that they could handle issues of end-of-life care when they’re ready on their own terms. It wasn’t forcing anybody to do anything.” [1]

The provision that President Obama refers to is Section 1233 of HR 3200, entitled “Advance Care Planning Consultation.” [2] With all due respect, it’s misleading for the President to describe this section as an entirely voluntary provision that simply increases the information offered to Medicare recipients. The issue is the context in which that information is provided and the coercive effect these consultations will have in that context.

Section 1233 authorizes advanced care planning consultations for senior citizens on Medicare every five years, and more often “if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual … or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility… or a hospice program.” [3] During those consultations, practitioners must explain “the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice,” and the government benefits available to pay for such services. [4]

Now put this in context. These consultations are authorized whenever a Medicare recipient’s health changes significantly or when they enter a nursing home, and they are part of a bill whose stated purpose is “to reduce the growth in health care spending.” [5] Is it any wonder that senior citizens might view such consultations as attempts to convince them to help reduce health care costs by accepting minimal end-of-life care? As Charles Lane notes in the Washington Post, Section 1233 “addresses compassionate goals in disconcerting proximity to fiscal ones…. If it’s all about obviating suffering, emotional or physical, what’s it doing in a measure to “bend the curve” on health-care costs?” [6]

As Lane also points out:

Though not mandatory, as some on the right have claimed, the consultations envisioned in Section 1233 aren’t quite “purely voluntary,” as Rep. Sander M. Levin (D-Mich.) asserts. To me, “purely voluntary” means “not unless the patient requests one.” Section 1233, however, lets doctors initiate the chat and gives them an incentive — money — to do so. Indeed, that’s an incentive to insist.

Patients may refuse without penalty, but many will bow to white-coated authority. Once they’re in the meeting, the bill does permit “formulation” of a plug-pulling order right then and there. So when Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) denies that Section 1233 would “place senior citizens in situations where they feel pressured to sign end-of-life directives that they would not otherwise sign,” I don’t think he’s being realistic. [7]

Even columnist Eugene Robinson, a self-described “true believer” who “will almost certainly support” “whatever reform package finally emerges”, agrees that “If the government says it has to control health-care costs and then offers to pay doctors to give advice about hospice care, citizens are not delusional to conclude that the goal is to reduce end-of-life spending.” [8]

So are these usually friendly pundits wrong? Is this all just a “rumor” to be “disposed of”, as President Obama says? Not according to Democratic New York State Senator Ruben Diaz, Chairman of the New York State Senate Aging Committee, who writes:

Section 1233 of House Resolution 3200 puts our senior citizens on a slippery slope and may diminish respect for the inherent dignity of each of their lives…. It is egregious to consider that any senior citizen … should be placed in a situation where he or she would feel pressured to save the government money by dying a little sooner than he or she otherwise would, be required to be counseled about the supposed benefits of killing oneself, or be encouraged to sign any end of life directives that they would not otherwise sign. [9]

Of course, it’s not just this one provision that presents a problem. My original comments concerned statements made by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor to President Obama and the brother of the President’s chief of staff. Dr. Emanuel has written that some medical services should not be guaranteed to those “who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens….An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia.” [10] Dr. Emanuel has also advocated basing medical decisions on a system which “produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.” [11]

President Obama can try to gloss over the effects of government authorized end-of-life consultations, but the views of one of his top health care advisors are clear enough. It’s all just more evidence that the Democratic legislative proposals will lead to health care rationing, and more evidence that the top-down plans of government bureaucrats will never result in real health care reform.

– Sarah Palin

[1] See http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/08/president-obama-addresses-sarah-palin-death-panels-wild-representations.html.
[2] See http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
[3] See HR 3200 sec. 1233 (hhh)(1); Sec. 1233 (hhh)(3)(B)(1), above.
[4] See HR 3200 sec. 1233 (hhh)(1)(E), above.
[5] See http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
[6] See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/07/AR2009080703043.html].
[7] Id.
[8] See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/10/AR2009081002455.html].
[9] See http://www.nysenate.gov/press-release/letter-congressman-henry-waxman-re-section-1233-hr-3200.
[10] See http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/Where_Civic_Republicanism_and_Deliberative_Democracy_Meet.pdf
[11] See http://www.scribd.com/doc/18280675/Principles-for-Allocation-of-Scarce-Medical-Interventions.

Related reading:

SamHenry: WHERE ARE INDEPENDENT VOTERS THESE DAYS?
LisainTx’s Blog:
Born to be Free and Fascism Straight Up! and White In America: Affirmative Action advocates Discrimination
OhioBelle:
When The Giant Wakes; The Revolution Begins.. and THE FACE OF SOCIALISM
ArleneArmy: Obama’s Jackbooted Thugs Beat Down on Black Patriot

Michelle Malkin:
Hey, go flag yourself! and Rolling out the welcome mat for Obama in Colorado and Montana and Hey, Rep. Betsy Markey: You’re invited to a town hall meeting you refuse to hold! Updated and The Etiquette Czar’s Rules for Patriotic Protest and The Obamacare horror story you won’t hear and  Mr. Postman – The Obamacare Remix and What’s the SEIU up to now?; Another Democrat calls Obamacare protesters “political terrorists” and Oh, Sheila and Democrats now taking refuge at SEIU offices and Little girl at Obama town hall has not-so-random political connections and Encounters with “the mob” and Forget Brown Shirts. Beware the Purple Shirts and A doctor takes issue with the Washington Post and Um, who’s bought and pay for by the drug lobby? and “Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.” and Rep. Tsongas tries to explain why Congress is exempt from Obamacare. Fails.
Chicago Ray Report: Tsongas health care forum attracts overflow crowds (Right Wing Mob, lol)
Right Voices: Specter: “I could be somewhere else. I don’t get any extra pay — I don’t have any requirement to be here.”
Greg Gutfeld, Big Hollywood: Daily Gut: Townhalls vs. Twitter and Daily Gut: Plants
Legal Insurrection: Now The Left Doesn’t Know Obama
Nice Deb: How Obama Is Pitting Americans Against Each Other
Ztower: Defending The Party Line – Here Comes The Sun – UPDATE
Pirates! Man Your Women: Note the Concern of Your Rulers
DaTechguy’s Blog: Obama doesn’t dare hit SEIU too hard; they know things
Fire Andrea Mitchell!: Sheila Jackson Lee (Democrat – Texas) shows where her priorities are – her CELLPHONE and Exposed: The little “mean signs girl” Julia Hall from today’s New Hampshire Townhall
Pronk Palisades: The American People Confront The Red Shirts (ACORN) and Purple Shirts (SEIU) Bullhorns and Beatings Over Obama Care!
Daily Uprising: In Defense of Mobsters: Why Shouting At Town Halls Doesn’t Bother Us As Much As It Does Pelosi/Hoyer/Gibbs
The Clampdown: Sheila, Take A Bow
Hot Air: Tsongas: I won’t take ObamaCare because I have better options
PUMABydesign001’s Blog: Paranoid Democratic Politicians Turning on the People; Refusing Accountability
Below The Beltway: ObamaCare Continues To Lose Support
Pronk Palisades: The American People Confront The Red Shirts (ACORN) and Purple Shirts (SEIU) Bullhorns and Beatings Over Obama Care!
Stop The ACLU: LA Times Misses The Irony In Labeling ObamaNuts “Grassroots”
Atlas Shrugs: Tampa, St. Louis …Obama’s Union Thugs are Beating People up at Town Hall Meetings
The Angry White Guy: Obama Propaganda Hall Meeting
Frugal Café Blog Zone: World Net Daily Asks, “Why is National Guard Recruiting for ‘Internment’ Cops?” and Say “No” to ObamaCare: Protests Growing Against ObamaCare… More Town Hall Meeting and Tea Party Protests and “Town Hall” or “Town Hell”? Congressman Mike Pence & John Boehner Respond to Pelosi’s Insults Against Americans Exercising Free Speech about ObamaCare (video) and Pelosi Calls Protesters “Astro-turf” & Sen. Barbara “Don’t Call Me Ma’am” Boxer Says ObamaCare Town Hall Protesters Are “Too Well-Dressed” So Must Be Fake (video)
Protein Wisdom: Who is ‘un-American’?
Ace of Spades HQ: The Chicago Way: Obama Reaches Not-So-Secret Deal to Not Push Down Pharmaceutical Prices Any Further; In Exchange, BigPharma Will Spend Up to $150 Million in Ads to Push ObamaCare
The Barton Bulletin: Could There Be A Peasant Uprising Afoot?
Burt Prelutsky: ObamaCare is Really ObamaDoesn’tCare — So Vote For Gracie
VotingFemale Speaks!: Obama-Pelosi Declare WAR; Demonizing Health Industry; Warning, Socialist Demons At Work
Lighthouse Patriot Journal: Govt Watch: “Change” For the Worse and No Marked Change in Politics as Usual
Hot Air: Video: Democrat screams at constituent for asking tough question on health care
Steven Crowder, Big Hollywood: Getting Torn Apart by an Angry, Un-American Mob! and Lonewolf Diaries: It’s Time to Flip the Bird to Tyranny–Flag Yourself!
Quipster: Georgia Democratic Congressman Blows His Top At Constituent
Tarpon’s Swamp: Meltdown: Democratic Congressman David Scott of Georgia Goes Berserk at Town Hall
Jim Blazsik: Daniel Hannan and the looming disaster of ObamaCare
Generic Rant – NOT usually Politically Correct!: Union Thugs attempting to shut down protesters
Sister Toldjah: Pelosi and Hoyer to ObamaCare opponents: You are “Un-American”
Neoavatar: Americans Will Not Stop Protesting…
Gateway Pundit: Shocker! Little Girl Who Asked Obama Question at New Hampshire Town Hall Was a Plant
Temple of Mut: WE ARE NOT THE STAGERS! Leftist Activists try create faux imagery to squash our dissent.
JustOneMinute: Because Children Are Useful Props Except When You Don’t Want Them To Be

More Related Articles

Advertisements

About VotingFemale

I am a female voter, as my blog name implies. I vote for conservatives. I am a political opponent of Leftists, Progressives, Socialists, Marxists, and Communists.
This entry was posted in American Socialism, ObamaCare, ObamaCare Protests, Sarah Palin and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

277 Responses to Sarah Palin forces Obama bow down to her in full view of World; Forces Drop of ObamaCare Death Panels from the Legislation

  1. Karen Northon says:

    I commend you for keeping us updated on Sarah Palin, as she IS the future of the conservative movement. Added you to my blogroll with hopes that more like-minded politicos will keep up on all things SP.

  2. VotingFemale says:

    Thank you for your comment Karen. Sarah is kicking serious Socialist butt… and it needs to be done.

    What is the link to your blog, dear? I can add it to my blog roll.

    Author : Karen Northon

    I commend you for keeping us updated on Sarah Palin, as she IS the future of the conservative movement. Added you to my blogroll with hopes that more like-minded politicos will keep up on all things SP.

  3. samiam60 says:

    Sarah Palin is far and away the new Champion for the Conservative Movement in America. Her voice has put in check the advancement of the Socialist movement and put Obama and Thugs on Notice.

  4. Foxwood says:

    Glenn Beck says on his radio show today to tell your Reps and Senators to NOT let this bill pass in any form. I agree. It is not in the Constitution. The role of Congress is enumerated. They are to only pass laws set forth by the Constitution. Healthcare is not in the Constitution.

  5. VotingFemale says:

    Good Morning Lisa! you conservative terrorist ObamaCare hater and birther! lol

    We conservative bitches need to stick together! 😉

  6. LisaInTX says:

    Oops…sorry VF…I just realized we were on a new report….LOL…..
    Palin ROCKS!!! I’m so glad she is standing up to the Anti-Americans!!!

  7. LisaInTX says:

    Right on girlfriend!!!! LMAO…..
    Being a southern trailer trash racist slut has its moments!! Hahahahaaa…..

  8. LisaInTX says:

    Shall I play Dixie again??? hahahahaaaa

  9. samiam60 says:

    President Obama, go back to Kenya where you belong!

  10. LisaInTX says:

    Oh and white malcontent, terrorist right-wing nut extremist…..I love be compared to our founding fathers!!! Gives me a trickle up thrill thru my whole body—not just my leg……why it’s almost orgasmic….;-p

  11. VotingFemale says:

    wooo HOOO!!! You Paul Revere-ette!!!!

  12. LisaInTX says:

    sami
    Yes, send all the Anti-Americans to Kenya or Chavez/Castro….so they can be truly happy.

  13. VotingFemale says:

    The Socialists are on the RUN

  14. LisaInTX says:

    LOL….Yeah, the Anti-americans are coming!!! Time to sharpen our wits to defeat their mental ill rabidness, aka Liberal Progressiveness. 😛

  15. samiam60 says:

    There are now a high percentage of College Grads going to China to find work. We get to keep the Shovel Ready Jobs though. lol

  16. LisaInTX says:

    Kick butt video!!!

  17. samiam60 says:

    I would love to see a Palin/Limbaugh ticket.

  18. VotingFemale says:

    SHE SURE DID! YAAAAA-HOOOO!!!!

    datechguy says

    She is leading these guys by the nose. She did it again today.

    And remember every time she hits the administration on healthcare, she grazes the Romney 2012 campaign, that is why he is so quiet.

  19. VotingFemale says:

    I just added it to the body of this blog post 😉

    LisaInTX says

    Kick butt video!!!

  20. VotingFemale says:

    You noticed that too, hun?

    samiam60 says

    There are now a high percentage of College Grads going to China to find work. We get to keep the Shovel Ready Jobs though. lol

  21. VotingFemale says:

    Glen scares the holy crap out of Obama and the rest of the bottom feeding Socialists…

    Foxwood says

    Glenn Beck says on his radio show today to tell your Reps and Senators to NOT let this bill pass in any form. I agree. It is not in the Constitution. The role of Congress is enumerated. They are to only pass laws set forth by the Constitution. Healthcare is not in the Constitution.

  22. samiam60 says:

    America needs its first Female President more now than ever before.

  23. VotingFemale says:

    I agree… but a lot of women dont want a female president…it is called Reverse Sexism… women against women.

    samiam60 says

    America needs its first Female President more now than ever before.

  24. Foxwood says:

    That is my favorite version of America The Beautiful.

  25. samiam60 says:

    Hail to the Chief may soon be replaced with a new song:

  26. VotingFemale says:

    Hey johnrj08?

    Blow it out your ASS, DUDE!!!!

    Who the hell are you to preach your Socialist BS to real Americans?

    Bite Me, Dude!

    hahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  27. VotingFemale says:

    And Yeah… I moderated your Socialist Bull Crap Comment…

    Go peddle it to Socialist Sheep! They love Socialist Crap! 😉

  28. Foxwood says:

    LOL Sami, I do like Ray.

  29. Foxwood says:

    It’s not a matter of Race or Sex. It’s a matter of the right person for the job. I think Sarah can handle it.

  30. samiam60 says:

    Sarah has far more experience than Obama ever did. We are now seeing the proof of that in America.

  31. VotingFemale says:

    Hank Williams!!! YOU GO DUDE!

    DOWN WITH SOCIALISM!

    DOWN WITH OBAMA!

    BRING SARAH PALIN!

    WE ARE READY!!!!

  32. Foxwood says:

    John,

    Socialist shit comes from the socialist crap they serve up in public school and college. We don’t eat socialist CRAP here. We believe in the Constitution. Move to a Commie country like Cuba or Venezuela if you like socialism so much.

  33. samiam60 says:

    I had to watch painfully as my Children came home from school with all the Socialist Crap that was being crammed down their throats. Trying to speak up against this at their schools was an effort in futility. Thank God I was able to raise my Children in a God Fearing Christian Church. At least I was able to give my Children a choice in what They Would Decide to Believe.

  34. rosehips says:

    Well, everything I have read disputes the “death panel” scenario. What socialist countries employ such a thing?

    Palin discredits herself when she spreads misinformation. She may get plenty of pats on the back from her loyal followers, but her claims are pure speculation. Rationed health care? I would argue that it’s already rationed. When health care is cost prohibitive for many Americans, I consider that a form of rationing.

    End of life consultations make sense. We all should talk seriously with our families and loved ones about end of life care and having the advice of a professional can be extremely helpful. According to the WSJ, 5% of Medicare beneficiaries die each year but we spend 27% of Medicare funds on the last year of life care. Wow. In the whole scheme of our lives, is this last year worth the cost to society? Is it worth going further into debt to keep us hooked up to machines in a hospital? I sure don’t want to go like that.

    I just got a phone call from a friend while I was writing this. His mom was just transferred to ICU and has been put on experimental drugs that have excelerated her heart beat. She is 73 and has methotheilioma. She may die soon in the hospital, or she may hang on for months. She may need to be put in a nursing home which will deplete all her savings. People are faced with this every day. It’s so sad and there really is no solution that will satisfy everyone. I certainly wouldn’t want to be the one to decide that she shouldn’t be given life extending procedures but I don’t think the quality of her life will be very good either. It’s a very difficult issue. Makes me sad.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125012322203627701.html

  35. LisaInTX says:

    Not sure who John the socialist is, but the “White malcontent racist” from the south, say KISS MY FLAG!!

  36. karmahd says:

    Off topic but pertaninent, ACORN was one of the primary factors in “opening” up the mortgage market to people who “could not afford” to own a home, now they are protesting the very same companies they harassed to offer such programs to modify the sour loans to keep the individuals who misused the program in the first place in an effort to browbeat them into letting the non-performing individuals stay in there homes!

    http://www.housingwire.com/2009/08/14/acorn-targets-hamp-noncompliance/

  37. LisaInTX says:

    I gotta run and terrorize our local stores—lol—aka, shopping, you know spend some money and support our communities….hahahaaa

  38. samiam60 says:

    Rosehips, God I just love ya but I am afraid you just Don’t Get It.

  39. rosehips says:

    And sorry but Sarah Palin has little chance of being the republican nominee for President. It ain’t gonna happen. She may be good at inspiring and inciting, but running the country? I don’t think so.

    The problem is that it is easy to find candidates who are not capable of the job but next to impossible to find someone who can run this country. I think all candidates need “end of world” consultations. That is what we will be facing in the not too distant future.

    Is there a human alive who can give us all hope?

  40. tellitlikeitis says:

    Good Morning all. I thought there was no death panel. If there is no death panel than why would they be dropping the end of life provision from the bill.
    Senators exclude end-of-life provision from bill

    WASHINGTON – Key senators are excluding a provision on end-of-life care from health overhaul legislation after language in a House bill caused a furor.

    Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said in a statement Thursday that the provision had been dropped from consideration because it could be misinterpreted or implemented incorrectly.

    A health care bill passed by three House committees allows Medicare to reimburse doctors for voluntary counseling sessions about end-of-life decisions. But critics have claimed the provision could lead to death panels and euthanasia for seniors.

    The Senate Finance Committee is still working to complete a bill.

    WASHINGTON (AP) — For more than a decade in Congress, Oregon Rep. Earl Blumenauer has been known for his ever-present bow-tie and tireless advocacy of bikes.

    So it is something of a surprise to the Portland Democrat that he has earned a new measure of fame in recent days — as author of a health-care provision that some critics say would set up a “death panel.”

    In a widely quoted Facebook posting, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin charged that federal bureaucrats would play God, ruling on whether ailing seniors or children with Down syndrome — such as Palin’s son Trig — are worthy of health care. Palin called the proposal “downright evil.”

    Many news organizations — including The Associated Press — debunked Palin’s claim. The provision that caused the uproar would authorize Medicare to pay doctors for voluntary counseling about end-of-life care.

    But Blumenauer says he is astounded that Palin and other critics have not tempered their bleak descriptions of the health care bill.

    “It’s deliberate at this point,” Blumenauer said of Palin’s failure to correct her Aug. 7 Facebook posting. “If she wasn’t deliberately lying at the beginning, she is deliberately allowing a terrible falsehood to be spread with her name.”

    Blumenauer singled out another prominent Republican, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, saying he has “linked arms with Sarah Palin and death panels.” While Gingrich has not used the term death panel, he has declined several opportunities to denounce Palin’s claim.

    “You are asking us to trust turning power over to the government, when there are clearly people in America who believe in establishing euthanasia, including selective standards,” Gingrich said Sunday on the ABC’s “This Week.”

    Blumenauer called the comments despicable and part of an orchestrated effort by Republicans to discredit the health care overhaul and scare seniors.

    In nearly four decades of public life, “this is the starkest example I’ve ever seen of how, if we’re not careful, political discourse dissolves into some type of partisan cage-fighting, where there are no rules and anything goes,” said Blumenauer, 60.

    Palin did not respond to requests for comment. But in a Facebook posting late Wednesday night, Palin defended her original claim, which President Barack Obama and other Democrats have criticized.

    “With all due respect, it’s misleading for the president to describe this section as an entirely voluntary provision that simply increases the information offered to Medicare recipients,” she said, noting that the provision authorizes consultations whenever a Medicare recipient’s health changes significantly or when they enter a nursing home.

    Since the bill’s intent is to reduce overall health care costs, it’s logical to assume that care for seniors may be curtailed, Palin said.

    “It’s all just more evidence that the Democratic legislative proposals will lead to health care rationing, and more evidence that the top-down plans of government bureaucrats will never result in real health care reform,” she wrote.

    Rick Tyler, a spokesman for Gingrich, said Blumenauer was following a Democratic tactic of linking all Republicans to Palin.

    “Obviously Newt didn’t embrace her euphemism of death panels. But he said to the larger point, there is a concern that people have about allowing government to be involved in these decisions,” Tyler said. “She’s raising a point we should discuss.”

    Blumenauer said the measure he supports would merely allow Medicare to pay doctors for voluntary counseling sessions that address end-of-life issues. Topics include living wills, designating a close relative or a trusted friend as a health care proxy and information about pain medications for chronic discomfort.

    The measure would block funds for counseling that presents suicide or assisted suicide as an option, Blumenauer said, calling references to death panels or euthanasia “mind-numbing.”

    “It’s a blatant lie, and everybody who has checked it agrees,” he said.

    Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski said this week that Palin and other critics were not helping the GOP by throwing out false claims.

    “Quite honestly, I’m so offended at that terminology, because it absolutely isn’t” in the bill, Murkowski said. “There is no reason to gin up fear in the American public by saying things that are not included in the bill.”

    Georgia Sen. Johnny Isakson, a Republican who co-sponsored a similar measure in the Senate, said it was “nuts” to claim the bill encourages euthanasia.

    “You’re putting the authority in the individual rather than the government,” Isakson said. “I don’t know how that got so mixed up.”

    Blumenauer said the controversy was helping Democrats in a “perverse way.”

    By continuing to spread a widely refuted claim, Republican critics are undercutting their own credibility, he said. The controversy has drawn more attention to the original proposal, which passed largely unnoticed when a health overhaul was approved by three House committees.

    “This has taken on an outsized significance and so more people are paying attention to it than ever before,” Blumenauer said. “I think you will see more people use this to say, ‘What will happen to me if I am in an accident? Here’s what I want.’ More people are going to take matters into their own hands.”

  41. rosehips says:

    thanks for the love sami. I know, I don’t get it at all…

  42. samiam60 says:

    Rosehips I think it futile that you and I should debate these issues.
    While you were out Protesting the Vietnam War I was out Fighting it. It was my A$$ out there on the line not yours.

  43. VotingFemale says:

    {{{{{{rosehips}}}}}}

    We all need hippy love!

  44. VotingFemale says:

    Samiam, as Foxwood has pointed out, you were fighting for her right to protest…

    We dont have to agree… but we have a right to our positions and opinions and efforts to disseminate misinformation if we wish! lol

  45. samiam60 says:

    Sorry to be offensive Rose. It is just that I have scares from Nam that run deep into my soul. Unending nightmares that are so very vivid. No offense meant dear.

  46. VotingFemale says:

    I endeavor to disseminate Facts… it drives socialists nutz!

  47. samiam60 says:

    Ok, I’m better now.

  48. rosehips says:

    tellit, if you read the article you posted, you can see that the “death panels” are pure speculation. “Some critics say would set up a ‘death panel’ is a far cry from what the bill provides for. There is no mention of death panels or the government rationing health care. The provision simply allows doctors to be paid for end of life consultations. What is so wrong with that?

    We should all have living wills so our loved ones won’t have to second guess what our wishes are. I don’t want to be kept alive on a machine and I don’t want to burden the gov’t with the expense. I think it’s something that we all should consider. I don’t think it’s a bad thing to get profeesional help when making this important decision. Is it such a bad thing that the result could save our country billions and avoid suffering?

  49. Pingback: Freedom of Speech Attacks Escalate Against Conservative Talk Show Hosts Glenn Beck, Michael Savage « Frugal Café Blog Zone

  50. samiam60 says:

    Well I thought I was better now but then there ya go again Rose. lol

  51. VotingFemale says:

    Rosehips, keep up dear…

    The Death Panels have been stricken from the ObamaCare Bill…

    Sarah Palin saw to that! HAHAHAHAHAHA

    NO DEATH PANELS !!!! BOO SOCIALISTS!!!!

  52. VotingFemale says:

    If the DEATH PANELS WERE ACCEPTABLE TO AMERICANS IT WOULD STILL BE IN THE BILL, eh?

  53. samiam60 says:

    My good friend and neighbor was found to have Prostate Cancer caused by exposure to Agent Orange. This was one year ago. He requested the Veterans Hospital to remove the Cancer and was denied based on Risk and Cost. He now has Colon cancer and the Prostate Cancer and was given 4 weeks to live. Six weeks if he takes the Chemotherapy treatments. He was told that if he refused the Chemotherapy treatment for the reasons of poor quality of life and horrible side effects, that his Veterans coverage would be canceled. That is what Obama’s Healthcare Deform would do to all Americans.

  54. samhenry says:

    VF – I like this post. I have been busy improving upon, correcting and expanding on myown current post, “The Summer of Our Discontent.”

    I call out allowing the uncontrolled town hall sessions as being purposeful to justify blasting Republicans and I take on the legitimacy and or appropriateness (something the administration overlooks at times) of using White House stationery by OFA and the inappropriate use of some lists by the White House.

    http://samandimp.wordpress.com. Most of all, in my opening paragraphs I point to the fact that most overlook, it is just as important what is NOT in the health care bill as what is in it.

  55. rosehips says:

    sending {{{{luv}}}} out to you all!

    sami, You have not offended me. It hurts me deeply that you carry scars from Vietnam. I protest war so that others won’t have to experience what you did.

    I’d like to see all our soldiers come home. I don’t think we are doing much to stop terrorism. It will happen with or without our presense in Afghanistan. The factions in Iraq will battle with each other regardless of our presense. Either way it will be bad. Why not admit it and put the billions we spend on defense here protecting our country from attacks? The money we save could be used to keep our citizens healthy.

    vf said: {{{{{{rosehips}}}}}} We all need hippy love!

  56. tellitlikeitis says:

  57. Foxwood says:

    Rose said:
    “What socialist countries employ such a thing?”

    Rose, When an older person has to wait in line, because of rationing, they may die before you get a heart or kidney transplant.

    The more productive 20 to 40 year old will get first dibs, because they will be productive. Allowing for they are not handy-caped in some way.

    There will be rationing, because we don’t have the money for this deathcare bill. It’s a piece of shit.

    The people on the board who will make the decisions will be called a death panel. Not up front and in front of their faces, but that is what the people will call it.

  58. samhenry says:

    This just put on CNN website.

    SAN DIEGO, California (CNN) — David Iglesias, the former U.S. attorney for New Mexico, is a cautionary tale for young Hispanics who think the road to political power leads through the Republican Party.

    If so, it’s a road with a lot of potholes.

    Iglesias went from the GOP’s golden boy to its whipping boy — all during one administration. When the former Navy lawyer was appointed by President George W. Bush, Iglesias was thought to be a symbol of Republican inclusiveness and someone who might help lure Hispanic voters to the party.

    But by the time Iglesias was fired — in December 2006, along with eight other U.S. attorneys — he had become a symbol of something else: how schizophrenic Republicans are on the issue of Hispanic political participation

    http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/14/navarrette.gop.latino/index.html

  59. rosehips says:

    VF, I am keeping up. The “end of life consultation” has been struck because it was creating so much misinformation and speculation that it threatened the bill itself. There is no “death panel” provision in the bill. Show me where it is and I will retract my claim. I know you won’t be able to because IT DOES NOT EXIST!!!!

    And just to remind everyone, I am not in favor of Obama’s health care plan. I think we need to remove profits from health insurance. It’s the only way it can be made affordable. It won’t create a perfect system, but at least everyone will be able to get coverage without totally bankrupting our country. I think Obama’s bill is just too costly.

    vf said: Rosehips, keep up dear…

    The Death Panels have been stricken from the ObamaCare Bill…

  60. Foxwood says:

    It was only stricken from the Senate version.

  61. Foxwood says:

    Not to mention Healthcare is unconstitutional.

  62. tellitlikeitis says:

  63. VotingFemale says:

    SamH,

    I understand what you are saying… and others such as on fox news are saying the same sorts of things here and there.

    Thing is… what is wrong with loud protestations? The Socialists have been tolerated doing that for decades…

    Since when do we let the F’ing Socialists set the rules of Protest?

    The Socialists can BITE ME!

    Although not all people are going to be rude, neither are all people going to be polite… this is a free country… for the time being.

    SHOUT TO THE ROOF TOPS! YOUR DISSENT AND DISSATISFACTION!

    IF OBAMA DOESNT LIKE IT HE CAN GO SCREW HIMSELF!

    samhenry says

    VF – I like this post. I have been busy improving upon, correcting and expanding on myown current post, “The Summer of Our Discontent.”

    I call out allowing the uncontrolled town hall sessions as being purposeful to justify blasting Republicans and I take on the legitimacy and or appropriateness (something the administration overlooks at times) of using White House stationery by OFA and the inappropriate use of some lists by the White House.

    http://samandimp.wordpress.com. Most of all, in my opening paragraphs I point to the fact that most overlook, it is just as important what is NOT in the health care bill as what is in it.

  64. samiam60 says:

    rose says:

    And just to remind everyone, I am not in favor of Obama’s health care plan. I think we need to remove profits from health insurance. It’s the only way it can be made affordable. It won’t create a perfect system, but at least everyone will be able to get coverage without totally bankrupting our country. I think Obama’s bill is just too costly.

    Ok Rose,

    Then why do you keep defending it?

  65. samhenry says:

    Good for you, FOX. I had thought the end of life stuff had been stricken from all versions of Health Care Reform nonsense. Well, the Senate drop sends a powerful message.

  66. rosehips says:

    fox, this is pure speculation based on not an iota of fact. I have spent a lot of time in Canada and believe me the people that I know are not complaining and have not died waiting for health care. It is pure fear-mongering to say Canadians are dying waiting for treatment. It just isn’t happening like people want you to think. Go to Canada and just ask.

    foxwood said: Rose said:
    “What socialist countries employ such a thing?”

    Rose, When an older person has to wait in line, because of rationing, they may die before you get a heart or kidney transplant.

    The more productive 20 to 40 year old will get first dibs, because they will be productive. Allowing for they are not handy-caped in some way.

    There will be rationing, because we don’t have the money for this deathcare bill. It’s a piece of shit.

    The people on the board who will make the decisions will be called a death panel. Not up front and in front of their faces, but that is what the people will call it.

  67. Foxwood says:

    Profits are what make people invent new drugs, Rose. Do you want innovation? No? The things will never improve.

    To reduce costs, Tort reform has to happen. Greed is good when it comes to invention.

  68. tellitlikeitis says:

  69. VotingFemale says:

    Companies make money… just like individuals… and they pay taxes too.

    There is nothing wrong with companies making a profit… one of the things that needs to be done is open up fair competition between health insurance companies. And right now that is not the case… State Regulations prevents it… and that needs fixing! 😉

    When companies compete, the consumers win.

  70. Foxwood says:

    Nothing to do with speculation Rose. It’s well documented in Canada and in Brittan.

  71. Foxwood says:

    I can find as many fact about the sucky service in Canada. NOT SPECULATION DEAR.

  72. samhenry says:

    Rose we agree. We need to regulate profitability in some way for the Pharma charges as well as those of the insurance industry.

    Equally important, we need to yell and scream until the attorneys in Congress know we are serious about tort reform.

    Am off to lunch with a friend. I am old and have few of them left or left standing or left mobile beyond their phones. For this reason, I accept luncheon and other engagements whether I like the person or not but I am also developing new YOUNG friends so that I will never be able to say “all my friends are dead.” I think I have said this to you. In any event I may be the one gone and the word may be “gee I miss Jean…”

  73. Foxwood says:

    Not to mention, it’s not constitutional.

  74. samhenry says:

    Agreed FOX

    DOG OVERBOARD

    And VF – thanks for your appreciation of my latest ramblings and rantings.

  75. Foxwood says:

    Again, where is innovation when profitability is gone. Not to mention, to regulate profits is also unconstitutional.

  76. VotingFemale says:

    Tellit, it is using the accusation Racist to silence free speech.

    And this has to be addressed.

  77. samhenry says:

    PS I believe in profitability – that is democratic – that is why I say “in some way.” But VF – how to increase competition when all of these companies are merging? My Pharma company has been bought out by Pfizer and I await news on my retirement benes.

    Laters – woof to all my good blog buddies

  78. tellitlikeitis says:

  79. rosehips says:

    sami, I am defending the intention of “end of life consultations.” I am not denying that it can benefit the govenment by saving billions but I don’t think it is right to claim that it will lead to “death panels.” That is pure speculation that has been spun into “fact.” It’s simply not true.

    I am for a single-payer system because I think it is the best and most affordable alternative to our present system. I don’t care if health care is a constitutuional right or not. I don’t like that people are presently forced into bankruptcy while insurance CEO’s are making multiple millions of dollars each year. The CEO of United Health retired with $1.8 billion in stock options. Does anyone else see something wrong with this picture?????

  80. VotingFemale says:

    The Communist News Network complains somebody’s posters! AAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Be Disturbed Socialists!

    We were disturbed by your crap for years!

    So Enjoy!

  81. Foxwood says:

    So our Constitution and founding fathers were wrong Rose?

    In a letter, James Madison wrote to Edmund Pendleton “If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the ‘general welfare’, the government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one… With respect to the two words ‘general welfare’, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”

    In a letter to Albert Gallitin, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.”

  82. Foxwood says:

    In 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who fled from insurrection in San Domingo to Baltimore and Philadelphia, James Madison stood on the floor of the House to object saying, “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

  83. Foxwood says:

    You prefer to shit on the Constitution?

  84. rosehips says:

    anyway, I realize I don’t have the answers. I don’t think anyone does. We will never be able to fix the problem as long as special interests stand to lose if we do. I’m not saying that profits are bad. But what good are they in insurance? I don’t think they have shown any value to our society except to line the pockets of executives with wealth.
    Did anyone actually watch the interview Bill Moyers did with the insurance VP Wendall Potter? It was very insightful. You can see it on youtube.

    I better go. I am just spinning wheels here. Just trying to balance out the commentary.

    Love to all!

  85. tellitlikeitis says:

    It looks like the fix is in.

    Lobbyists Spend Millions to Influence Health Care

    By Dan Eggen
    Drugmakers, hospitals and insurers continued to pour millions of dollars into lobbying during the second quarter of this year, hoping to limit the damage to their bottom line as lawmakers and the Obama administration wrangle over landmark health-care legislation.

    New disclosure reports that began arriving Monday in Congress showed familiar players at the top of the health-care influence heap, including $6.2 million in lobbying by the dominant Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) and $4 million by the American Medical Association.

    Many health companies and associations increased their first-quarter lobbying expenditures, sometimes dramatically. The Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association upped its lobbying expenditures by a full million, to 2.8 million dollars in the second quarter; GlaxoSmithKline’s spending jumped from $1.8 million to $2.3 million; Novartis grew from $1.4 million to $1.8 million; and Metlife Group reported $1.7 million, up nearly 50 percent. Allstate, which spent less than $900,000 on lobbying through March, boosted its spending to more than $1.5 million from April to June.

    Others simply kept up the pace, including Johnson & Johnson at $1.6 million and America’s Health Insurance Plans and Bayer Corp. both approaching $2 million in spending from April to June. The AMA has spent a total of $8.2 million on lobbying through June of this year.

    Final aggregate numbers are likely a day or two away as reports continue to trickle in and get tallied by journalists and watchdog groups. But the data so far suggest that the second quarter has a good chance of reaching a new high for the health-care lobby. The industry already set records from January to March, when health-care firms and their lobbyists spent money at the rate of $1.4 million a day.

    There were a few surprising examples of declines, however, most notably PhRMA, which reported spending about $700,000 less than it did in the first quarter. But consider that PhRMA spent $8.6 million in the first half of 2008 — just two thirds of what they’ve spent so far this year.

  86. Foxwood says:

    Make it something Constitutional. Don’t make it Socialist. And by the way, anyway you do it will be Socialistic.

  87. Foxwood says:

    “Did anyone actually watch the interview Bill Moyers did with the insurance VP Wendall Potter?”

    No, Bill Moyers is a Socialist.

  88. VotingFemale says:

    A rose by any name smells as sweet…

    I call it Death Panel and it was Stuck because Palin proved it was a Socialist Mandated Policy of early death of expensive patients… for the good of the masses…

    BOOO!!!!! BOO OBAMA YOU F’ING JOKER!

    rosehips says

    VF, I am keeping up. The “end of life consultation” has been struck because it was creating so much misinformation and speculation that it threatened the bill itself. There is no “death panel” provision in the bill. Show me where it is and I will retract my claim. I know you won’t be able to because IT DOES NOT EXIST!!!!

  89. Foxwood says:

    I’ve decided I’m a Constitutionalist, Rose. My new call in life is to defend it. Be it Democrat or Republican shitting on it, I will call out Unconstitutionality.

  90. VotingFemale says:

    Bill Moyers is also a Full Blown MAGGOT

    Foxwood says

    “Did anyone actually watch the interview Bill Moyers did with the insurance VP Wendall Potter?”

    No, Bill Moyers is a Socialist.

  91. samiam60 says:

    AWHHHHH, now shucks Rose don’t be leaving us just because we have different views. We enjoy your opinions on here and don’t want to lose our token Liberal, extremeist,communist, marxist, socialist views.

  92. VotingFemale says:

    I support you FOX!

    No one must be allowed to crap on the Constitution, regardless of their Politics.

    Foxwood says

    I’ve decided I’m a Constitutionalist, Rose. My new call in life is to defend it. Be it Democrat or Republican shitting on it, I will call out Unconstitutionality.

  93. rosehips says:

    fox, I find nothing wrong with the Constitution. I think it is a brilliant work. I just don’t worship it like you do. Our founding fathers were HUMAN and by their very nature imperfect. I don’t think they should be elevated to deity. I think that is dangerous.

    I am glad we have constitutional rights. I just don’t think they should be exclusive. What is so wrong with having a right to something that those white guys didn’t consider? Imagine if we ran businesses without the ability to revise goals and objectives? Talk about stifling innovation.

  94. VotingFemale says:

    Rose? Obama the Joker is in bed with sepecial interests… ever heard of Big Pharma and the White House Deal? How about GE?

  95. VotingFemale says:

    So… you are saying the Constitution has never been… AMENDED? ROFL

    rosehips says

    fox, I find nothing wrong with the Constitution. I think it is a brilliant work. I just don’t worship it like you do. Our founding fathers were HUMAN and by their very nature imperfect. I don’t think they should be elevated to deity. I think that is dangerous.

    I am glad we have constitutional rights. I just don’t think they should be exclusive. What is so wrong with having a right to something that those white guys didn’t consider? Imagine if we ran businesses without the ability to revise goals and objectives? Talk about stifling innovation.

  96. samiam60 says:

    Did not the Obamination swear on Lincolns Bible to uphold and defend Our Constitution in his botched attempt to take the Oath of Office?
    Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
    Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
    Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

  97. samiam60 says:

    Rose every single books and alinski thought you have comes from a book or document that was written by human hands. LOL

  98. VotingFemale says:

    Rose? Ever heard of the 14th Amendment?

    It was enacted by White Men to change the Constitution

    http://www.classbrain.com/artfree/publish/article_172.shtml

  99. samiam60 says:

    Don’t no body dare leave here, I am on a roll.

  100. Foxwood says:

    I admit we have problems with insurance (I disagree about pharmaceuticals tho), and we can fix it. But not at the cost of Capitalism and the Constitution. To throw that away WILL make our country fall apart. China is waiting for this to happen (Thank you, socialists).

    With pharmaceuticals, if they are regulated and can not make profit, they will STOP inventing and testing new drugs. More people WILL die.

  101. Foxwood says:

    Tort reform will bring costs down. That is what is necessary.

  102. tellitlikeitis says:

  103. tellitlikeitis says:

    samiam60, They switched the bible at the last minuite for the Koran.

  104. rosehips says:

    vf, and I am opposed to Obama’s bedroom antics with special interests. But how do we stop it? I don’t think there is any way to stop special interests from doing what they do. I thought Obama was going to put an end to lobbying but doesn’t lobbying have it’s place? There needs to be an alternative. How can our leaders be expected to make decisions without learning the impacts of legislation on industry. We also need more advocates lobbying for the interests of the people. There should be a balance.

    vf said: Rose? Obama the Joker is in bed with sepecial interests… ever heard of Big Pharma and the White House Deal? How about GE?

  105. samiam60 says:

    I think it was altogether proper and fitting for Obama to be on the Ellen Degenerate show.

  106. Foxwood says:

    Change the Constitution Rose. In he mean time…
    Unconstitutionality = Against the law. Our leaders are against the law. PURE FACT!

  107. samiam60 says:

    Rose tell us the story again about how happy we are all gonna be under socialism.

  108. Foxwood says:

    Our system is set up to vote out those that don’t do your bidding, but Congress is still bound to uphold the Constitution. Healthcare is not in the Constitution and therefor out of their hands.

  109. rosehips says:

    sami, I try to keep an open mind. I don’t think I am influenced by what I read any more than anyone else here, probably less. I try to take everything with a grain of salt, but I have more trust in people like Wendall Potter who speaks from experience. He witnessed firsthand how greed drives the insurance industry and why it is wrong.

  110. VotingFemale says:

    When we get a Conservative President… I am going back and throw in the face of every Socialist the “You Should Trust and Obey the President because he is the president”

    AAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Socialists? There is a FUTURE, YOU IDIOTS!

  111. Foxwood says:

    Read Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution, Rose. It tells you what the Powers of Congress are. Then read James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. They will tell you about limited government.

  112. Foxwood says:

    “like Wendall Potter who speaks from experience. He witnessed firsthand how greed drives the insurance industry and why it is wrong.”

    And anyone on Bill Moyers show is a Socialist.

  113. VotingFemale says:

    Show me the part that says the Congress is empowered to fund universal health care and run it…

    from: http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec8.html

    U.S. Constitution – Article 1 Section 8

    Article 1 – The Legislative Branch
    Section 8 – Powers of Congress

    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

    To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

    To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

    To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

    To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

    To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

    To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

    To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

    To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

    To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

    To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

    To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

    To provide and maintain a Navy;

    To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

    To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

    To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

    To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

  114. rosehips says:

    lol sami. If we can be as happy as the Scandinavians, we will be better off. How happy are Americans? I don’t think very. We may be the wealthiest country, but we all know money doesn’t make us happy.

    I have a friend whose brother from New York is visiting. He is a wall street broker and makes a million a year. He is also a raging alcoholic. Money doesn’t buy happiness.

    I’d rather know that I will have shelter, access to health care, food, and other basics if I cannot provide for myself. That would make me much happier. I worry that I could lose everything I own simply by getting sick or in an accident.

    okay, really must go. carry on my friends.

  115. samiam60 says:

    Can anyone tell me why the term Founding Fathers has been replaced with Constitutional Framers in our Schools? Will history book burning be the next Obama rally?

  116. samiam60 says:

    Rose the Scandinavians are happy because they have legalized Prostitution.

  117. Foxwood says:

    The great Thomas Jefferson wrote, “Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated…Whensoever the General [federal] Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.”

  118. VotingFemale says:

    Samiam… in science we have a saying… it is a law of nature…

    for every action there is a reaction…

    Obama and the Socialists creates the reaction by virtue of their action.

    The push back is well underway…

  119. samiam60 says:

    Rose with all the internment camps going up I am sure you will have food, shelter, healthcare and other basics you need.

  120. Foxwood says:

    Sami, Let’s not forget legalized drugs also.

  121. Foxwood says:

    “makes a million a year. He is also a raging alcoholic. Money doesn’t buy happiness.”

    Sign me up, I’m a happy alcoholic.

  122. samiam60 says:

    That’s right Fox, legalized drugs over there so I am sure their Prisons are not so overwelmed as they are here. So they’re happiness is basically delusional?

  123. Foxwood says:

    A great man said…

  124. Foxwood says:

    Free drugs will buy votes.

  125. Foxwood says:

    Well free and legalized drugs.

  126. tellitlikeitis says:

    I beleive that the white house is hoping for a severe swine flu outbreak in this country to create a phony emergency to get healthcare passed. I think they will do this stealthfully if necessary. I also think that part of the urgence is the thier hero Ted Kennedy has been pushing natl healthcare for years and they want him to see his dream got passed before he kicks the bucket.

  127. samiam60 says:

    Tellit this would also give them the Marshal law they desire.

  128. samiam60 says:

    Dirty Secret No. 1 in Obamacare
    by Chuck Norris
    08/11/2009

    Health care reforms are turning into health care revolts. Americans are turning up the heat on congressmen in town hall meetings across the U.S.

    While watching these political hot August nights, I decided to research the reasons so many are opposed to Obamacare to separate the facts from the fantasy. What I discovered is that there are indeed dirty little secrets buried deep within the 1,000-plus page health care bill.

    Dirty secret No. 1 in Obamacare is about the government’s coming into homes and usurping parental rights over child care and development.

    It’s outlined in sections 440 and 1904 of the House bill (Page 838), under the heading “home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children.” The programs (provided via grants to states) would educate parents on child behavior and parenting skills.

    The bill says that the government agents, “well-trained and competent staff,” would “provide parents with knowledge of age-appropriate child development in cognitive, language, social, emotional, and motor domains … modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices,” and “skills to interact with their child to enhance age-appropriate development.”

    Are you kidding me?! With whose parental principles and values? Their own? Certain experts’? From what field and theory of childhood development? As if there are one-size-fits-all parenting techniques! Do we really believe they would contextualize and personalize every form of parenting in their education, or would they merely universally indoctrinate with their own?

    Are we to assume the state’s mediators would understand every parent’s social or religious core values on parenting? Or would they teach some secular-progressive and religiously neutered version of parental values and wisdom? And if they were to consult and coach those who expect babies, would they ever decide circumstances to be not beneficial for the children and encourage abortions?

    One government rebuttal is that this program would be “voluntary.” Is that right? Does that imply that this agency would just sit back passively until some parent needing parenting skills said, “I don’t think I’ll call my parents, priest or friends or read a plethora of books, but I’ll go down to the local government offices”? To the contrary, the bill points to specific targeted groups and problems, on Page 840: The state “shall identify and prioritize serving communities that are in high need of such services, especially communities with a high proportion of low-income families.”

    Are we further to conclude by those words that low-income families know less about parenting? Are middle- and upper-class parents really better parents? Less neglectful of their children? Less needful of parental help and training? Is this “prioritized” training not a biased, discriminatory and even prejudicial stereotype and generalization that has no place in federal government, law or practice?

    Bottom line: Is all this what you want or expect in a universal health care bill being rushed through Congress? Do you want government agents coming into your home and telling you how to parent your children? When did government health care turn into government child care?

    Government needs less of a role in running our children’s lives and more of a role in supporting parents’ decisions for their children. Children belong to their parents, not the government. And the parents ought to have the right — and government support — to parent them without the fed’s mandates, education or intervention in our homes.

    Kids are very important to my wife, Gena, and me. That’s why we’ve spent the past 17 years developing our nonprofit KICK START program in public schools in Texas. It builds up their self-esteem and teaches them respect and discipline. Of course, whether or not they participate in the program is their and their parents’ choice.

    How contrary is Obamacare’s home intrusion and indoctrination family services, in which state agents prioritize houses to enter and enforce their universal values and principles upon the hearts and minds of families across America?

    Government’s real motives and rationale are quite simple, though rarely, if ever, stated. If one wants to control the future ebbs and flows of a country, one must have command over future generations. That is done by seizing parental and educational power, legislating preferred educational methods and materials, and limiting private educational options. It is so simple that any socialist can understand it. As Josef Stalin once stated, “Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.”

    Before so-called universal health care turns into universal hell care, write or call your representative today and protest his voting Obamacare into law. Remind him that what is needed in Washington is a truly bipartisan group that is allowed an ample amount of time to work on a compromise health care law that wouldn’t raise taxes (for anyone), regulate personal medical choices, ration health care or restrict American citizens.

  129. Foxwood says:

    Good Stalin quote Sami, and true.

  130. tellitlikeitis says:

    This guy just doesn’t get it.
    Health Care Protests Don’t Reflect America: Specter

    Sen. Arlen Specter said Wednesday he thinks people who have been angrily disrupting town hall meetings on overhauling the health care system are “not necessarily representative of America,” but should be heard.

    “It’s more than health care,” said Specter, 79, who earlier this year left the Republican Party and became a Democrat. “I think there is a mood in America of anger with so many people unemployed, with so much bickering in Washington … with the fear of losing their health care. It all boils over.”

  131. Foxwood says:

    Sami, Tellit,

    I also believe that they are trying to instigate fights in the town hall meetings for the same reason.

  132. Foxwood says:

    I don’t know about you guys, but I find it funny that the left’s excuse for crapping on the Constitution is that it was written by old white guys.

    It that the best they can do?

  133. tellitlikeitis says:

    I don’t see much future for the Americans. It’s a decayed country. And they have their racial problem, and the problem of social of social inequalities . . . Everything about the behavior of American society reveals that it’s half Judaized, and the other half negrified. How can one expect a State like that to hold together – a country where everything is built on the dollar?
    Adolf Hitler

  134. Foxwood says:

    HEY! COMMIE LIBS! THE CONSTITUTION IS THE LAW!

    It was NOT written so that if you don’t like part of it, you can ignore it. That is what’s wrong with our country now, but you say, ‘It’s ok.”

    IT”S NOT OK! The law is being broken. You didn’t learn history and the Constitution. You were indoctrinated in your public schools and colleges. THAT IS WHAT’S WRONG WITH OUR COUNTRY!

  135. Foxwood says:

    Danm, Tellit!

    Was Hitler a lefty?

  136. tellitlikeitis says:

    The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them.
    Karl Marx

  137. tellitlikeitis says:

    Hitler was a faciast. That last quote I posted from Karl Marx was right on the money.

  138. Foxwood says:

    Just joking Tellit… 🙂

  139. tellitlikeitis says:

    The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property.
    Karl Marx

  140. Foxwood says:

    “We cannot expect the Americans to jump from capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small doses of socialism until they suddenly awake to find they have Communism.” – Soviet Leader Nikita Khrushchev

  141. Foxwood says:

    “The best way to destroy the capitalist system is to debauch the currency.” – Vladimir Lenin

  142. tellitlikeitis says:

    Socialized Health Care: The Communist Dream and the Soviet Reality

    The utopian ideal of equality of circumstances has captured people’s imagination since ancient times. If only everybody could have the same of everything the world would be different. There would be no envy, no crime, no poverty, no greed, and no unhappiness. From Plato to Karl Marx, many thinkers looked to the state for the creation of that heaven on earth. In our own times, this dream has remained alive in the form of the welfare state, and today it shows itself most distinctly in the appeal of government-managed health care.

    Isn’t it obvious, many ask, that government can supply medical care more fairly and less expensively than the selfish profit-oriented free market? Let us remind ourselves that in the Soviet Union the road to medical-care hell was paved with the same good intentions. In October 1917, the Marxist dreams of coming to political power came true in Russia. Now that everyone was to be equal in all aspects of their lives, people would no longer die in the streets from illness. Free medical care would be available for all, rather than reserved only for the “greedy rich.”

    But what did the Bolsheviks destroy and what did they create?

    In Old Russia, medical care was a consumer-oriented business. Doctors’ incomes and their standard of living were totally dependent upon professionalism and reputation in the wider community. Patients decided which doctor to use, which hospital to go to, and which pharmaceutical products to trust. Doctors worked hard to establish their reputation, an important part of which came from providing charity care for the poor. As in the West, all Russian doctors upon graduation from medical school took the Hippocratic Oath, in which they swore never to reject anyone who needed medical assistance—and as a rule they were loyal to their oath.

    In Russian urban areas, there were charity hospitals and out-patient care for the poor and their families. In rural areas, peasants would often pay doctors with a chicken, potatoes, bread, or in the form of domestic services—or received their medical treatment for free. Under the private medical system in Old Russia, doctors were able to earn a comfortable living and therefore could afford to be generous in supplying charity services to those who were in need.

    Expectations of high income, along with the status of being a member of a respected profession, generated strong competition for acceptance into medical schools. The best were accepted as students, and the most qualified were hired as professors. At the beginning of the 20th century, the quality of Russian medical care and medical research was internationally recognized. Was it a perfect system? Of course not. But contrary to the socialist myth-makers, medical care in Imperial Russia was widely available and provided in a fairly cost-efficient manner. Both the profit motive of the competitive marketplace and the spirit of charity assured the provision of quality medical services throughout Russian society.

    This, then, was the system the Bolsheviks wanted to destroy. Unfortunately, many Russian intellectuals, including medical doctors themselves, were infected with the socialist disease. Seeing so much poverty in a still underdeveloped Russia, many doctors turned their back on the free market and came to believe that government management could create a better society through planned equality of living conditions, education, and certainly medical care. Thus, guided by wrong ideas, the members of the medical profession helped to destroy with their own hands a health-care system that, while certainly not perfect, provided people with skilled treatment, regardless of their income or social background.

    Equality for All
    In 1917, like everything else, medical services were nationalized by the new socialist government. Gradually, small medical practices disappeared and a network of big, factory-like hospitals and out-patient clinics were established all around the country. Everyone was registered in both out-patient clinics and hospitals according to their government-assigned residence. Patient choice was completely taken away by the Soviet State, which took full responsibility for centrally planning each individual’s medical expenses and health care.

    With the elimination of private expenditures for health services, the form and amount of medical care were now dependent upon the budgetary priorities of the State. All members of the medical industry were put on low fixed monthly salaries and were mandated to examine and treat an overwhelming daily quota of patients. Medical research became dependent upon inadequate annual budgetary allocations from the government. Doctors’ and nurses’ incomes no longer depended on their professional skills or the number of patients they treated. Total unionization of the medical profession made it practically impossible for anyone to be fired. Without markets and prices determining the value and availability of health care, the government imposed a rationing system for medical services and pharmaceutical products.

    Specialized services (mammograms, ultrasounds, and so forth) were available only in a few select hospitals where the doctors were supposed to treat patients as well as participate in research. For example, in the case of brain or cardiovascular surgery and treatment, there were only a few specialized hospitals available in the entire country. People sometimes died waiting in line to be admitted for these treatments.

    Medical care became a producer-oriented industry, instead of the consumer-oriented market that it had been in Old Russia. But even the State cannot kill the market, just as the State cannot repeal the laws of God and nature. The market was simply driven “underground,” and thus became the black market. The black-market response to State-rationing occurred immediately. Doctors’ services and pharmaceutical products (both domestic and foreign-made), as well as access to medical-testing equipment, became available for bribes. Unfortunately, only the wealthy elite could afford expensive black-market medical services, while the poor majority could no longer count upon charity.

    In the world of “free” medical care in the Soviet Union, people often had to have connections to obtain many of the medicines prescribed by physicians to save their family members and friends. Indifferent and often hostile nurses and orderlies had to be bribed to change a patient’s bedpan or to provide ordinary attention that any American would take for granted during a stay in a hospital.

    Hospital wards were crowded and far from antiseptically clean. Anesthetics and basic painkillers were frequently unavailable. The crying of patients in pain could sometimes be heard from outside a hospital by passersby.

    Some Are More Equal than Others
    Not surprisingly, those in the political elite did not want to be treated in the medical system provided for “the people.” One of the greatest myths about the Soviet Union was its supposed equality for all. No society was so divided into privileged groups and classes as was Soviet society. Where an individual stood in the political hierarchy of the Communist Party and the bureaucratic structure of the socialist economy determined his access to all the essentials as well as the luxuries of life.

    Special hospitals were created all around the Soviet Union. These were reserved for the members of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, the Council of Ministers, the local and regional Party elites, and so forth. The “servants of the people,” as a result, received a qualitatively different level of medical care than “the masses.” The privileged few had access not only to Soviet-made drugs and medications but also to Western European and American medicines and equipment, which could never be within the reach of the ordinary “proletarian” patient.

    Affirmative Action, Soviet Style
    The nature and quality of medical education were affected, as well. Bribes and connections determined both the hiring and admission processes in medical schools. Skills and professionalism mattered very little, and service to the community did not matter at all.

    This poor medical care was reinforced by the fact that entrance into higher education in the Soviet Union was dictated by a system of affirmative action that had been introduced shortly after the triumph of the Socialist Revolution in 1917. At first belonging to a social class —worker, peasant, or intellectual—determined the entry quotas into colleges, universities, and technical schools. But the Soviet affirmative action system was soon expanded to include gender and ethnic classifications as well. A young person’s professional and career opportunities were greatly influenced not by his individual merit but by whether he was, for example, a Russian, an Uzbek, a Georgian, a Lithuanian, a Jew, or somebody else. Every class, gender, and ethnic group had its own quota for admission and hiring into institutions of higher learning.

    Connections, bribes, class, gender, and ethnicity heavily determined who were admitted into and graduated from medical schools throughout the Soviet Union. Thus the supplies of hospitals, physicians, medical equipment, and pharmaceuticals all became victims of socialist central planning and political priorities just like everything else in the “workers’ paradise.” At the end of the 20th century, Russia was infamous for having one of the worst health-care systems in the world.

    In bitter situations, Russians often respond with jokes and anecdotes. In one of them, an American and a Soviet doctor are talking. The American says, “Dear colleague, our profession is imperfect. You treat the patient from one disease and he dies from another.” The Soviet doctor replies, “No, dear colleague, this is not the case with me. Mine die from whatever I treat them.”

    It is easy to say that the present system is imperfect and a radical change will make it perfect in a relatively short period of time. But there are always lessons from history from which to learn. Sometimes, your neighbor’s history warns you which path never to follow.

  143. Foxwood says:

    Back in 1927, an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for President on the Socialist Party ticket, said that the American people would never vote for socialism but he said under the name of liberalism the American people would adopt every fragment of the socialist program.

    o Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against Socialized Medicine (1961)

    “But at the moment I’d like to talk about another way because this threat is with us and at the moment is more imminent. One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. . . . Now, the American people, if you put it to them about socialized medicine and gave them a chance to choose, would unhesitatingly vote against it. We have an example of this. Under the Truman administration it was proposed that we have a compulsory health insurance program for all people in the United States, and, of course, the American people unhesitatingly rejected this.

    The doctor begins to lose freedom. . . . First you decide that the doctor can have so many patients. They are equally divided among the various doctors by the government. But then doctors aren’t equally divided geographically. So a doctor decides he wants to practice in one town and the government has to say to him, you can’t live in that town. They already have enough doctors. You have to go someplace else. And from here it’s only a short step to dictating where he will go. . . . All of us can see what happens once you establish the precedent that the government can determine a man’s working place and his working methods, determine his employment. From here it’s a short step to all the rest of socialism, to determining his pay. And pretty soon your son won’t decide, when he’s in school, where he will go or what he will do for a living. He will wait for the government to tell him where he will go to work and what he will do.”

  144. tellitlikeitis says:

    Yes , Foxwood this is the slippery slope we are heading down. Once the camel gets it’s nose under the tent it won’t be long before the whole camel is inside. Ronald Reagen must be spinning in his grave over what’s going on today.

  145. Foxwood says:

    These people that spit on Ronald Reagan are the same that learned their socialism in public school and college.

  146. samiam60 says:

    Statement from the American College of Surgeons Regarding
    Recent Comments from President Obama

    CHICAGO—The American College of Surgeons is deeply disturbed over the uninformed public comments President Obama continues to make about the high-quality care provided by surgeons in the United States. When the President makes statements that are incorrect or not based in fact, we think he does a disservice to the American people at a time when they want clear, understandable facts about health care reform. We want to set the record straight.

    Yesterday during a town hall meeting, President Obama got his facts completely wrong. He stated that a surgeon gets paid $50,000 for a leg amputation when, in fact, Medicare pays a surgeon between $740 and $1,140 for a leg amputation. This payment also includes the evaluation of the patient on the day of the operation plus patient follow-up care that is provided for 90 days after the operation. Private insurers pay some variation of the Medicare reimbursement for this service.

    Three weeks ago, the President suggested that a surgeon’s decision to remove a child’s tonsils is based on the desire to make a lot of money. That remark was ill-informed and dangerous, and we were dismayed by this characterization of the work surgeons do. Surgeons make decisions about recommending operations based on what’s right for the patient.

    We agree with the President that the best thing for patients with diabetes is to manage the disease proactively to avoid the bad consequences that can occur, including blindness, stroke, and amputation. But as is the case for a person who has been treated for cancer and still needs to have a tumor removed, or a person who is in a terrible car crash and needs access to a trauma surgeon, there are times when even a perfectly managed diabetic patient needs a surgeon. The President’s remarks are truly alarming and run the risk of damaging the all-important trust between surgeons and their patients.

    We assume that the President made these mistakes unintentionally, but we would urge him to have his facts correct before making another inflammatory and incorrect statement about surgeons and surgical care.

    About the American College of Surgeons
    The American College of Surgeons is a scientific and educational organization of surgeons that was founded in 1913 to raise the standards of surgical practice and to improve the care of the surgical patient. The College is dedicated to the ethical and competent practice of surgery. Its achievements have significantly influenced the course of scientific surgery in America and have established it as an important advocate for all surgical patients. The College has more than 74,000 members and is the largest organization of surgeons in the world.

  147. samiam60 says:

    Disinformation is the Obama platform.

  148. samiam60 says:

    There is No Honor, nor ethics in the Obama Administration. This is a Deceitful man on a Deceitful mission to bankrupt and take over the United States of America. He is here to destroy the very fabric of American life and impose a Dictatorship over the American People.

  149. Foxwood says:

    He has to have is legacy and he thinks it’s going to be healthcare.

  150. tellitlikeitis says:

    Obama just makes up numbers out of thin air. I predict that his approval numbers will soon be lower that GB’s were when he left office.

  151. samiam60 says:

    His Only Legacy will be that he is a Long Legged Mack Daddy.

  152. Foxwood says:

    Obutthole thinks he will be King Obutthole, but what he doesn’t see is China lurking across the ocean. That is, unless he plans to rule under a Chinese overlord.

  153. rosehips says:

    here’s my congresswoman promoting a new spending tracking website:

    sunshine.gop.gov

  154. samiam60 says:

    The Chinese may well have in place a Working Relationship with this Administration. More than just Financial I might Add.

  155. samiam60 says:

    Welcome back Rose. Is your Congresswoman not a Republican?

  156. Foxwood says:

    TRANSPARANCY???!!!

    HA!

  157. tellitlikeitis says:

  158. Foxwood says:

    Sami,
    It may be part of his One World Order.

  159. samiam60 says:

    I believe that Barry got some Chinese Indoctrination while attending School in Indonesia.

  160. tellitlikeitis says:

    Yes there is transparensy in the Obama whitehouse. His lies are transparent except to the blind sheeple fools that still follow him.

  161. Foxwood says:

    It may be a GOP site… I’m starting to have my doubts about all of them Rose. Even my guys. These guys do not know the Constitution, or they rely on us to not know it.

  162. tellitlikeitis says:

  163. tellitlikeitis says:

    Newly elected Democrats waver on health plan
    By Daniel Dombey and Tom Braithwaite in Washington

    Published: August 13 2009 22:08 | Last updated: August 13 2009 22:08

    Two freshly elected Democrats are wavering in their support of healthcare reform, as a rancorous summer series of “town hall” debates appears to be ­hardening opposition against the Obama administration.

    Frank Kratovil and Tom Perriello, who as freshmen congressmen would be expected to back the party leadership, both say proposals for expanding coverage to the uninsured are un­acceptable in their current form and should focus more on cost savings.

    EDITOR’S CHOICE
    Obama on drive to tackle healthcare rage – Aug-12In depth: Obama’s first year – Jul-11Healthcare hard sell fails to calm fears – Aug-07Editorial: Debating US health reform – Aug-11Opinion: Health 2.0 could shock the system – Aug-12Opinion: A runaway deficit may soon test Obama’s luck – Aug-10Mr Kratovil, who was hanged in effigy by a healthcare protester at a town hall meeting in his state of Maryland, said he would have voted against legislation if it had come to a vote last month.

    Tom Perriello, another new representative from neighbouring Virginia, also says he is not yet ready to support the current proposals in the House of Representatives, partly because he is “still getting feedback from . . . constituents”.

    Neither man has ruled out voting for a revised package.

    Billed as a chance to sell healthcare reform to the American people in small meetings across the country, the town hall debates have seen protesters screaming at their elected representatives.

    In spite of hopes by proponents of reform that voters would be turned off by the sometimes ugly scenes, a poll yesterday from USA Today gave an indication that the debates were having the opposite effect.

    Some 34 per cent of respondents said the demonstrations had made them more sympathetic to the protesters, while 21 per cent said they were less sympathetic. In the all-important independents grouping, 35 per cent against 16 per cent said they were now more sympathetic to the protesters – a margin of more than two to one.

    The Obama administration was on Thursday attempting to regain the initiative with a self-described “chain” e-mail from the senior adviser David Axelrod, pointing to a series of “myths and facts” in the debate.

    But the “myths” identified by David Axelrod, one of Mr Obama’s chief advisers, themselves highlight how the healthcare dispute has spilt out of the White House’s control.

    In the e-mail, which Mr Axelrod asks supporters to forward to others, he denies that the administration favours rationing healthcare, that the new system will undermine health benefits offered to the over-65s in the government’s Medicare scheme or that the reform will encourage euthanasia – the origin of the “death panel” myth.

    This week the veteran lawmakers senator Arlen Specter and congressman John Dingell were shouted down by constituents fearful of tax rises, cutbacks in Medicare and rationing of private schemes. In the face of barracking from a large part of her audience, senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri was reduced to saying: “I don’t know what else I can do. If you want me to go home – OK.”

    Mounting opposition among such newly elected legislators played a particularly important role in the collapse of the Clinton administration’s effort to push through healthcare reform in 1994.

    This time, some commentators, such as Joe Scarborough, a television host and former Republican congressman opposed to Mr Obama’s proposals, say ­feelings are even more passionate.

  164. tellitlikeitis says:

  165. rosehips says:

    my rep is a gop puppet. I haven’t figured out who pulls her strings, but she isn’t really all that dynamic. I like her personally. She is a nice person. She doesn’t sway far from the party except if it is to advocate for rural Americans. I can’t argue with that.

  166. samiam60 says:

    Obama is in Montana right now live on cnn doing a town hall meeting. Interesting to watch.

    Hi Rose, You are lucky to have a Republican in office. Where I live it is all Democrats and the poverty rate is unbearable and the crime if office is horrendous. In Cleveland the entire building dept is under investigation by the FBI for over a year now. This State wreaks of Corrution and a stalled economy.

  167. samiam60 says:

    Obama is giving pretty much the same canned answers that he gave at the last town hall meeting.
    The dude is just plain lost without a teleprompter.

  168. VotingFemale says:

    OBama is just pulling his campaign stumping tricks

    Earth to Obutthole… you are going to have to learn that campaigning strategy of yours is backfiring… but then we know how arrogant you are and no one can tell you what to do…. AAAAHAHAHAHAHA

    Keep it up dumb ass…

  169. Foxwood says:

    Please go to
    http://www.askheritage.org/Premium.aspx
    and get your free pocket Constitution.

  170. samhenry says:

    Rose has said (many hours ago):

    I am glad we have constitutional rights. I just don’t think they should be exclusive. What is so wrong with having a right to something that those white guys didn’t consider? Imagine if we ran businesses without the ability to revise goals and objectives? Talk about stifling innovation.

    Rose, you do border on racism here. You could have made your point without it. As VF says, there are amendments. We have to work with the laws we have, Rose. We bring our innovative ways to the law and try to revise them and there are means provided by the very founding fathers who gave us the constitution to do so.

    In fact, in the current health care debate, part of the concern by opponents to the law is that some of what is in that law seem to be preambles to additional things that could amend this law. However, there is an entire formal process of amending a law that tries to take the innovation and creativity aspect of an amendment and make it’s justification a matter of national debate. Just sayin’

  171. Foxwood says:

    Obama in Montanan:
    Blah blah blah, blahblahblah blah!

    The people:
    Cough (Bullsh!t) cough (bullsh!t) cough (bullsh!t)!

    Obama in Montanan:
    Blah blah blah, blahblahblah blah!

    The people:
    Cough (e&t me) cough (e&t me) cough (e&t me)!

  172. Foxwood says:

    Montanan = Montana

  173. samiam60 says:

    Looks like Montana bought the Rust proofing and the Fabric Protection.

  174. tellitlikeitis says:

  175. tellitlikeitis says:

  176. tellitlikeitis says:

    sam. They had to cover everything in Montana with plastic so it wouldn’t get covered in bull doogey.

  177. samiam60 says:

    You could tell who the Libs were by the uppity smirks on their faces. Those libs have got to be bi-polar.

  178. tellitlikeitis says:

    Margaret Thatcher quote, “The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money,”

  179. Foxwood says:

    “I find nothing wrong with the Constitution. I think it is a brilliant work. I just don’t worship it like you do.”

    It’s the LAW!

    “Our founding fathers were HUMAN and by their very nature imperfect. I don’t think they should be elevated to deity. I think that is dangerous.”

    It’s the LAW!

    “I am glad we have constitutional rights. I just don’t think they should be exclusive. What is so wrong with having a right to something that those white guys didn’t consider?”

    It’s the LAW!

    “Imagine if we ran businesses without the ability to revise goals and objectives? Talk about stifling innovation.”

    It’s called an amendment. It’s the LAW!

  180. tellitlikeitis says:

  181. tellitlikeitis says:

  182. tellitlikeitis says:

    This guy is such a liar!

  183. Foxwood says:

    As Beck said, “they call us birthers, deathers, we’ve got to find something that ends in ‘ers’ to call the lefties…

    .

    .

    .
    let’s call them liers.”

  184. tellitlikeitis says:

  185. Foxwood says:

    I so love Go-Go Girls

  186. Pingback: Exposed: The little “mean signs girl” Julia Hall from New Hampshire Townhall not so random afterall | Fire Andrea Mitchell!

  187. Foxwood says:

    Something for Rose,
    40th anniversary
    She was the writer.

  188. rosehips says:

    re: Obama in Montana. I think he did great. First, he allowed the NRA guy to ask a q. Who can accuse him of staging that? ( well, I suppose you could.) Second, it’s true he said he wouldn’t raise taxes unless you made over $250,000. Sorry, but I don’t lose sleep overnight about someone who makes scads of money (and okay, 250 grand might not be all that much these days but it’s a hellova lot more than me.) getting a 2% raise in taxes. I especially don’t sympathize with millionaires and billionaires. If a 2% raise in taxes is going to make them move abroad, I say let em move. They’ll be back.

    SH, sorry if my comment borders on racism. I know white guys get all beat up these days, poor things. heehee

    I got no beef with white guys as long as they know their place.

    C’mon sh, I was making a point. The fact is that the Constitution was written in a time when white men ruled our country. Women were second class citizens. Slaves had no rights. The Natives were subjugated. Maybe the Constitution would have included health care or earth care and equal rights for all regardless of race or gender. I am glad for the amendments that were added and improved upon what our founding fathers created. I’m sorry if I offend anyone because I don’t hold the same reverence as you do about the Constitution. And I’m sorry if you are a white guy and took offense to my previous statement, or this comment for that matter.
    White guys rock!

  189. rosehips says:

    This is for all you white guys.

  190. rosehips says:

    okay that one didn’t work. I hope this one will.

  191. rosehips says:

    Thanks for the woodstock vid foxy. I love Joni Mitchell.

  192. Foxwood says:

    The Montana town hall was a setup, like all of Obama’s planed town halls. They were there to make him look good, and there was no real decent.

    If there was, it would have looked like the rest of the Democratic town hall meetings.

  193. m2 says:

    I’ve got a good one,

  194. m2 says:

    alrighty, let’s try this:

  195. Foxwood says:

    There are no jobs without rich guys. That’s life. I love Capitalism and the Free Market, because I too can become a rich Millionaire or Billionaire.

  196. Foxwood says:

    The Constitution is the law. It is not to be ignored because you don’t like it. That goes for Oshithead too. To change the Constitution, it has to be amended. The POS politicians seem to have forgotten that.

  197. Foxwood says:

    Supposedly Oshithead is a Constitution lawyer. More like a constipational lawyer, as he has done nothing by the Constitution.

  198. m2 says:

    bwha ha ha:

    A Thank-You Note to the President
    Matthew S Harrison
    Dear Mr. President,

    I thought it an opportune time to write you and say thanks! I am a conservative, voted for McCain, and have voted straight conservative since reaching voting age. You are probably thinking, “Why is a conservative thanking me?”

    Well, I’ll tell you — and I am sorry if I gush:

    First, thank-you for going back on every single campaign promise you made!

    Second, thanks for not closing GITMO yet, what with so many terrorists already released, going back to the battle fields to kill our troops and all-another great decision — so far.

    Third, thank you for continuing wire-taps and electronic intrusions into communications between American Citizens and Foreign Nationals! The ACLU is not exactly loving you!

    Fourth, thank-you insulating the Democrats in Congress from any intrusion from across the aisle, and by doing so, taking the full blame for everything wrong with our country.

    Fifth, thank-you for further discrediting left wing race-mongering. Bringing racial profiling into the discussion of Skip Gates’ arrest. Socialism is the new “N” word-Brilliant!

    Sixth, Thanks for bringing the Chicago Machine to the Department of Education. That should work out well for you. Voucher anyone?

    Seventh, thank-you for telling us that you advocate a single payer system. Can you say sound bites?

    Like Chris Matthews, I too get a chill up my leg every time you speak to the masses. When you turn on TOTUS and regurgitate speeches penned for you by your cabal of radicals, looking left and right in that hypnotic rhythm, you remind the electorate of the colossal mistake they made last November. A mistake that will haunt them all for the next three years, as if they all had bodies hidden in their crawl-spaces.

    So, thank you Mr. President! From the bottom of my heart. You are the best, worst president we ever had!

    Matthew S. Harrison

  199. LisaInTX says:

    New Ad by League of American Voters
    They are asking for donations for those that can afford to send money.

  200. Sarah is dead on (no pun intended), senior citizens will pay 99.9% of the Obama Health Desctruction and will be rationed to 1 in 13 I believe for the elderly. Hussein O.’s chief of staff infection’s brother is heading up a lot of this morass and I’m sure We The People are giving that piece of ka ka a ton of our money (Tax payers). It freakin stinks.

  201. ok, m2 I’m doing a post on your letter above!

  202. samhenry says:

    Sorry I missed you Warrantonegirl, Lisa, Fox and whoever is still kicking around. I’m just checking in and then jumping ship for bed.

    Best to my blog buddies.

    DOG OVERBOARD

  203. ohiobelle says:

    One dog is jumping overboard as the other is hitting the deck… Anybody around?

  204. samiam60 says:

    Looks like everyone had a spirited debate and exchange of ideas tonight. It is so good that we still have the freedom in America to express our feelings and beliefs.
    It is blogs such as this and talk radio that will fight to keep us free to express ourselves. There is only One News Network that will fight for our freedoms in America and so with that we all know we must continue on in our fight to stay free in the land of the Free and home of the Brave.

  205. tellitlikeitis says:

    Hi Bell. How are you?

  206. tellitlikeitis says:

    Hi Sam.

  207. tellitlikeitis says:

  208. samiam60 says:

    Ohio you are such a Belle 🙂

  209. samiam60 says:

    Hi Tellit… Great song.

  210. ohiobelle says:

    Hello tellit and Sam… How are you guys doing??
    It’s great to be able to comment on the blog again.. Is vf still around?

  211. tellitlikeitis says:

    Hi Sam, The fight continues.

  212. tellitlikeitis says:

    Bell, VF was around this morning but not this evening.

  213. samhenry says:

    Well, I’m bad, I just had to look at the blog one more time before bed and here is am Sami, Tellit and at last, Belle. VF hasn’t been on since late afternoon has she? Did you see the CNN vid where Paul Begala called Palin a wack job? She is not my top candidate but i think that is pretty darn low.

  214. ohiobelle says:

    I am so glad my comments are finally showing up yet it’s taking about 10 minutes for that to happen!!! I’ve been locked out for 2 weeks!!! At least I can finally say.. good morning, good evening and good nite! lol

  215. samiam60 says:

    BELGRADE, Montana (CNN) — President Obama on Friday took his push for a health care overhaul to traditionally conservative Montana, saying a bill to extend coverage to the uninsured while helping those already with coverage will pass this year.
    President Obama discusses his health care plans Friday at a meeting in Belgrade, Montana.

    President Obama discusses his health care plans Friday at a meeting in Belgrade, Montana.
    Click to view previous image
    1 of 2
    Click to view next image

    However, an influential Democratic representative said the House would only pass a health care bill in January or later, signaling continuing rifts within Obama’s party on his domestic priority for 2009.

    “We’re taking some time to make sure it’s done right,” said Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania. “I don’t know that we’ll get something done before January, and even then we may not get it done. We’re going to do it right when it’s finally done.”

    Obama told a largely supportive Montana audience at his second of three town hall meetings this week that fixing the health care system requires improving health insurance practices and reducing the costs of treatment. He sought questions from skeptics of his proposed health care overhaul, seeking to confront some misconceptions fueled by opponents Democrats say are undermining the debate.

    One man who identified himself as a proud National Rifle Association supporter and believer in the Constitution asked how the government would pay to expand health insurance coverage to 46 million uninsured people.

    “You can’t tell us how you’re going to pay for this,” said the questioner, Randy Rathie, a welder from Ekalaka, Montana. “The only way you’re going to get the money is to raise our taxes. That’s the only way you can do that.”

    Obama responded with his oft-repeated explanation that two-thirds of the cost of overhauling health care — estimated at about $900 billion over 10 years — would come from eliminating waste and improving efficiency in the current system, which includes the government-run Medicare and Medicaid programs for the elderly and impoverished.
    Don’t Miss

    * Obama’s big problem in Big Sky country
    * Obama feels summer heat over health care
    * Failing to reform health care ‘truly scary,’ Obama says
    * Fears fuel emotional health care protests

    The rest would have to come from new revenue, he agreed with the questioner, and he called for reducing the amount of deductions that people making more than $250,000 a year can make on their income taxes.

    “If we did that alone, just that change alone … that would raise enough to pay for health care reform,” Obama said, noting that would meet his election campaign pledge to avoid any tax increase on people earning less than $250,000 a year.

    However, Obama said some taxes would have to be raised, and the crowd applauded when he said he believes people with more money, like himself, ought to pay a heavier burden.

    “We’ve got to get over this notion that we can have something for nothing,” Obama said. “That’s how we got into this deficit and this debt in the first place.”

    In reference to emotional and heated debate at some other town hall meetings across the country in recent weeks, Obama told Rathie, “I appreciate your question, the respectful way you asked it, and by the way, I also believe in the Constitution.”

    Afterward, Rathie said he was impressed by Obama’s performance but remained skeptical.

    “I don’t think he knows where that money’s going to come from,” he said. “If he does, he’s not saying.”

    Obama noted there is more work to be done, with Congress seeking to merge at least four bills, along with a possible compromise agreement being negotiated by Democratic Sen. Max Baucus and five other members of his Senate Finance Committee, into a single bill in September.

    Another questioner chosen when Obama asked for a skeptic identified himself as an insurance provider who wanted to know why Obama and Democrats are vilifying the insurance industry in the health care debate. Earlier in the meeting, Obama described what he called discriminatory practices by insurance companies that dropped coverage of people who became sick or refused to cover those with pre-existing medical conditions.

    Obama noted some insurance companies are contributing to the reform debate, but said others are spending millions of dollars to try to defeat any health care legislation. For a health care overhaul to work for everyone, he said, it has to ensure all Americans are covered so that insurance companies have incentive to participate.

    They won’t be able to exclude coverage for pre-existing conditions or “cherry pick” healthy people while refusing coverage for sick people, Obama said, so increasing the total numbers covered will be the enticement.

    On Saturday, Obama will hold another town hall meeting in Grand Junction, Colorado, before vacationing in some national parks with his family next week. In addition, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Obama will hold “some events not yet announced” in coming days.

    While Obama has said consensus can be reached on health care reform, contentious town hall meetings held by lawmakers around the country have created a different impression.

    The White House, and many Democrats in Congress, hope that by building support in the West, the president can start to turn the tide. Though the region is largely Republican, Obama made some inroads in the latest election. He won in Colorado and lost by just a slim margin in Montana.

    However, Murtha’s comments in Bentleyville, Pennsylvania, to CNN affiliate WJPA signaled continuing divisions among House Democrats over the scope and pace of health care legislation.

    “We said to the speaker [House Speaker Nancy Pelosi], the leadership, let’s not rush this thing,” Murtha said. “Let’s do it right, so we’ll have a uniquely American plan, if the thing passes.”

    Obama’s town hall events are just part of a larger Democratic strategy for winning support in the region.

    The Democratic National Committee began a TV ad this week promoting the president’s health care plan. A committee spokesman said the ad will run on national cable as well as on local cable in New Hampshire, Montana, Colorado and the District of Columbia.

    The group Families USA, which supports the president’s plan, also launched a campaign Thursday that includes an ad running in a dozen states — among them Montana and Colorado.

    But groups opposed to the president’s plan have their own campaigns.

    One voter in Livingston, Montana, not far from where the president spoke in Belgrade, summarized the kinds of concerns that she and many others in the region have.

    “I believe that there is a health care crisis, I really do,” Sonja McDonald, who voted for Obama in 2008, told CNN’s Ed Henry on Thursday. “Do I believe that the government needs to be more involved? No!”

    Henry met McDonald at a clinic that gets half its funding from taxpayers.

    “The government being involved is fine,” McDonald said. “It’s just … when they try and overstep, when they try to say, ‘No, this is what needs to be done

  216. samhenry says:

    Belle – did VF have to do something to get you back in?

  217. tellitlikeitis says:

    good nite Bell!

  218. ohiobelle says:

    HELLO SAM!!! YOU MAY NOT GET THIS UNTIL TOMORROW….. HAHA

    For anybody that does not know, SamHenry has been my bff since I’ve been “shut out”! lol

  219. samhenry says:

    Thanks for the town hall wrap, Sami. I missed it.

  220. samiam60 says:

    SamH good to see you and everyone on so late. I am just getting back from my 10 minuets of fame. Was supposed to go till 12 but owell the cane came out and I was out. Rednecks don’t really like Redneck jokes so much.

  221. samiam60 says:

    Good night all and have a great weekend.

  222. ohiobelle says:

    SamH & Tellit, vf doesn’t know I am being shut out… I am unable to talk to her. I am getting ready to lose the connection again…… I don’t know why this keeps happening????

    I’ll check in tomorrow morning if I can.

  223. tellitlikeitis says:

  224. tellitlikeitis says:

  225. Foxwood says:

    Debate? It’s not a matter of debate. It’s a matter of right. Capitalism, Free Market and the Constitution are right. Socialism was never what our “old white men” founding fathers meant this country to be. If someone want’s socialism, there are places like Cuba and Venezuela that have the perfect system to live in. They can leave the United States as it is. That is my well educated opinion.

  226. ohiobelle says:

    I doubt this will post but if it does; GOOD!!
    I never had problems with my computer until the night (2 weeks ago tomorrow) I told vf that I had info I needed her to blog for me about GM… I just want that noted! VF can back me up on this!

  227. tellitlikeitis says:

  228. ohiobelle says:

    My computer is freezing up again! Sorry

    I miss you all and I will try to check in tomorrow if I can!

  229. tellitlikeitis says:

  230. samhenry says:

    Nite all – will catch up with you tomorrow night. I have a huge garage sale tomorrow.

  231. Foxwood says:

    Night SamH,

    I’ll just roll the cannon into the garage tonight and silently fold up the flag.

  232. Foxwood says:

    Hey people! The Constitution is the LAW! It is not meant to pick and chose what you want from it. The Constitution in it’s entirety it the LAW of these United States of America, and it really pisses me off that some people take a big hairy dump on it, because it’s not fair, and it was written by “old white men” that took advantage of others, so therefor it deserves to be shit on.

    We’ve made mistakes and have done our best to rectify them, but this is the greatest nation in the world because of the Constitution AND NOT DESPITE IT!, if Oshithead doesn’t f*ck it up. Hopefully in 2010 and 2012 we can fix all of the f*ckups.

    If you don’t like it, Cuba and Venezuela have nice weather and good Socialist values.

  233. samhenry says:

    This may have been published earlier. In this speech, Ronald Reagan sounds would sound far right to the liberals today. He saw national health insurance as the first step to socialism. It will be capable of expansion into every area eventually.

  234. arlenearmy says:

    Well, folks i gotta get to bed. There’s a rally tomorrow morning in front of congressman office. So I gotta be alert. Talk at you all tomorrow when I get back.

  235. samhenry says:

    NOTE: new post at http://samandimp.wordpress.com has a new post: “Terrorist” Ronald Reagan. Hop on over.

  236. VotingFemale says:

    Your Video Post was not lost on me in the least, Tellit…

    I am an enigma… and my love and devotion to all of you is like that of a mother puma.

    Tellit posted…

  237. VotingFemale says:

    Good Morning Samiam!!!

  238. samhenry says:

    vf, I have a garage sale going on until 1:00. I will be pinned sown by enemy gunfire demanding reduced prices. If you have time, could you look at my new post and tell me what you HONESTLY think. I will edit. TX, Cat. woof

  239. Foxwood says:

    And speaking of gunfire…
    Sieg heil und Gutten Morgan fellow unAmerican Nazis!
    Time to unfurl the Confederate Swastika and fire the cannon.

  240. LisaInTX says:

    DAMN!!! Okay so NOT raising taxes, only “reducing the deductions”? What a nice way to put, HELL YEAH I’m GONNA RAISE YOUR DAMN TAXES!!!
    Is the man INSANE??? Does he REALLY think WE won’t understand this fork tongued talk????
    Give us a break already Mr. MARX Jr……

    Obama syas ” The rest would have to come from new revenue, he agreed with the questioner, and he called for reducing the amount of deductions that people making more than $250,000 a year can make on their income taxes.”

  241. samiam60 says:

    Good Morning my Fellow Patriots!
    Good Morning my Fellow Defenders of Our Constition!
    Good Morning my Fellow Freedom Fighters!
    It is a good day to continue the fight for our Personal Freedom and to expose the Liberal Socialism that has become a Terminal Cancer to Our Way of Life.
    This is a Cancer that had laid dormant for too many years and it must not just be put into Remission but must be Removed from our Society all together.
    We The People can and will Destroy this Cancer of Liberal Socialism once and for all by making the American People wake up to this life threatening disease and by Our VOTE in 2010 and a final defeat of Socialism in 2012.
    Now is the time for ALL AMERICANS to speak out with ONE LOUD VOICE and put Washington on notice that their days are now numbered. RISE UP AMERICA and be heard like never before. RISE UP AMERICA and let Washington know we are on the move. WE THE PEOPLE Mr. President are now WIDE EYED and aware of all of your deceptions and ill will for our way of life. Your Socialism will never survive the Voice of America. Make no mistake about it, we have had ENOUGH!

  242. VotingFemale says:

    I am finishing up the new blogpost…

    Good Morning Lisa and Fox!!!

    Hi again Samiam!!!

    BRB pant pant pant…

  243. LisaInTX says:

    Morning Sami!
    Well said!! We are FED-UP with the DOUBLE TALK and the LIES and the ARROGANCE and the ELITIST attitude. They can KISS MY FLAG!!!

  244. samiam60 says:

    Good morning Fox, VF, Lisa, and SamH

  245. LisaInTX says:

    Here is MORE DOUBLE TALK by the Communist in Chief!!
    TAX RELIEF = WELFARE, NOT TAX BREAKS!!!
    THE LIES and LIES let me count the ways…. :-/

  246. LisaInTX says:

    Meatheads, hacks and Jackasses!!! LMAO!!!!!!!!!
    Mark Levin tells it like it is!!! hahahaaa

  247. Foxwood says:

    Good morning Sam and Sam, VF and Lisa.

    I am really tired of people picking and choosing what they like in the Constitution and throwing out the rest.

    I’m tired of people saying “it’s a brilliant piece of work”, then taking a big hairy dump on it.

    I’m tired of people thinking it’s ok to pass a piece of legislation that is unconstitutional and saying that the Constitution should not be the only thing to consider when making law.

    THE CONSTITUTION IS THE LAW!
    And POS politicians and ignorant people need to learn this FACT!

  248. LisaInTX says:

    Dear Friend,

    BARACK OBAMA AND HIS ALLIES ARE TRYING TO CHANGE THE U.S. CONSTITUTION WITHOUT FOLLOWING THE AMENDMENT PROCESS — IN FACT, THEY’RE TRYING TO REWRITE THE ENTIRE CONSTITUTION — AND THEY’RE CLOSE TO SUCCEEDING!

    What would you think if an amendment to the U.S. Constitution was introduced by liberal Democrat Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, which repealed the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights — taking away our right to Free Speech?

    What would you think if an amendment to the U.S. Constitution was introduced by liberal Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, which repealed the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights — taking away our right to Keep and Bear Arms? (A right that the U.S. Supreme Court recently upheld!)

    “That could never happen,” you say. “No one would allow it!” Right? Well…

    Did you know that there are TWO ways that our Constitution can be changed? And did you know that Pelosi, Reid and Barack Obama are using the less well-known way, without having to actually introduce amendments?

    IT’S TRUE — and WE have to stop it NOW!

    One way to change the Constitution is to go through the amendment process — a long and tedious process requiring two-thirds of both houses of Congress to pass an amendment, and then three-fourths of the states to ratify it.

    That means a “super-majority” of our representatives at the National and State levels would have to be in favor of the amendment — which safeguards us from the possibility of really “bad” amendments.

    BUT… there is one other way that our Constitution can be changed… and it DOES NOT require all of those elected representatives to be in favor of it. It’s called a Constitutional Convention, and all that it requires is 34 states to ask Congress to call one.

    In fact, right now, all that is needed is for two more states to ask for a Constitutional Convention… and the basic law of the land could be changed forever by Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid!

    WE NEED YOUR HELP, RIGHT NOW, TO STOP BARACK OBAMA
    AND HIS ALLIES FROM CHANGING THE U.S. CONSTITUTION:
    CLICK HERE NOW!
    Most people don’t realize that Article V of the Constitution requires Congress to call a new Constitutional Convention (a “Con Con”) if two-thirds (or 34) of the states request it. We’ve only had one other “Con Con” in our history: the one where the original Constitution was written in 1787!

    The language of Article V is mandatory: it says that Congress “shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments” whenever requests are received from two-thirds of the states. Note that the word “amendments” is used in the plural. These are the only instructions we have about a Constitutional Convention. There are no other rules or guidelines.

    We don’t know how a Constitutional Convention would be apportioned, or how the delegates would be elected. We don’t know what rules the Convention would operate under. We don’t know whether changes to the Constitution could be proposed by a simple majority, or would require a super majority, of those attending. We don’t know if the agenda could be limited or would be wide open to any proposal.

    We don’t know ANYTHING about how a Con Con would work — which means that it will come down to Congress setting the rules!

    And Congress is controlled by the most radically liberal Democrats in American history! Is that who we want to be in charge of a new Constitutional Convention?

    Do we want BARACK OBAMA, NANCY PELOSI, and HARRY REID to completely rewrite our most basic document of law?

    WE NEED YOUR HELP, RIGHT NOW, TO STOP BARACK OBAMA
    AND HIS ALLIES FROM CHANGING THE U.S. CONSTITUTION:
    CLICK HERE NOW!
    The fact is, under the vague language of Article V, a Constitutional Convention cannot be limited. It would be wide open, and able to consider ANY change in the Constitution that was proposed!

    Former U. S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger once said, “There is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda.”

    The Stanford Law School Professor whose case-book is used in the majority of U.S. law schools, Gerald Gunther, said that, even if Congress tried to limit the Convention to one subject, the delegates could decide for themselves that the Convention “is entitled to set its own agenda.”

    This means that, even if supporters of a “Con Con” claim that the convention would only cover one issue — whether it’s a balanced budget amendment or removing the requirement that to be eligible to serve as President, one must be a “natural born citizen,” or anything else — there is NO WAY to stop the Convention from changing EVERYTHING that we hold dear in America!

    Barack Obama and his far-left supporters would be able to get THEIR people appointed as delegates to the Convention, so that THEIR agendas would be the Convention’s agenda, and THEIR plans for socialism in America would come to pass.

    Say BYE-BYE to the First Amendment’s freedom of speech — Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity could be taken off the air.

    Say BYE-BYE to the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms — a total gun ban could be the law of the land!

    Say BYE-BYE to the Constitution’s requirement that to serve as President a man or a woman must be a “natural born citizen”!

    You KNOW that’s what they’ll do if given the chance — and we’re only TWO STATES AWAY from seeing a Constitutional Convention convened!

    You see, Article V says that it takes a request from two-thirds of the states to force a “Con Con” — but it doesn’t say there’s any time limit on getting to that total!

    Thirty-two states have already issued a call for a “Con Con” over the last few decades, including Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming.

    It only takes 34 states to REQUIRE a Constitutional Convention be convened!

    Some states, like Georgia, Virginia, and others, have since voted to “rescind” their call for a “Con Con” — BUT no one is sure whether those “rescission” votes are actually Constitutional…so the danger is REAL!

    WE NEED YOUR HELP, RIGHT NOW, TO STOP BARACK OBAMA
    AND HIS ALLIES FROM CHANGING THE U.S. CONSTITUTION:
    CLICK HERE NOW!
    The United States Justice Foundation is launching a major campaign to STOP a “Con Con” from taking place — WE MUST CREATE a tremendous outpouring of publicity and public scrutiny to be given to this danger, so that Barack Obama and his radical liberal allies can’t “sneak this past us” without anyone noticing, until it’s too late. Right now, our staff is conducting legal and historical research, and preparing legal opinions, to submit to every state legislature, if necessary, and we’ll be offering to represent any state, or state legislator, in fighting the Con-Con based on those documents.

    We’re also going to be leading a grassroots effort to attack this issue at both the state and federal levels: At the state level, leading the charge in every state to either NOT VOTE for a “Con Con” (if they haven’t voted yet) or to RESCIND their past vote in favor (if they have). And, at the federal level, we’ll be mobilizing citizens across the country to contact their Representatives and Senators to DEMAND that they come out, NOW, and announce their support for a state’s right to rescind, and that they won’t support a call for a “Con-Con.” In addition, we’ll be calling on the Attorney General of the United States, and the Attorney General of each and every State that has passed a “Con-Con” resolution, to issue an official Opinion on the legality of rescission.

    THIS DANGER IS REAL. The Constitutional Convention of 1787 was called for the exclusive purpose of amending the Articles of Confederation. Once the Founding Fathers assembled in Philadelphia, however, they threw out the Articles of Confederation and wrote an entirely new Constitution, and even changed the ratification procedure so they could get it adopted more easily. The 1787 Convention is the only precedent we have for a national Constitutional Convention.

    There’s no guarantee that all of the changes to our Constitution passed at a Constitutional Convention would need to be ratified by 34 states this time — if a “Con Con” can change our structure of government as defined in Articles I, II, and III, of the Constitution, then it can also change the Article V requirement that three-fourths of the states are needed to ratify any changes. The Convention of 1787 reduced the number of states required to ratify a change from 100% of the states to 75%, and a Convention today could “follow their example” and reduce it further, to 66%, or 60%, or even 51%!

  249. LisaInTX says:

    Morning VF and Foxwood!
    Fox I agree. We are in a CRISIS of NATIONAL importance.
    The Communists in charge are trying desperately to hang on to their ILL GOTTEN power and will resort to whatever it takes to keep it!
    My last post was from the USJF….thank God they are watching out for us thru the legal loopholes!!

  250. Foxwood says:

    Lisa, I need the link please.

  251. LisaInTX says:

    Foxwood
    Here is the link.
    http://usjf.net/

  252. Dave B says:

    I have never felt more invigorated than when I read these comments and see normal citizens that have proven they’re not stupid, they’re wise to what’s going on, and don’t succumb to the politically correct expectations and admonitions of their positions. I’m guessing that at some point we all felt like we might be alone in our observations and opinions, might have felt helpless to do anything or as in the case of white heterosexual, Christian males, might have felt like we have been trivialized to the point of insignificance because of what we are. Not anymore. I have seen normal people, despite being called racists, I have seen black people, despite being called “uncle Toms”, I have seen pundits despite being called right wing nuts, stand up and protest and be heard. I have seen the women take the lead in this fight and they’ll be the ones responsible to save our Republic.. in my opinion. We’ll be all right, there’s too many people that understand the spirit of our country that will not capitulate to the media, capitulate to the attempts to minimize our grievances because we don’t fit into a preferred category, or won’t “blink” when they level their charges of racism, sexism, or some other category they try to fit us in.

Comments are closed.