Tareq and Michaele Salahi Attend Dinner by Obama's Executive Order

With today's reality show wanna be's, it's easy to jump on the band wagon of accusations when someone turns a public or media event into a faux pas. When, Tareq and Michaele Salahi recently appeared at an important White House Dinner, it was said that they were looking for publicity for a possible reality show, or perhaps a book, or maybe both. Adding to the mystique was Michaele's reported gushing to her hair dresser of her invitation to the dinner, but somehow she was never able to produce that invitation - especially at the White House when they arrived!

Well, that was enough to set tongues a waggin'. Who had allowed this "security breach"? Was it the fault of the White House Social Secretary Desiree Rogers? Was it the fault of the Secret Service? The Salahis insisted they were invited and not "party-crashers", so who had actually invited them? Where was that mysterious invitation? Were these people really able to slip through the tightest security known to the US?

Here's something I want you to look closely:

Look at the expression on Obama's face. This is not his normal "formal" smile that he uses when saying, "Hi, how are you?" to people he's not familiar with. In fact, the expressions on all three of their faces suggest that they are sharing some intimate information.

Now, the buzz has been about how these people could get into this event with no formal invitation. No one is confessing to having any knowledge of them being on the guest list. Again, they haven't produced that formal invitation that everyone was required to have and they weren't on the list that had been approved and cleared for attendance.

Now, look at this picture VERY CLOSELY:

Just who is that guy in the center? Who is that man in the white jacket? Who is the blonde on the right? Hmmmm. This picture was taken at a fashion event in 2005 when Obama was a Senator.

It's obvious that this couple who are under suspicion of "crashing" a White House dinner event, weren't strangers to the occupants of the White House. So, if it wasn't any of the White House staff who approved their attendance, and the Secret Service let them it - it obviously had to be by EXECUTIVE ORDER!

Again, when you "hear" the campaign rhetoric from Obama echoing in your ear about transparency and everything above board, add this incident to the multitude of "behind closed doors, back-room deals, etc.

Face it, America. We've been hoodwinked by a pathological liar who lives by his own devised set of rules of conduct and propriety while governing by a totally different set. The old political machines of which we had all grown tired have given way to a newer, but much more insidious one - and it's rolling over us at an alarming speed.

I'm asking you to judge someone by their actions, not their words. Make your decisions based upon facts, not emotions. In regards to our national and even our local leaders - particularly the ones who have been in office a while - evaluate what they have done and are presently doing that isn't in agreement with what they have proclaimed they would do. Don't listen to their promises, because as we have found from this last election, politicians will say whatever it takes to keep their positions of power - and they have shown, especially this year, that they have no intention of listening to the people they are supposed to represent.

Remember, too, that all of them, including the President, are employees of We the People! Therefore, as their employer, we must demand that they do what we want - that being open and transparent - or risk being fired and replaced with someone who will. We will have a chance in the near future to drive this point home.

Obama Opens US Courts to the "Citizens of the World"

As you are probably aware, President Barack Obama claims himself a citizen of the world.  Not only does he view himself as a citizen of the world, but he views the world as citizens of the United States, with the same rights to US housing, US financial aid, US protections, US freedoms, et al, as any natural born or naturalized citizen.  In fact, he has ordered the military to Mirandize the enemy in the throes of war.  That's insane!  The Miranda warning is a right for US citizens, to give them protection against making incriminating statements against themselves.  It never was - and should never be - intended as blanket protection for all people of the world, anywhere in the world, and especially in time of war - for our enemies!

People with half a brain should know that before the US declared war on the terrorists, war was declared on the US by the terrorists.  Their actions were notched up way beyond what could be called civil disorder, way beyond a protest against major socio-political or religions positions.  They slaughtered thousands of innocents with their carefully orchestrated attack on the US.  Their actions should strongly suggest to Obama and his other Progressive/Liberal cohorts that the terrorists established the rules - the rules of war - and that they did not perpetrate a civil crime as of one US citizen against another US citizen, and therefore should be treated and tried differently - by the conventional rules of war, and not in civil courts.

I found this blog while scrolling through Blogsurfer.  I hope they don't mind me using it here because it demonstrates the Obama Administration's version of the Miranda Rights for our enemies at Gitmo and those on the battlefield:

FEDFILTER

"Post-War on Terror” Miranda Rights - Posted in In the News by tymothyson on November 19, 2009

"You have the right to remain silent or shout any obscene, blasphemous religious propaganda you may want. Anything you say or do could, but will not be used against you in a court of military law. You have the right to a[n] civilian attorney who could leak information to terrorist cells outside of your terrorist jail cell, though you should really be tried as an enemy combatant war criminal and never again see the light of day. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed to you as part of the $75-100 Million of our tax dollars to move your keister from Gitmo to the land where our fathers died. Do you understand these rights as they have been read to you? Of course you don’t, you didn’t even have to learn English to take up residency on the dole, plant a dirty bomb, or get a license to fly a jumbo jet.

“If you are not a United States citizen, you need not contact your country’s consulate prior to any questioning because we will treat you like one anyway.”

Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder sees Al-Qaeda in the same light as Obama.  He has made it abundantly clear that he plans to try five of the main Gitmo terrorists/detainees as if they mugged an old lady in Central Park. 

Our laws require that accused US citizens be tried before a jury of their peers.  WHO, then, are the peers of these men, these non-citizens?  Holder himself said that if Khalid Sheikh Mohammed pleads guilty and testifies the same as he has before, Holder can guarantee a conviction.  What conviction?  He's an enemy combatant and has admitted to his role in the planning of the 9-11 attack.  He declared jihad against the US... that's a declaration of war!

Further, Holder is also getting pressure from Germans that the testimony they may contribute during the trial not be used if the prosecution plans to seek the death penalty.  So, has Holder created his own Catch-22?  If KSM and the four others are given life in prison, what prison will they be sent to?  If in the US, the US citizens will pay again for the crimes of this man by providing him with three squares (a special diet by the way) special prayer times, and more civil rights that most US citizens exercise in their lifetime -- for the rest of his!

In another instance, Navy seals are being prosecuted for bloodying the lip of another terrorist/enemy who is known to be responsible for the atrocious murders and abuse of the corpses of four civilian US security personnel in Iraq.  Now, during declared wartime, every action of military personnel is under the microscope of liberal interpreters, and the enemy is afforded US Citizens rights when they aren't US citizens, it's NOT war anymore - it's insanity!

Send Thanksgiving Message to These Democrats for Healthcare Sell Out!

Many thanks to Redstate.com for this information.   Take this information, and let your Senators know that they should be especially thankfully this Thanksgiving holiday for the career that they once HAD in the Senate.  Adios, Amigos y Amigas!

Below is a list of the Democratic Senators up in 2010, and the email contact links for each of their offices:


Bayh, Evan - (D - IN) Class III 131 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-5623 Web Form: www.bayh.senate.gov/contact/email/

Bennet, Michael F. - (D - CO) Class III 702 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-5852 Web Form: www.bennet.senate.gov/contact/

Boxer, Barbara - (D - CA) Class III 112 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-3553 Web Form: www.boxer.senate.gov/contact/email/policy.cfm

Burris, Roland W. - (D - IL) Class III 387 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-2854 Web Form: www.burris.senate.gov/contact/contact.cfm
Dodd, Christopher J. - (D - CT) Class III 448 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-2823 Web Form: www.dodd.senate.gov/index.php?q=node/3130

Dorgan, Byron L. - (D - ND) Class III 322 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-2551 Web Form: www.dorgan.senate.gov/contact/contact_form.cfm

Feingold, Russell D. - (D - WI) Class III 506 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-5323 Web Form: www.feingold.senate.gov/contact_opinion.html

Inouye, Daniel K. - (D - HI) Class III 722 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-3934 Web Form: www.inouye.senate.gov/Contact/Email-Form.cfm

Leahy, Patrick J. - (D - VT) Class III 433 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-4242 Web Form: www.leahy.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Lincoln, Blanche L. - (D - AR) Class III 355 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-4843 Web Form: www.lincoln.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm

Mikulski, Barbara A. - (D - MD) Class III 503 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-4654 Web Form: www.mikulski.senate.gov/Contact/contact.cfm

Murray, Patty - (D - WA) Class III 173 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-2621 Web Form: www.murray.senate.gov/email/index.cfm
Reid, Harry - (D - NV) Class III 522 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-3542 Web Form: www.reid.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm

Schumer, Charles E. - (D - NY) Class III 313 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-6542 Web Form: www.schumer.senate.gov/new_website/contact.cfm

Specter, Arlen - (D - PA) Class III 711 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-4254 www.specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.ContactForm

Wyden, Ron - (D - OR) Class III 223 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-5244 Web Form: www.wyden.senate.gov/contact/

Obama's Plan to Spread the Wealth -- TO THE WEALTHY!

According to Edmunds.com, 690,000 Americans took advantage of the Cash for Clunkers Program.  Under this Obama brainfart, it cost the taxpayers $24,000 for EACH one of those cars.  Remember the head-slap "I coulda had a V-8?  Well you, too, could have had at least a V-6 -- along with all the other folks who got their new cars if you'd been given your OWN money to spend!

So, my point here is that SOMEONE took some of your wealth and gave it to someone else!  AHHH--- that would be Obama's promise to Joe the Plumber when he said he thought that spreading the wealth around would be good for everyone.  Well, was it good for you?  Seriously, who got that $24,000?  It wasn't the car dealers.  Some of them are still awaiting their money from the government to cover the rebates given to those who purchased the cars... So, WHO got that money?

We're all, by now, familiar with the fact that the reported "jobs saved or created" numbers that have been posted on the recovery.com site are absolutely false.  I'd like someone to PROVE that any job was actually saved due to the economic strategies of the Obama Administration. They like to use the nice round number of one million jobs, even though it's much, much less than that.  But we'll go with data the Obama administration has posted, just for the sake of this argument. 

The Administration says that they've created and/or saved one million jobs and they spent $160 billion doing it.  That means that government had spent  paid $160,000 on each job.  Hmmm.  Will someone please introduce me to the person who got a job created by the stimulus with a starting salary of $160,000?  The Obama Administation likes to say that some of the jobs saved are "the waitress who's still on the job," --  as Joe Biden himself used this example.  (I'd like to meet the waitress who makes that kind of money!)

In fact, Jared Bernstein, chief economist and senior economic advisor to Vice President Joe Biden says that the cost per job was more like $92,000.  So, even if the "shovelers" on the shovel-ready jobs, and the waitresses, and teachers, or whoever, got $92,000 on average, and didn't actually get their fair share of that $160,000 average - WHO did?

Are you beginning to get the picture?  The Obama Administration has borrowed billions upon billions of dollars in only 11 months in office.  And only a small portion of that money has trickled down to the people who are hurting and need to work.  Millions, if not billions have been documented as wasted - mostly in million-dollar chunks that include rebates to the long-dead, rebates to prisoners, yada, yada..... 

I CAN tell you where jobs were actually created. There are 30-some-odd czars and they have sizeable staffs. There are innumerable advisors and expanded staff roaming the White House halls on any given day.  All the czars make at least high six-figure incomes. Their operating budgets/expenses have not been made public. But just their combined salaries run in the millions of dollars. Government is the sector where the greatest amount of job creation has taken place.

Where is the rest of it going, though?  Is it going to some middleman?  To some corporation (cash for clunkers) perhaps?  To local governments (shovel-ready projects) perhaps?  To banks (bailouts) perhaps?  To financial insurers (AIG) perhaps? 

Out of the "Dollars" Obama is getting from China, he's sending "pennies" down to the the people.  And the wealth of our nation is being re-distributed to the wealthy GROUPS .  The "have nots" NEVER have gotten theirs... just look at all cultures and civilizations throughout history.  So, if you're looking for your share of Obama money!  Don't hold your breath! 

"Lousiana Boudin" in the New Senate Health Care Bill

Pork, whether it's negotiated for or not, is pork.  Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is desperate to get his necessary votes for his health care bill to make it onto the floor of the Senate and be passed on Saturday.  In order to get all his democratic senators in lock-step, he has decided to resort to bribery.  According to Bloomberg.com,  "Nov. 20 (Bloomberg) -- Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu (D), one of three lawmakers being wooed by Senate Democratic leaders to back health-care legislation, won the inclusion of an extra $100 million in federal aid for low-income people in her state."

Was the same consideration given to the Arkansas Senator, Blanche Lincoln?  No, not that has been made known yet anyway.  However, it's bribery to include such "favors" in turn for a single vote needed on Reid's "pet project" -- and it's pork!  More importantly it's wrong.  PLUS it's plain stupid to make it so very obvious!

The American people have finally become aware of the shenanigans that go on in Washington all the time.  This type of behavior is so commonplace that all the players in Congress simply ignore it, turn blind eyes to it and consider it usual legislative activity, but it's appalling to ordinary citizens.  However, Americans aren't likely to grow numb to the "pay to play" tactics or the bribery tactics that the House and Senate are using routinely, because they know that if normal American citizens conducted their businesses and personal dealings in like manner, they'd be imprisoned for bribery and other felonies.

Why won't the politicians wake up to the fact that their constituents are onto their games, and it's not going to be "politics as usual" anymore.  Politics isn't the same as it used to be.  Americans are more educated, becoming more involved in government, and demanding accountability from their representatives.  If Congress members don't wake up to that fact, then perhaps in 2010 and 2012, when corrupted House and Senate members are removed from the premises, they'll finally understand that Americans really are mad as hell and not going to take it any more!

Obama's Fuzzy Math

I don't think anyone should be in the least surprised about the arbitrary (kindest word I could think of) numbers that are thrown around by Obama and his administration.

I mean, after all, during his campaign he said he visited ..... let's see how many states was it he said?



And how many jobs does his administration say they've saved with the Stimulus Package I?

It is obvious that the only long term jobs (or positions) that have been created are those he created in government. Most jobs that have been "created" on "main street America" are mostly temporary jobs and/or short-term project work. Yet, the Administration's website touts large numbers from mystical congressional districts all over the country that simply do not exist.... just like the promised jobs!  Each of these jobs cost you the taxpayer an average of $173K. And if a worker made as much as $53K for this job, where did the other $120K go? And really.... you cannot count jobs saved!

In regard to mystical healthcare numbers, Obama's administration had said at first that there are from 46 to 47 million people in the US who are without health insurance. Then somehow it became more like 30+ million. So, who really knows? Here are some of the factors that make determining this number difficult to pinpoint - but let's illustrate worst-case scenario using numbers from 2007:

Of the 46 million who the Administration claimed are uninsured, 6.4 million are already on government-funded healthcare program but consider themselves as non-insured. One reason for this is that these people were automatically enrolled or pre-enrolled by a medical facility after receiving treatment at an emergency room or free clinic. They may not be paying insurance premiums, but they certainly have access to medical care any time they need it!

Another group of 4.3 million people are eligible to go on a federally funded Medicaid or SCHIP or something similar, but they simply have not signed up. If they were to go to a free clinic or emergency room, they, too, would automatically be shifted into the group above, and while they aren't paying insurance premiums, they technically have no healthcare coverage risk.

Approximately 10 million are non-citizens. How many of these are illegals is not known, but it would most likely be a staggering amount.

More than 10 million don't fit into either of the above groups, but they have substantial incomes. In fact, usually more than three times the poverty level. Included in that group, as well, are single income earners whose income is over $30K per year, and a family of four has an income of more than $62,000 per year who simply have chosen not to acquire healthcare coverage or they may be influx between an old job and new job and are awaiting the new coverage to "kick in".

From the remaining group, approximately 15.6 million, 5 million are adults between 18 and 34 without kids. They are US citizens, some of whom fall below poverty level and somehow are not eligible for federally funded health insurance program, and most are not a childless adult between age 18-34.

So, given the above breakdown, we're talking about only 15.6 million who currently may not have healthcare coverage because they cannot afford it or because they simply cannot get it. These people should be the ones that the government focused on - the ones who need some kind of intervention for the Democrats to be satisfied that everyone had access to healthcare.

But they aren't satisfied... for two reasons. Number one and most importantly, they don't have control of the healthcare industry. Don't be fooled; that is their goal. Second, they will be forcing those younger Americans who want to spend their money on something other than healthcare into a healthcare plan.... or be penalized. Either way, the government is getting deeper into their pockets, too! (Plus stripping them of a personal choice.)

My math is not that great, but that appears to be that only about 5% of Americans are presently the ones who actually need healthcare coverage and cannot afford or obtain it. YET, Harry Reid's latest proposed Senate healthcare bill is being touted as covering 94% of Americans. Does that mean the last group listed above will be left out - again? How has that improved any situation for other Americans? Isn't this hoopla about healthcare reform then much ado -- all for 1% of Americans? Would somebody explain this in plain ENGLISH?

Abortion Will Be Federally-funded in the New Overhauled Healthcare System

If you don't believe it.  Read this:  http://tinyurl.com/yfwcvls

Let's say that the healthcare bill gets through the Senate and returns to the House and both House and Senate manage to come together on a healthcare bill.  If the Stupak Amendment remains attached at that point, (MOST unlikely that the House would allow it to stand - but if it did...) Obama plans to strip it from the final bill as he prepares to sign it.

Neither Obama or the House of Representatives are at all listening to the people.  The majority of Americans oppose federal funding of abortion at this point, and the most of them who oppose it do so under any circumstances except where it is necessary to save the life of the mother or in the cases of incest.  So, why won't they listen to the people and abide by their wishes?  Simple.  They are NOT in office to do the will of the people, but to use the power of their offices to push through their liberal/progressive agenda which does not reflect the majority of Americans but the few who happen to agree with them - special interest groups, both political and corporate.   Isn't this supposed to be a DEMOCRACY where the majority rules.... or a Republic where the PEOPLE rule?  Apparently the United States of America is neither anymore! 

It's amazing what one can learn when they get out of the small world of their own minds. Jeremiah Wright spewed hatred against the government for causing hardship on the black population.  Here is one very interesting quote: 

“The great irony is that abortion has done what the Klan only dreamed of.... Roughly one quarter of the black population is now missing.” Dr. Alveda King, the niece of Martin Luther King, Jr., has long been a strong opponent of killing the unborn.

NOTE:  There's a slight of hand going on here as well..... the hubbub over the abortion portion of this bill is overshadowing the Public Option portion.  Don't be distracted on either of these issues as this healthcare debate continues.

ObamaCare Will Contribute Hugely to National Debt Crisis!

All too often we're hearing conflicting numbers when Democrats talk about what some of their new programs will cost and how many people will be affected by it.  We hear that the "simple language" version of the healthcare bill will cost less than a trillion dollars.... but at the same time the full version will almost double that amount.  It's the same bill with the same provisions - AND ultimately the same costs, but it allows them to present a lower cost to the ears of those who are looking for more palatable numbers.  You and I, however, are the ones that are going to have to come up with the real cost.  If we can't, the debt will be carried over to our children and their children, and with the combined indebtedness of all of Obama's programs, our grandchildren's children.  And to just get caught up, folks, that would mean that the government would cease spending and implementing any new programs from here on out until the national debt is repaid.  That is not reality.
 
We're also learning that we'll be paying the taxes to pay for this healthcare bill for years before it actually goes into effect.  So, let's just think about this.  They're projecting that healthcare in 2013 will cost less than $1 trillion on the low side and twice that or more on the higher side.  I once used the analogy that it's like buying a car, paying for it for four years before you can ever drive it.  By the time you can drive it, its technology is outdated AND the purchase price doubled.  Think about that for a moment  WHY would anyone pay double for something that they can't take advantage of in the very near future?  And even more, why would people want to pay for something that other people will be using as well - and some for no contribution to the cost?  That just doesn't make sense to me.

The cost of these latest programs that the Obama Administration is shoving through Congress is passed through the Congressional Budget Office.  This office is responsible for adding up the numbers to come up with the cost of these proposed programs.  However, they can only work with the information that is given them and sometimes they're given incomplete information or proposals.  (Senator Baucus sent over a partial bill for them to figure the costs on so the numbers would fall below $1 trillion!)  Even though the Director of the CBO has made some public statements, we ordinary citizens aren't usually privy to that information unless it's televised on CSPAN and we happen to know when the Director will appear before some committee. 

So, if you'd like to hear from someone who know how these bills are calculated, here's a former Director of the Congressional Budget of Office sharing her perspective on the proposed healthcare bill and its impact on YOU.



The debt for each person in the country for the national debt as of today is $39,054.98.  (THAT MEANS WHAT YOU OWE, what each person owes - including children and infants (calculate YOUR own family's total!) - for the entitlements and government spending thus far!) If the taxman came knocking on your door to collect your portion of the national debt, how long would it take you to pay that amount? 

As Ms. O'Neill states, the national debt goes up another $5 million each day - just in interest.  So, we're compounding that national debt number very rapidly and your amount owed continues to go up!  That $39,054.98 amount is also without including the cost of the healthcare overhaul (this healthcare bill) - let's not deceive ourselves, it's not reform, it's overhaul! - and again, it doesn't include the cost of Cap and Trade/Cap and Tax (Clean Energy legislation which is before the Senate) which will come to us not as "a tax" but come DIRECTLY out of each person's pocket each and every month.  It will drive up simple day to day living expenses to levels which will be unsustainable for many Americans. 

During the Bush Administration, there was a term introduced, "fuzzy math".  The Bush Adminstration may have coined the phrase, but the Obama Administration has certainly mastered it! 

It's way past time to put the brakes on government spending.  The Congress doesn't speak in millions of dollars anymore (that's pocket change to them), or even billions of dollars  (that's folding money - in small bills), but in TRILLIONS of dollars without the least hesitation and without acknowledgement that, though we're considered a rich nation, we do not have that kind of money!  You are smart enough to know that if you don't have money, you should not go on spending.  Why shouldn't the government understand and adhere to the same?

It would be smarter and much wiser to slow things down, get the national debt reduced, make changes to the health care where there is an obvious need for change, and implement change as we can pay for them.  Our government should run its business like we should run our homes and businesses:  you pay as you go.  Congress, as you have observed, is not going to do that.  The Democrats are apparently "drunk" with the power of having control over the House, Senate, and the White House and they are not weighing the impact of their hugely expensive programs on the American people.  They're "just making hay while the sun shines", pushing through their ideaological legislation while they can. 

So it is up to you and me as voting citizens to communicate our concerns at the time of next elections and clearly send our message that they are not considering American's interests and well-being or the country's financial integrity in the global economy.  Congress and the White House need to understand that people have had enough of their extravagences and that they cannot label as extremists everyone who has deep concerns about where we're headed as a nation.  If they don't pay attention to the people, they must be made to pay with their political careers. 

(Note:  Here's an excellent article by Rich Lowry on why healthcare issue should be slowed in the Senate:  http://tiny.cc/HPtrH.)

Abortion in a Legislative Disappearing Act

Now you see it, now you don't, now you see it....  First abortion coverage was included in the House healthcare bill, then it was until Stupak Amendment clarified that it would not be covered, and then ...

In regard to whether this Healthcare Bill will or will not contain government-funded abortion, Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), who is the Democrats’ chief deputy whip, says that there's no doubt that the "last minute insertion" of the Stupak anti-abortion amendment to the House's recently passed Healthcare Bill HR3962 will be stripped out when the bill comes back to the House in its final form from the Senate.

The Liberal Democrats planned to use the Stupak amendment as only a ploy to appease the Moderate
Democrats, and snagged the single, turncoat Republican in the end who voted for the bill based primarily on that restriction to the bill. These pro-abortion Democrats in the House knew they'd ultimately have another chance to get that government-funded abortion slipped back into the final healthcare bill. You can look for it to happen most likely late at night, on the weekend and/or in the very late night hours with a super fast move to a final vote.

Now, you would think that those "moderates" who went ahead and voted for HR 3962 after the Stupak amendment would know that - I mean even I can see it coming! But that, folks, is how Washington plays the game and all the members of Congress will feign "horror" at such a move when they're in front of media cameras and microphones! This is typical of so many maneuvers that are commonplace in Washington. Both sides of the aisle play it, and the side that is not in power is always crying "foul" when these are used by the side that is in the majority. Don't you love hypocrisy?

I wish someone would make an exhaustive list of the tactical procedures and/or "playing instructions" (with all their twists and turns including terminology - or what I call politi-speak) to this Washington Game so the most ignorant American would have the opportunity to learn how to recognize it. Then people could contact their Congressmen and say, "Whoa! I know what you guys are up to. You're doing this and that, and I don't like it!"

Here are a few I've noticed:

1. After a meeting, never appear alone in front of cameras to make comments; having a crowd standing behind you adds credibility to your futility.
2. Be vague when talking; never say anything in simple terms, stutter or stammer if you have to buy you "thinking time" to evade difficult questions and don't give a direct answer - even better, change the subject.
3. Never say what you mean; you might be held accountable.
4. Coin a new phrase; it makes you sound so intelligent.
5. Never refer to the Constitution as authority to cover your political view; it's never there.
6. Place all blame on the opposing party for the same tactics that you have used in the past to push your own agendas and make the opposition look as ridiculous as you did when you espoused it.

And there are many more. Start your own list. You can share with me, if you like!

So, watch for what comes out of the Senate. Let's see how many pages are either taken out or added to this already hefty bill (at 4 reams of paper presently!) Don't forget to contact your Senators and let them know you're tired of being lied to, you're tired of back-room deals, you're tired of pork, and that you won't turn a blind eye to their shinanigans any more. (Even Obama knows what THAT word is!)

Is ObamaCare DOA in the Senate?

So, the House squeaked out enough votes to pass their horrendous healthcare bill against the wishes of the majority of Americans. I had assumed it primarily had to do with the fact that the uber-liberals were just hell-bent on pushing through their agenda based upon their socialistic ideals, or that they were running on the stale "mandate" of 2008 Obama campaign. However, the polls suggest that Americans have changed their mind on Obama's change!

So, that gave me pause to think, why would so-called "intelligent" people and large organizations be in favor of this vastly aggressive bill. I happened on to an article that Dick Morris and his wife, Eileen McGann, wrote on The Hill. Now, I'm not necessarily a big fan of Dick Morris. I'm always suspicious of someone who changes political allegiances, and especially when they change back again. In this case Dick was a republican who went over to the left to work for Clinton, and now is on the right again. In fact, I have about as much respect for him as I do Arlen Specter.

However, in their article, Morris and McGann did shed some light on that nagging questions. They claim that there was some "bribery" involved. I must say that makes sense. But, isn't that "business as usual" that Washington is known for and what Obama vowed to change? Oh, but no, it wasn't that kind of Washington change he meant, was it? He meant that he would have a sub-cabinet that that was neither elected or approved, that wasn't answerable to Congress, and that had no restrictions upon them - but that's for another time.  In today's blog I'm dealing with why would groups like AMA and AARP be in favor of Obamacare. Morris and McGann pointed out that there was a little wheeling and dealing in a back room at the White House.

Morris and McGann stated that the AMA,, under the current law, was facing a 21% cut in physicians' Medicare reimbursements that have accumulated over year after year rather than being repealed by Congress. Obama promised to kill the cut if they would endorse his bill. (Ah, now that makes some sense.... and perhaps why the trustees okayed the endorsement without the support of the membership.)

Likewise, AARP apparently got a financial windfall for their support as well. It appears that they are doing like some of the non-banks that are now banks. That is to say, they dabbled in insurance through their subsidiary company, so they are morphing from an advocacy group into a full-fledged insurance. They had their own Medi-gap insurance which is costly for seniors. This Medi-gap picked up where Medicare left off... but Bush passed Medicare Advantage program. It did the same thing, but at a lower cost. (And where was it now that Obama was going to cut Medicare to pay for his plan? Oh, yeah, Medicare Advantage! Hmm. That eliminates competition for AARP, doesn't it?)

But there's one other entity that I had questions about and not a lot has been said about it. That is the negotiated deal between Obama and the drug companies. So, what kind of deal did Obama do for them? Well, let's see... Morris and McGann say in their article that for backing his ObamaCare bill, the drug industry could get a 10-year limit of something in the neighborhood of $80 billion on prescription drug costs, plus there would be a ban on imported Canadian drugs, and the drug industry was to also make their huge advertising budget available to the Obama Administration.

So, who are the other winners? How about the Insurance industry itself. I haven't heard them screaming bloody murder about this governmental competition. Perhaps that because they will have potentially 40 million new customers whose premiums will be paid by the government. But wait, they were perhaps a little premature in their elation. It appears that the honeymoon with ObamaCare ended when the Senate Finance Committee bill lowered the penalty from $3,500 to $1,500. That meant that the penalty was more affordable than their insurance premiums.

Among the losers in this scenario is the industry that makes medical devices. They wouldn't go along with ObamaCare and it's cost them. The BaucuScare bill imposed a tax on their devices. These include arterial stents, prosthetics, hip and knee joints, pacemakers, and automated wheelchairs.

Now that these facts have come to light, people are becoming better informed than ever before and the Senate needs to understand that when Americans say they don't want ObamaCare, they mean it! If they don't listen, the American people will be the real losers here. They will lose the quality of care that is the envy of the whole world. They will lose the right to choose their insurance coverage, to choose their doctor, and to choose the type of medication and/or treatment.  Is ObamaCare DOA in the Senate?  I hope so!

Pelosi' HR3962 Is Worst Socialist Legislation - Ever!

If you're looking for more deficit spending and higher taxes for everyone, increased costs for insurance coverage, rationed care (particularly for elderly and the sick), a long waiting period for coverage under the new healthcare plan for those with pre-existing conditions, and "creative" (if not illegal) Congressional accounting, then The Pelosi healthcare bill has it all! The health bill she unveiled last Thursday (and which President Obama quickly proclaimed a "critical milestone") is probably the worst piece of socialist legislation ever introduced and, quite frankly, forced upon Americans.

Rumor has it that Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said to her fellow Democrats that she is "all in" and prepared to lose seats in 2010 if that's what it will take to pass ObamaCare. Well, if that's the case, I say let her's be the first one to go! (No single person should have as much power as she THINKS she has. She's got the representatives in the House by the -- well, she'd got them literally dominated!)

The Democrats under Pelosi's dictatorship leadership are no longer even making the pretense of wanting "bipartisan" support for this bill. Instead they are using pure political power plays to shove through what is probably an unrepealable middle-class entitlement that will continue to expand over time and raise taxes steeply. This ObamaCare will expand government control of healthcare, and that means that all medical care will be administered through the Congress - what kind of healthcare, how much healthcare, who gets it and who doesn't, how much it costs, etc. Do you really want some other Congressman or Senator from some other state having a say in meeting your health care needs?

It is almost beyond comprehension that the Democrats have begun such a purely political power play, especially with the unpopularity of their own agenda. People from all political positions are expressing great concern over this governmental seizure of this large portion of the nation's economy. But the goal of these liberal (and wimpy moderate) Democrats is to ram through this part of Obama's overall income-redistribution plan. It's all about gaining more CONTROL in every aspect of American lives.

Congress claims that HR 3962 is "universal coverage" - but keep in mind they have admitted that it's still NOT going to cover everyone. The actual result if this is passed will be destruction of the world's best healthcare system, of our country's fiscal stability, of private industries, of opportunities for prosperity, and ultimately, the personal freedoms fo every American.

This proposed legislation that Pelosi is ramming through the House with super-sonic speed costs considerably more than it was supposed to. It costs even more than the HR 3200! And again, it doesn't even offer healthcare to everyone - as the Obama campaign promised. It does NOTHING to change the things that are wrong with the present system. Instead it creates the framework for even more problems -- in spades! And further, as we have seen time and time again, the estimated costs of government programs are always only a portion of its actual costs. This bill was supposed to come in at around $900 billion or Obama wouldn't sign it. But it's now well over $1 trillion at this writing and he doesn't sound hesitant at all in his praises of this bill! (Some have calculated that over 10 years, this bill will have a price tag of $2.4 trillion!)

(Note: Remember how Obama used the "Republicans/Bush's deficit" as a talking point in his campaign and how he was going to turn it around... well, instead he has created a mountain of debt that makes the Bush deficit look like a tiny blip on the deficit screen - and he isn't through - the Cap and Tax is working its way through the Senate now!)

"House Call" on Washington

Tens of thousands of people marched on the House on Thursday at noon to protest this healthcare legislation. (Interesting how no one will give a solid estimate of how many people there really were, but it was literally a sea of people encompassing the Congressional buildings. But if Code Pink were to stage a protest, they'd have a pretty good headcount and post that amount (times 100 - or 1000!) Regardless, the message from these people is that this bill is a piece of crap! If you asked people in that group if they believed that we need healthcare reform, most of them would say that we do. However, they don't want an overhaul. They would tell you, "Let's fix what is wrong with the one we have!"

Sure our present system has flaws - that is something that no one disputes. But we have identified where the problems are and everyone in Congress knows where they are. The FIRST flaw is that we don't have a cap on non-economic compensation when there is a malpractice lawsuit. Everyone also knows that the lobbyists for trial lawyers have paid off most if not all of our lawmakers. Suspiciously, this is the one segment of professionals that have had absolutely no comment or been seen taking a position during this hotly contested debate, but if we really fixed what was wrong with our present healthcare system, they certainly have a dog in the hunt.

Like Rats From a Sinking Ship! (After the public spoke in NJ and VA!)

The voices of the "tens of thousands" is being heard, though. The Blue Dogs saw what happened in Virginia and New Jersey last week. On the heels of that demonstration, they saw how quickly a very large group of people could be called to and attend a march on Congress. Now, they're considering their options. Some are wring their hands moaning, "What to do, what to do." The question is are they more afraid of Nancy Pelosi - or their constituents! Will they "walk the plank" for Ms. Pelosi and the trial lawyer lobby?

Not only are the Blue Dogs in a quandary about which side they're willing to commit to, the members of AMA (American Medical Association) who Obama proclaimed again this week supported his Obamacare, are now saying that the AMA should not be supporting the House's health care plan because the issue of endorsement hadn't been formally approved by the membership.

Actually, it was a board of trustees for the AMA that made the endorsement without taking an official vote among the members of the organization. This week, there's been some developing outrage among AMA members who feel like this endorsement was made against the general consensus of the AMA’s members. So, in a few days, probably on Monday, the members will cast a vote on a resolution that could officially reverse the AMA's Obamacare endorsement. (Note: If Pelosi gets her way this weekend, though, it's too late in the game to be withdrawing a much-publicized endorsement and would be nothing less than a token gesture. Where have the AMA members been all this time??? Have they, too, seen the handwriting on the wall?)

Here It Comes: New Medical Taxes from BaucuSCARE!

There remains a great divide between Democrats and Republicans on health care reform and the time for construction of the actual bill is upon us. It's not so much what's in the bill, because the politicians will have their way, but a more significant area of disagreement is what the final bill will actually cost and how it would be paid for. One stipulation is for it to achieve the President's commitment to being deficit neutral. In order to achieve that goal, the Senate constructed (upon the prodding of the White House) a plan called the "Doctor Fix" legislation (S1776) that would in essence buy their support by "freezing" the mandatory cuts in Medicare and Medicaid payments over the next ten years to the tune of nearly one-quarter trillion dollars. That meant "sliding" some of the cost of the overall healthcare reform to other legislation so that the cost of the healthcare reform would barely come in under Obama's proposed limit of one trillion dollars. Now, that, my friends is one heck of a political shell game! (We already know they plan to cut half a trillion from Medicare and Medicaid).

If you haven't been living in a cave, you know there has been healthcare bill proposed in the Senate by Senator Max Baucus and was supposed to be the work done by the Gang of Six, a committee of six senators headed up by Senators Baucus(D) and Grassley(R). Magically, Senator Baucus released his own document which he alone sponsored (no one else apparently wanted to lay claim to it!) and which is referred to as the Baucus Framework. It outlines key provisions that Senator Baucus would like to see in the final healthcare bill. With the acceptance of the Framework by the Finance Committee, this proposed legislation spent several days behind closed doors where Harry Reid, Rahm Emanuel, and others got their hands on it.  It emerged with an inserted Public Option....Uh-oh, they instantly lost some support! So, then they altered it to be a "States Can Opt Out Plan". But that won't work either. States will still have to fork over taxes to the federal government to pay for the States who opted in! That means that taxpayers in non-opted-in states will STILL be paying for someone else's health care!

Besides "Doctor Fix" as a proposed way to disperse the cost for this monstrosity, the Baucus Framework has introduced several new taxes on pharmaceutical companies, medical device manufacturers, clinical laboratories and insurance companies. Let me put it a little clearer. Heart stents - new tax, motorized wheelchairs - new tax, and there's more! In fact, anything that can be construed as a "medical device" (something that is used to improve health) and costs over $100 will have a new tax imposed upon it. The new taxes (Democrats call it "fees"!) over the ten year period would total $63 billion dollars just for pharmaceutical and the medical device industry. That's a FAR cry from the more than $1 trillion cost as this legislation now stands! And guess what.... the cost of this reform is coming not from the filthy rich! It's coming out of the hard-earned wages of middle America, those how are finding it more and more difficult to keep their heads above water. It's coming from you!

US Allies - Growing Fewer by the Day!

Folks, it's way worse than lying and anyone - I repeat - ANYONE who doesn't know Obama is a liar has the intelligence of a rock. Our Eastern Allies, particularly Poland, have been victimized by Obama lies. Someone said in a blog (sorry, I wish I could remember who you were) said that everything Obama says has an expiration date. That is a kind way of saying that his truth applies to the moment only. He chooses to "remake" an outright lie into a semi-truth or spin the politi-speak into something that isn't exactly clear or accurate. (And who invented the word disingenuous? - A lie is a lie.... period!)

So, what is our global position now under Obama's reign? Rich Lowery has said it much better than I. Read his remarks at http://bit.ly/1pin24 .

Mr. Obama not only lies to our international friends, he is systematically breaking his pledge not to raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 a year. He already signed a cigarette tax increase in February, and this tax could be as much as $3,800 a year for a family and is therefore a more tangible breach of his promise than most of his fairy tales. His Cap and Trade program (which has been renamed to a more palatable "Clean Energy Act" will tax energy and manufacturing corporations who will pass those costs down to the rest of us (so it's an indirect tax). His massive healthcare overhaul will increase costs (though that's not technically called a "tax" either - it's really a matter of semantics) on everyone because they are requiring EVERYONE to purchase insurance or pay a stiff penalty. The healthcare overhaul, again will cost you in either premiums or penalties - take your pick!

So, with the cost of health insurance (or subsequent penalty for not purchasing insurance and the increased premium cost if you happen to be over weight), the cost of Cap and Tax, the cigarette tax, the proposed soft drink tax and on and on, you can see that your standard of living is going south very quickly. So, where's the prosperity he promised for everyone! This redistribution of wealth.... doesn't seem like that's a possibility because all his programs are creating big hits on the wallets of the majority of Americans.

So, not only is Obama losing allies on the international front, he's losing his own allies right here at home.... some in his own party who are questioning all this flip-flopping on campaign promises... and many of those who supported his campaign are now having voters remorse. (I wonder if the tingle up Chris Matthews leg is still as strong.)

Healthcare Insurance – It Should Be Your Responsibility!

I really take issue with the absurdity that under the Baucus healthcare plan people MUST buy health insurance or face penalty of up to $1900 annually and possible imprisonment of up to one year for failure to do so. (Can you say, "Bought and paid for by insurance lobbyists"?) And there's NO TORT REFORM. Can you say, "Bought and paid for by trial lawyers?") The argument that the liberal idiots use for required insurance coverage is that automobile insurance is mandatory. While that might be true in some places, not everyone owns a car to insure! So, it's NOT mandatory for everyone, now is it? (Why can't the liberals use good illustrations? For instance, US Post office and Medicare is what they've listed as successful government-run programs - yeah, right! They've been operating in the red, well - forever! That should give you a good idea of how the healthcare system would be run, huh?)

In my opinion it is an individual's responsibility to either pay insurance premiums to cover their medical emergencies, or pay for the emergencies when they occur, or perhaps a combination of both of them. It's not an impossible idea. I have been included somewhere within the "middle class" most of my adult life, usually closer to the bottom. There have been times when money was so tight that I couldn't pay for some of the nice things I wanted. So, I waited until I could afford it; but I always had insurance to cover in case of emergencies. When we started our family, the health insurance we carried paid a flat fee of $250 for pregnancy. That didn't even cover the doctor's expense. So, we were on the hook for the rest of his fee plus the hospital expenses as well. Whenever we did apply for federal or state assistance, we were qualified as far as our income was concerned, but - and here's how it has been all our lives - we didn't have enough DEPENDENTS to fit the federal or state assistance programs criteria. (Hmmm. It's a little like trying to get your first job and being turned down because you have no experience.)

BUT, here's the difference in how we as a couple handled our medical situations: we accepted our responsibility! Plain and simple. We took the initiative to get insurance coverage, to save some money for the emergency, or else workout payment plans with the doctor and the hospital to pay monthly payments until the balance was paid off. And that also meant that we didn't run up credit cards for "stuff" we wanted while we were paying off our debt. We understood that the debt was our own. Not one cent was paid by taxpayers. Not one cent was written off by either the doctor or the hospital. That's taking responsibility for yourself! That's what it means to not be a burden on anyone.

And so this is how we have lived our lives for all these years. If we want to buy something expensive we either make sure we have cash on hand to pay for it, or if we want to charge it, we look at our budget and see if we can work it into the budget and make the payments (and not just the minimum payment, either!) - before we buy it. That's called being responsible adults.... that's what makes a responsible society.

Somewhere along the way people failed have to teach that principle to their children. And so the Socialists have been right there to implement their strategies to collect more taxes from the responsible adults to pay for programs to pay for the necessities of those who were irresponsible. It has been the Socialist's purpose to enslave everyone by making them dependent upon the government, and yes, people have played right into their hands by teaching their children to "get what they can, any way they can". People now believe that they're "entitled" to whatever they want whenever they want it, and the cost will be born by taxpayers!

Those who have become enslaved to government programs have taught their children that it is the government's job to take care of them and there would be no backlash if they took all they could from the government. And so that's what the government has been doing - to the tune of $14 TRILLION in debt at this point, plus the trillions in unfunded debt. And it's not over yet - or is it? I'd say that is up to those who want to be responsible and accountable citizens, those who don't want to take from the government until the government becomes the slave of yet another government.... otherwise, that's where we're headed, folks! That's where we're headed!

US House of Representatives To Ban News Coverage??

Anita Dunn gave great insight into how the Obama Administration controlled the media coverage during the presidential campaign and how the Democrats plan to control their agenda now - just as they did in the campaign. They spun their rhetoric for "change", they gave access for coverage ONLY when, with whom, and how it suited their agenda. This fact is true and documented. (How many of you who voted for Obama feel manipulated now?)

Apparently Democrats are growing nervous about how the far left's "best laid plans" are being revealed by the floodlights of fair and balanced reporting done by Fox News. A prime example very recently was when the White House tried to strip Fox News from having access to a press conference with "Pay Czar" Kenneth Feinberg. (Kudos to the other media outlets that banded together in a "one for all, and all for one" on behalf of Fox News.) The campaign is over (though the Obama Administration doesn't seem to know it) and the battle may now being waged on a new front. The Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi may have joined the White House in trying to stop the "unfavorable" reporting of the goings on in Congress.

Hugh Hewitt reported in his blog that Pelosi appeared on Keith Olberman's program on Friday and declared that she plans to bring to the floor of the House this week a vote to strip Fox News of its journalistic rights of access to Congressional activities, saying basically that Fox News falsely reports what is going on in Washington or that it is biased in its reporting. (This vote, by the way, would not affect other new agencies or reporting entities - just Fox News.)

He also said reported in his blog that Mrs. Pelosi argued "That Fox regularly grants access to Republican Congressman to spread their lies and propaganda on their airwaves is a violation of the public trust, and their continued desire to challenge such well documented facts as Global Warming, and the efficacy of single payer health insurance, proves that they are simply doing the work of the special interests. They should thus be stripped of their journalistic access in the halls of Congress." (Whether this Pelosi/Olberman scenario occured or not, that would be an egregious abuse of power!)

Democrats have been given equal opportunities (and a few have taken them) to speak on Fox programs from the steps of the House and Senate to discuss their positions on certain issues. They have also been given many invitations to appear on panels and debate the issues, but most have flatly refused to do so. At times the Democratic leaders in Congress have even told their party members to not speak to Fox News. (Sounds like grade-schooler activity doesn't it?)

Why is that Democrats don't want to deal with Fox News? Is it because the Democrats don't have a convincing argument for their political positions sufficient to sway the public? Is it because they don't all speak with the same voice? Is it because their agendas are flawed - or worse, un-Constitutional? Is it because their intent is to chop away at our freedoms until the American way of life is no longer recognizable? Is it because they just don't like hearing some news agency giving both sides of the political argument so that people can be fully informed? Is it because they want only one voice to be heard - theirs?

Pelosi and the uber-liberals like her in the Obama Administration (including the President – though he’s too slick to say it out of his OWN mouth) seek to shut down any reporting that is in opposition to their extremely liberal agenda. This is an appalling infringement on America’s basic freedom of speech. If that freedom is to remain from now on, any such vote against freedom of speech on the House or Senate floors must never take place. If you ever want to be heard, or if you want to hear both sides of what is going on, you better step up – speak up! Just imagine the ramifications of such a vote!

ACORN Tangled Up in Legal Battles as Plaintiff AND Defendant

You know, ACORN and two of its employees have exhibited unprecedented gall by threatening to sue the "pimp" and the "prostitute" who stirred up a political hornet's nest with their undercover videos. To be precise, the attorneys for ACORN are relying on Maryland’s wiretap statute to bring a lawsuit against James O’Keefe III, Hannah Giles, and Breitbart.Com LLC, for the video recordings which revealed ACORN’s more than willing assistance and counsel on establishing a brothel which would feature underage girls trafficked in from El Salvador. The lawsuit should fail, however, because it attempts to misapply the "wiretap" statute to the legal recording of a non-protected conversation.

As an example, do you remember Linda Tripp who recorded Monica Lewinsky's sordid tales of her encounters with then-President Bill Clinton? They tried to prosecute her under this same law. But she was a more valuable witness for another case, that being the impeachment of a President. She was given immunity for her testimony, but I daresay that they would have found it extremely difficult to prosecute her under that law anyway.

You see, the Maryland state law is not a "wiretapping" law per se. It's an "interception" statute that regulates the "interception" of communications, and that is spelled out precisely in the law. In Linda's case, it was her own phone that she was using. And she didn't intercept a communication, she was participating in the conversation. In that same vein, it is easy to see that there was no "interception" of communications by O'Keefe and Giles. In fact, it was, as with Linda, their own conversations with ACORN employees.

If this law is used successfully to prosecute O'Keefe and Giles for exposing the corruption within the ACORN organization, then people with cell phones that capture videos and records voices had better turn off their phones while in Maryland to avoid the temptation to break this law at some party or event!

But ACORN has other legal issues as well, this time on the defensive side. When ACORN went to Las Vegas and started playing what they called "Blackjack" or "21," the activist group was making a far greater gamble than it could ever have guessed, or so think the Nevada prosecutors who are, by the way, Democrats.

There's nothing wrong with playing the tables in Vegas, but the authorities claim that ACORN was using the common names of popular casino game as a cover-up term for paying workers bonuses to sign up voters as part of a quota system which is illegal in Nevada. As a result of an extensive investigation, a preliminary hearing in the Clark County courthouse has put ACORN on trial for the first time as a criminal defendant.

Until now, prosecutions for voter registration fraud have focused on the ACORN workers themselves rather than the organization leadership, and yes, the authorities have secured guilty pleas from several workers who have admitted to falsifying voter registration forms. But when investigators from Nevada Secretary of State Ross Miller's office raided the ACORN Las Vegas office, Ross says they found a paper trail that not only was ACORN organization itself aware of this practice, it was actually promoting this behavior.

In an interview with Fox News, Miller said, "We came across policy manuals that outline their policy of creating a quota system, which is against the law. This, in fact, was something that was widespread and something the organization itself knew about, and it's important to hold the organization criminally accountable as opposed to the individual field directors."

ACORN, of course, has consistently denied that it had a quota for the number of voter registration forms, and that it required its workers to turn in a certain minimum number every day. The organization does say that there were "performance standards" — that standard was "an expectation" that workers would find 20 new voters each day. But prosecutors say ACORN paid a $5 bonus to workers who would sign up 21 or more voters per day. That's where the "code" name "21" or "Blackjack," came in. It was an alleged quota system that Miller says is the first step toward corrupting the entire democratic system.

"These charges strike at the heart of having integrity of the electoral process. That's something that is important in Nevada and the entire country," he told FOX News. "By filing these charges we are sending a clear message we are not going to tolerate these kinds of activities. We have seen voter registration abuse before and we are holding these people accountable."

With the undercover videos from several offices done by O'Keefe and Giles, and the search and seizure of such incriminating evidence in the Las Vegas ACORN office, pressure from all sides has been mounting on ACORN in recent weeks. But it seems that the "lame street media" would rather focus on the alleged illegal actions of two young people rather than go after the organization that counsels people to commit obviously illegal activities and cheat on paying taxes.

There has been some other fallout from the expose' done by O'Keefe and Giles, and the revelation of the manuals and documents discovered in Las Vegas. The IRS and Census Bureau have since severed direct ties with the group, and even the inspector general of the Department of Justice is reviewing its own involvement with ACORN. Other state and local authorities are also beginning to distance themselves from ACORN, while others are watching them closely, including Maryland's own attorney general.

As of this writing, I haven't heard or read anything further on ACORN's lawsuit against O'Keefe and Giles. But Las Vegas officials are proceeding with their case against ACORN. And if ACORN is convicted, the Nevada ACORN operation could lose its tax-exempt status and that would have national implications for the organization as a whole — meaning that ACORN would end up with a losing hand!

ACORN Is Out of the Census Business? Not so much!

Here is a partial list of census partners, according to the Census website. I spent a couple minutes looking at this list and noticed how close the ties were between those listed below and ACORN and/or the White House. Even without the direct ACORN involvement in gathering census information, the 2010 census could be a valuable organizing tool for the liberal organizations.

• AARP - You know where they are in the healthcare debate.... they're doing like GE - getting on the Obama bandwagon (Or snuggling up to the liberals, if you prefer) so that they can get Presidential privilege that other similar organizations won't have.
• A. Phillip Randolph Institute
• AFL-CIO (ACORN Associate)
• American Federation of Government Employees
• AFSCME has 1.6 milion members including health care workers, corrections officers, child care providers, educators , and sanitation workers. From a statement of AFSCME President Gerald W. McEntee on the 2008 Election: "With Barack Obama and Joe Biden, we will have a team of proven fighters committed to providing state and local fiscal relief, fully funding and supporting public services and the workers who provide them, and guaranteeing that everyone in our country has quality, affordable health care they can count on...We knocked on 10 million doors, made 70 million phone calls, and distributed more than 27 million workplace flyers focusing on economic issues. AFSCME alone spent $67 million on political activities, including our aggressive independent expenditure campaign which played a key role in the most competitive House and Senate races. Forty-thousand AFSCME members volunteered along with more than 500 staff because we all knew we could not afford four more years like the last eight."
• American Federation of Teachers
• Coalition of Labor Union Women
• Coalition of Black Trade Unionists
• Community Action Partnership
• Families USA
• International Brotherhood of Teamsters
• Labor Council for the Latin American Advancement
• League of Women Voters of the United States
• National Black Justice Coalition
• National Council of La Raza (ACORN Associate)
• National Education Association (ACORN Associate)
• Pride at Work
• Rainbow Push Coalition (ACORN Associate)
• Service Employees International Union (SEIU) (ACORN Associate)
• Southern Coalition for Social Justice
• United Workers

Most of these groups listed above are politically active and most, if not all, are left-leaning. Many of the ones I haven't noted here still have ties to ACORN. But more disturbing to me is that in one instance, prisoners in jails and half-way houses were hired to take the census. If this is representative of the types of people who are being hired, do you really want these people having access to the most detailed census information to date? Who's to say that these groups won't gather and use that information for recruiting for their causes? Do you really want them having the ability to collect personal information from the census surveys for their own political organizing or other such use?

The White House statement on who runs the census reads: "There is historic precedent for the director of the census, who works for the commerce secretary and the president, to work closely with White House senior management, given the number of decisions that will have to be put before the president. We plan to return to that model in this administration."

If it is a concern to you who conducts the census, contact the Census Bureau, the White House, and the Commerce Secretary and tell them you want their politics kept OUT of the 2010 Census.

No One Knows What Goes On Behind Closed Doors ---

Or do they? You know politicians like to talk - a lot. And those who work with them seem to always be jockeying for position and/or attention. So, if you just get people to talking, you're bound to find out something that "the powers that be" wouldn't want you to know.

The Obama Administration has claimed the endorsement of the AMA for Obama's healthcare reform, but as many physicians will tell you, most practicing physicians are not members of the AMA. Do you remember the staged doctors' meeting in the Rose Garden at the White House? Where the hundred or so doctors were given white lab coats to wear so they would "look" like doctors? Nice photo op - except the there weren't any hospital or practice logos or names embroidered on them and the unfortunate pictures of staff handing out lab coats didn't lend any credibility to the effect, either. If one was so inclined, they could assume (as seen from the back anyway) that these may have been lab techs -- or butchers from local grocery stores! Apparently that gathering wasn't an accurate representation of a wide-ranging support of physicians for Obamacare.

As you know, the Senate elite plus Rahm Emanuel have been holed up behind closed doors - and EVERYONE knows this is in direct opposition to the promise of total transparency Candidate Obama promised - everything would be on CSPAN - indeed!) trying to hammer out a Senate healthcare bill that will be acceptable to the wary moderates in the Senate. On Day Seven of the closed door sessions, the White House and the Senate leaders came up with this brilliant idea of ordering Congress to pass a $247 billion bill (S1776) as a payoff to doctors to try and gain their support for this comprehensive healthcare reform.

In regards to the "Secret Bill", as reported by The Hill, "The White House and Democratic leaders are offering doctors a deal: They'll freeze cuts in Medicare payments to doctors in exchange for doctor's support of health care reform." The $247 billion "Doc Fix" bill totally excluded any public debate, or for that matter, any public knowledge. This "secret" bill was designed to get a large block of physician support - only it didn't work as planned and Harry Reid blames the AMA, though not by name. (Apparently the AMA lobbyists were supposed to "deliver" about two dozen Republican votes for this bill, but that didn't materialize even though some Republican Senators have supported short-term freezes to Medicare cuts in the past.)

Physicians have been forced to take cuts in medicare payments for quite some time and now a promised half-trillion dollars more in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid over the next ten years.  The only place that cuts can come from is from the payout to doctors who are treating Medicare and Medicaid recipients. However, I would imagine that the doctors would much rather see the Medicare/Medicaid payment structure be a part of the reform and not be the "backbone" of how Obama/Pelosi/Reid plan to pay for their healthcare system.

Anyway, this week the Senate used cloture to bring the "Doc Fix" Bill (S1776) to a vote, but it failed 47 to 53. So, it looks to me like perhaps our lawmakers are aware that the public has become more enlightened about what is going on in Washington and ordinary citizens have become focused on their legislative activities. Perhaps this closer scrutiny and the sharing of information between people and groups are making lawmakers squirm a bit when it comes to ramming something like this "Doc Fix" bill through without much semblance of debate or use of "legal trickery" to move a bill through quickly.... afterall, it is their political futures that are on the line!

Cap and Tax (Clean Energy Act)

I wanted to bring to your attention that we once again have another battle on our hands if we want to keep any of the money that we earn! Senators John Kerry and Barbara Boxer have introduced the Clean Energy Act a couple weeks back. It's been sort of just sitting there as the media focus has been on the Baucus Health Care Plan and now the closed door sessions to blend all five versions of healthcare reform into a single bill. But now, there's a full-bore push on the Clean Energy Act. (And they changed the name from Cap and Trade because it was too easy to make a slogan against it - "Cap and Tax" - but that's basically what it is.)


When the House rushed their version of the bill through, the CBO was called upon to make an assessment of the cost to American families. The CBO analysis looked only at the "day-to-day" costs of operating a trading program and did not include what the greater consequences that the necessary energy restrictions would ultimately have on the overall economy. The CBO added this footnote to their analysis: "The resource cost does not indicate the potential decrease in gross domestic product (GDP) that could result from the cap."

The Democrats in the House have said the cost would equal approximately the cost of a postage stamp. (Nevermind that the Post Office increases the price of the postage stamp every year or so with less and less efficiency. Symbolic?) However, the Obama Administration has estimated that the Cap and Trade bill would cost the taxpayers up to $200 billion per year, which figures to about $1,761 per year. (Geez, seems like that's in the neighborhood of what the penalty for not buying health insurance will cost!) If you listen to what Obama said about his proposal, even he says that the cost of electricity is going to go up significantly. OUCH!

Again, it's time to put the pressure on our legislators about Cap and Trade or the "Clean Energy Act", stand our ground, and make them realize that every one of the issues that they have pushed through (piling one on top of the other) in the last few months is going to place upon the average American citizen a burden that they cannot afford. These issues do not affect the wealthy lawmakers - especially those who conveniently forget to pay their taxes - so they have no context on how it affects the daily lives of "normal" Americans. Those who are just getting by will no longer be able to make ends meet, and those who have been falling behind due to loss of jobs will never be able to get their feet back on the ground. It will utterly destroy many families financially.

If you haven't read my article of about three week ago on this subject, you may want to check it out here: http://tinyurl.com/y9zg73a.

Stimulus, Clean Energy, TARP, etc., Now VAT - Good for America?

So, you think what you don't know won't hurt you? That's what the far-left legislators want you to believe as they "fundamentally change America".

The American people are being treated like lambs led to the slaughter - or rather, the American way of life is being pushed and shoved toward the slaughter. And in preparation for the finality of it all, everything that has made the United States unique as a nation is being quickly and systematically stripped from it. Concerned citizens are organizing Tea Parties, some are writing blogs, some are talking to their neighbors and friends, and all are expressing their opinions under the same rights that PETA, an ultra far-left organization, uses against the poultry and beef industries - only without smearing fake blood or red paint on things and scaring small children who only want their Happy Meals.

Conservative Americans, both morally and fiscally, are beginning to express their concern over the future of America. They're holding peaceful rallies of protest, carrying banners and handmade signs, and they're contacting their representatives about their concerns on the issues that are reshaping or restructured our country toward the leftist's position. These citizens are voicing their objections to the unethical practices of their own elected officials in Washington. Those unethical actions include, in part, pushing huge laws (literally and conceptually) through the legislative process in the most obscure and unprecedented ways possible, and often under the cloak of darkness, with the full intent of keeping the American people ignorant while this takes place. What happened to the very detailed promise of transparency of the Obama Administration?

Even the majority of the legislators don't know exactly what are in the bills because most of them refuse to read them. For example, a bill may be called a stimulus package, but within that bill are many amendments or sections that do not pertain to stimulating economy in any way, shape, or form. And sometimes those inserted amendments have restrictions on certain freedoms we have enjoyed or they may impose a new tax or cost to the taxpayer, or they may send millions of tax dollars to a particular lawmaker's state or district for special projects to garner votes and political support.

Let's take the $787 Billion Economic Stimulus Package. In it was money for Sen. John Murtha's (D-PA) airport renovation, which is an abomination! The airport was given $800,000 of stimulus money for a new cross-wind runway. (Three passengers a day! And all to Washington DC! How many new jobs did that create, and just who does that benefit?) That's just one example of the waste and little political favors payoffs that occur! It's our tax money and as taxpayers we should have a say on where our money goes; after all, that's what our representatives and senators are for - to protect our interests.

We, the people, have sent our representatives to Washington to look out for our interests. However, they have forgotten their campaign promises and are no longer representing their constituency. Instead they put party interests, pet projects, political favors, and partisan politics above the best interest of the American people and do not consider themselves accountable even to the people who elected them. They have their own personal crusade to gain power, influence, and wealth as they continue the "Washington as usual" politics and the American Democracy is falling down around our ears.

America is at an important crossroad at this point in its history. It's reputation is being quickly dissolved in the opinion of other nations because there is no integrity and no honor in our President's words any more. If we do nothing to change what's happening in Washington, the great nation of the United States will be unrecognizable before the passing of this generation. The jury is still out until November 2010 during which time we will see if the recent voices of the American people at the town hall meetings and at Tea Party rallies have been heard. But the pressure on our representatives needs to be maintained, because there's still a lot of time for more wholesale slaughter between now and then -- just look at what has happened over the past year. Think about these things:

» The House energy and global warming bill HR2454 was passed June 26, 2009. It consisted of more than 1,400 pages and was available online only 15 hours before being vote upon. This bill is presently before the Senate and is projected to cost taxpayers up to $200 million per year.

» The $789 billion stimulus bill was passed Feb. 14, 2009 and had over 400 pages. It was available online only 13 hours before debate.

» $700 billion financial sector rescue package, known as TARP 1, was passed Oct. 3, 2008. It has 169 pages and was available online only 29 hours before voting took place.

» The Baucus Bill on health care reform is reported to impose nearly $2,000 per family annually just to cover the mandated cost. And if you don't take out insurance, you'll pay nearly that amount in an imposed penalty. It is presently being re-worked to include a version of public option - and this is being done BEHIND CLOSED DOORS! So, we won't even see what they come up with before it goes to the House.

So, if you're not sure how those bills that were passed in such a rush earlier this year will impact your life, you need to become aware - fully aware! Even if the rich and the not so rich ponied up all their wealth, they wouldn't have enough money to pay for those bills that have already passed. And we're still awaiting the outcome of the Clean Energy/Global Warming bill in the Senate and the Healthcare Reform Act to pass.

If that wasn't enough, Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, has gone on record as saying that a new tax is on the table to help America address these fiscal responsibilities. (She is assuming that the healthcare bill will pass and that manufacturers will be required to include healthcare in their operating costs.) Her proposal is "a tax" called a VAT, a value added tax, to foreign manufacturing to level the playing field. Only it doesn't really. The value added tax is a tax put on manufacturers at each stage of production and is based upon the amount of value another producer may add to a product. Think about this: most of what the US consumes is imported these days - produced elsewhere. So those taxes on foreign companies will have costs that are directly passed on to you and to me. The VAT on manufacturing and services will only drive up the costs on all consumer goods. Critics of VAT say that this tax disproportionately affects the middle- and low-income customers. Whoa! No taxes on middle class? What happened to that promise?

Just so you know, it's politi-speak. That's how they're going to end up taking money out of your pocket even if you're not among those who make more than $250,000. No, it won't be a straight forward "tax" on the individuals of the middle class, but by such taxes and restrictions on the manufacturing and producer of goods (and services) they take money straight out of your pocket at the consumer end. It will also give the government more regulatory control over the manufacturers.

So, get ready. You're going to have to spend a whole lot more for goods and services - and real soon!

PolitiSpeak - Very Important to Know

Several months ago, when I was awakened to how really bleak the future of our country had become, I felt totally helpless to do anything about it, but knew something had to be done before it was too late. I wanted so badly to be able to make a difference, but I didn't know where to start. I started this blog simply as a way to "relieve" the pent up anger and angst that I was feeling with nearly every news report of TARP, Omnibus Package, Bank Bail out, AIG, GM and Chrysler. The more I heard, the worse I felt and I had to "let it out" in some fashion.

Since I started this blog a couple months ago, I have been continually educating myself through research for my blogs and through other avenues. I watched town hall meetings on television. I went to a local tea party rally. And even more intimidating to me, an apolitical person, I became a member of a new activist group who holds the same values and political views that I have, and whose members feel the same emotions.

I had not been aware that so many others had the same feelings that I was experiencing, not just in my town, but all across the country. So now we all know that there is momentum in this conservative movement to regain the country and protect it for our children and future generations. But we could be in danger of losing that momentum. We have to learn that in order to get our point across, as a group or an individual, we must use words and phrases that the liberals, particularly those in government will hear. They use their own terminology and spit out their politi-speak without ever engaging their brains.

"It's not what you say; it's what they hear." - Luntz Maslansky Strategic Research.

Nothing drove home the importance of using words and phrases that will be heard more clearly than when after enduring several grueling townhall meetings, Arlen Specter said on ABC's This Week, “I think we have to bear in mind, that although those people need to be heard and have a right to be heard, that they are not really representative of America in my opinion. We have to be careful here not to let those town meetings make the scene that influences what we do on health policy.”

Bless his ignorant heart! I decided that I needed to learn about how to really be heard. So, this article will give you a few of the words and phrases that you should substitute in your way of speaking so that you will be able to get and to hold the attention of those who literally are holding your future in their hands. These phrases are what are recommended by an expert wordsmith, Dr. Frank Luntz, in his books on this topic - Words that Work, and What America Really Wants... Really. I recommend that you get and read these books for more information on how to communicate effectively with politicians and your liberals friends and family. (Thank you, Dr. Luntz, for educating me to be a more effective communicator!)

These are terms that no longer are taken seriously by politicians. They see your lips move, but because you're using passe words, they don't hear you. So, by updating your terminology, you can be taken more seriously when speaking to politicians and liberals. As an example of what Dr. Luntz says about updated terminology, here examples that were pulled from his Words that Work:

• A used car is now pre-owned vehicle.
• A secretary is now an administrative assistant.
• A stewardess is now a flight attendant.
• Garbage removal is now sanitation services.
• Gay marriage is now same-sex marriage.

Choose words that inspire action:

• Instead of process, use progress.
• Instead of strategy use step-by-step approach.

Common phrases that make a difference include the following:

• Automobile manufacturers rather than automobile companies.
• Fuel efficiency rather than fuel savings.

If you go to town halls or tea parties or to some other organized protest, arrive especially early and sit in the front. If you have the opportunity to speak or to ask a question, use terms like "as a mom" or "as a dad", or "I regularly exercise my right to vote", that gives validity to your position - and let children speak if they can.

Simplicity is the most powerful way to communicate. In fact, the more simple the better. You will want to make your own signs. Pre-printed ones are not taken seriously - even Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxer mentioned that one (but ignored the ACORN and SEIU ones!). Keep your message positive - and not negative - because this keeps the left from having anything to use against the movement. You should use some of these phrases on your signs:

• "Why?" - and if asked about your sign. Get them to explain their position.
• "Accountability - Why not?"
• "I have a right to be heard."
• "How much will it cost?" Stop wasting my money.
• "Who will $ for it?"
• "Before you sign it - READ IT."
• "Don't make promises you can't keep."
• "The IRS, the Post Office, Katrina... now healthcare?

So, now you are getting an idea that the old way of speaking needs to be updated because these new words and phrases are the words the politicians and their liberal supporters are using. If you continue using the old terms, you lose your credibility with them - as Mr. Specter suggested in his comment about the town halls!

More on the Healthcare Issue ...

Just a thought here: Let's say that the House and Senate can come up with a single plan and it goes to Obama and he signs it - with or without the public option. How much do you think that Congress can change that healthcare program between now and 2013 when it actually takes effect? The thought is more than I can comprehend just based on the "mind-boggling" actions Congress has done in passing these huge deficit inducing bills over the past year.

Right now there really isn't a single healthcare plan. There are at least five proposals out there right now. Some pet aspects from each of the versions will have to be cut when they put the different versions together - but they will not be forgotten. So, you could expect "disgruntled" Democrats to come back time and again to get those added to whatever version gets passed into law. This scenario is not so far fetched with the healthcare plan that is being shoved through our Congress right now and given how much debate is going on - even within parties. However, none of the proposed plans will contain the crucial elements that most Americans are adamant about - those being tort reform, capping drug and insurance costs, and cutting waste in Medicaid and Medicare.

No one is saying that malpractice shouldn't be litigated, but there should be some restrictions in place in such a way as to what constitutes frivolous lawsuits, time limits for litigation should also be shortened, and there should be caps placed on the awards. Drug companies should not be allowed to rob US citizens in favor of citizens of other countries to make their businesses profitable. The insurance companies should also be held accountable for running premiums costs up just to increase their bottom line. Waste in the administration of Medicare and Medicaid and fraudulent claims should be addressed and dealt with, too. And you know what? If these things were added to the legislation, that would be real healthcare reform!

Cadillac Insurance Could Apply to Anyone Who Presently Has Insurance!

Okay, I'm being facetious, but as I discussed before, a Cadillac insurance plan is usually described as a high premium policy. Generally speaking, that means an insurance plan that is expensive coverage, and usually defined by the total cost of the insurance premiums, rather than what healthcare coverage the patient actually gets. Let's say some poor Joe was able to get healthcare coverage even with a pre-existing and had astronomically high premiums. Voila! He'd be in the Cadillac insurance category! How fair is that?
I have heard one individual say that it could depend upon what type of coverage you had; in other words, if you had insurance that covered dental and vision, that could be considered a Cadillac insurance plan.
When I was younger, I had insurance coverage based upon what I could afford to pay out of pocket in premiums, co-pays and deductibles. And it was sort of a balancing act between out of pocket expenses and how much coverage I could get. Just getting started in life, I didn't have a much extra cash on hand to pay for the occasional drugs and doctor visits and I certainly didn't have anything that I could save since I was just starting out. So, I had to have low deductibles and co-pays. I could also opt for a policy that would pay a higher percentage of the healthcare cost in the event of hospital visits, etc. - if I could afford it in the additional premium cost. Of course, all that meant was my payroll deducted premium would be somewhat higher than average. So, I guess I had a "Cadillac" policy and didn't know it.
So, just who is it that have these Cadillac plans in the government's estimation? Getting a straight and definitive answer is about the same as asking them if they can say with certainty what is and what is not included in the healthcare bills from the House and Senate... all five versions apparently say different things. And who the heck really knows since they're not reading the darn things???
Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Finance Committee, had set the threshold for most people at $8,000 in annual premiums for an individual and $21,000 for a family. However, the estimate is that only 2 or 3 percent of covered workers and families would hit that benchmark, so there are clearly not going to be enough people to "rob from" through taxes to cover the 40-million-some-odd people who supposedly don't have any coverage. In fact, the Baucus plan still leaves about 15 million without coverage.
So, besides taxing the very tiny percentage of people who fall into the rich category and robbing $500B from the old folks' Medicare Advantage plan (for which they pay extra to have!), there hasn't been any other revelation as to how this healthcare reform is going to be (1) deficit neutral and (2) not increase taxes on the middle and lower income people.
That presents a major problem. So, just how will the politicians decide what constitutes a Cadillac insurance plan? Oh, that's easy. They're going to review the majority of the plans that the 90% of Americans have now. They're going to determine the average coverage and then determine that anything above that average will be considered the "Cadillac".
As mentioned before, the BaucuSCARE bill isn't going to cover everyone. They're still saying that 15 million or more will not be covered. So, the arbitrary number of the 47 million, which had dropped down to something in the high 30 millions (you just pick any huge number) only about half of them will be covered under his plan. How is that so much better than what we have now? We will still have the lawyers skinning doctors and drug companies alive. We will still have drug companies gouging US citizens while practically giving drugs to other countries for pennies on the dollar. We will still have the Medicare and Medicaid fraud and abuse.... all of which will remain under HR3200 AND the Baucus' bill - as well as any of the others, I'm sure. So, ALL of the problems with our current US healthcare system we'll just carry those over to the next healthcare system, and for the switch we'll have less quality care, but add 15 million "to the rolls" who are basically getting free medical care now.... just check any hospital emergency room!
The other thing of great concern is the fact that when the new healthcare reform act is passed and signed by the president, the changes will not take effect immediately. Paying for the plan will begin immediately, but the actual plan itself will not be implemented until 2013. That means that we will be paying for a healthcare plan over three years before we can utilize its benefits. (Why don't I go buy a real Cadillac right now on a ten-year loan and wait for them to deliver it to me in three years. How smart is that?)
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released a report last week which claimed the Baucus bill would not add to the national deficit. This was the "plain speak" version not the "political-speak" one with all the confusion - I mean - all the details, either! But this report assumes that those employers who had previously provided healthcare coverage for their employers and who would drop employee coverage in favor of the less costly non-coverage tax penalty as provided under the Baucus bill would increase their worker paychecks by an equal amount which they spent on the insurance coverage. (I'm not sure if this would be less the penalty they would have to pay!) This practice will take a nontaxable event for the employer (the health care provision) and replace it with a taxable one (employee wages). Proponents of the bill say this will produce $83 billion in government revenues. If this revenue doesn't come into the coffers, then the Baucus bill will add billions of dollars to the federal deficit in the next ten years.
So I'm asking, why would a company drop employee coverage just so it could pay more (in fines, taxes, and wages) than it did before? It does seem more likely they'd just drop the expensive insurance, pay the fine, and let the insurance part go! Sounds more logical, doesn't it?
Overall, it would be much more effective and much less expensive if politicians would just address the problems that presently exist in our current healthcare system rather than building a whole new system around those problems. It's like building a new house on a crumbling foundation. And that is exactly what the American people are trying to tell Congress - only they're not listening.
All I can say is any Democrats who supports any final bill of this type should be and will be held responsible for this healthcare mess when premiums rise, taxes increase, deficits skyrocket, and Big Government's power grab reaches farther and farther into the American's wallets and way of life.