Apparently, the "smoke and mirrors" actions of those in Washington now over this health care deform disaster of a bill is getting more and more furious.

At over 2,000 pages, from its inception it is nothing more than the second Lawyers Employment Act legislation (the first being the Patriot Act itself) mostly for the revenues of those in the legal profession, many of whom in Washington are also members.

The argument over federal funding for elective abortions actually is such hyperbole it is at this point incredible, and does go to show just how much the media is being used in order to shift the focus on many of the provisions of the bill which bear further scrutiny while focusing on a really inconsequential provision.

Why inconsequential?

As with the health care bill's focus on whether or not it should provide benefits for immigrants, whether legal or otherwise (since this broad terminology will be played with in the courts in the near future on a "test" case using an illegal in order to set a precedent),  this argument now over elective abortions is redudant and really "after the fact," since at the present time health care for legal or illegal immigrants is already provided under separate legislation that was enacted "behind closed doors" but apparently only known widely by those who have lived in a border state for any length of time, as is also elective abortions. 

How so?

Many groups and "civic" organizations throughout the country receive federal funding for their programs through grant monies provided. 

Planned Parenthood, as a deemed "educational institution" primarily is one of them, and also provides services for elective abortions - in fact, is one of the civic organization that has become the focus of those opposing abortion, but also those not at all opposing abortion in and of itself, but opposing the "partial birth" abortion method utilized throughout the country at some public or low cost health care clinics now. 

The procedure that is nothing more than the "section and suction" extraction that has resulted in many women becoming subseqently sterile in the process due to the procedure itself which can and has pierced a woman's uterus effectively making her unable to carry a full term child thereafter.

And is in the opinion of many, barbaric in its method.

But this argument, without recission of the grant monies that are given now to many of these groups throughout the nation for elective abortions, has done a great job in swinging all those that have been crying foul over the entire focus of this bill to selective features of it.

Which apparently is the goal, after all, not the fact that the entire bill was written for and by the special interest groups and industries which will once again benefit without any fundamental changes in both the provision of health care in this country or its costs.

While charging many a now jobless and homeless American another "fee" and "tax" for Washington if they are unable to comply.  In essence, if Americans do not cowtow to Washington's will, they will pay a price.  A little less than the cost of getting that coverage - but either Big Daddy, or their special interest "favored subject" will profit, come hell or highwater.

Regulation, and performing their Constitutional function would address the difficulties that actually lack of regulation has created most of all, and also the expense and globalization of this financial sector into high risk investments they have progressively done with all those excess premium payments in weak economies thus then making their premium payers take some of those losses - with their very lives in denied coverages.

I mean, this legislations was the most expensive undertaking the health care industry has ever funded.  Which means their profit margins at this point are off the charts in order to have paid six figure salaries to all those lobbyists on K Street in order to once again increase their bottom line profits at the American public's expense. 

Americans will once again be feeding the global investors in the health care sector, at now the cost of their very lives - and bankbooks.

It appears, soon all Americans will be on welfare due to legislating with this mindset and logic.

 

It was announced by Barack Obama that in accordance with his campaign statements that he is deploying 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Iraq in order to seek out Osama bin Laden and the members of al Qaeda per the original Resolution passed by Congress in the wake of 9-11 (after, of course, at first promising to end the engagement in the Middle East altogether after so many lives, and so many American dollars have been lost in the over eight years since 9-11).

The question is, with the guarantee of support from the Afghan government with respect to this redress for the deaths and lives lost on that fateful September day, why the need for 30,000 troops rather than a limited deployment of intelligence and career military officers?

Not to second guess the commanders on the ground as a mere citizen, but is it really necessary to risk an additional 30,000 U.S. lives in order to capture one leader and those that were DIRECTLY responsible for giving those that participated "aid and comfort" in the planning of  9-11 which is the exact wording of the original Resolution?

The original pilots, after all, were Saudi citizens.  It was only days after the attacks that it was revealed that bin Laden had claimed reponsibility for the attacks - and with the assistance of the Taliban, as I recall, not al Qaeda, although the two have been merged now in this loosely defined "War on Terror" which evolved under the Bush Administration.

So far, the body count in Iraq is minimal compared to prior full scale declared wars but still staggering for the U.S. given that these individuals are actually using rudimentary weapons most of all, including themselves.

And the amount of money now which has been poured into the rebuilding efforts actually has resulted in the U.S. deficit soaring to unprecedented levels even before all the other "funny money" was printed in order to then "salvage" the U.S. economy in the domestic loss of jobs and the foreclosure mess which occurred in large part due to the inflationary costs and those taxes for the war itself, actually.

As funds were appropriated for the war, less funds were appropriated for domestic needs and costs and the budget for an entire new Department (DHS) and its expensive toys burst the "true" inflation (not the published spin) in rising costs for fuel, groceries and local taxes now for eight years - and then even with the stimulus, states are announcing college tuition cost increases, added taxes and a host of other new ways to bankrupt Americans, of course, after Washington then went so far as to tax the air Americans now breathe.

It was interesting and outrageous to note that one of the Congressional members is proposing a new "tax" on Americans labeled the SOS tax (Congress and the media whom it appears they consult more and more for PR purposes love the acronyms for new legislation, unlike days gone by with bills less than 50 pages tops.  The size of the average mortgage loan these days, which has also increased from less than five pages to 50 or more, with all the riders and caveats).

I wonder how much destruction we can now wreck in Afghanistan in order to bulk up the revenue, jobs and coffers of the U.S. military contractors once again in order to further plunge this country into a full out depression, since the global economy may be seeing signs of improving, but thus far the U.S. economy continues to tank in order to feed all those other nations and European investors.

By the time this war ends, it appears that what will truly have transpired is that there will eventually have been a leveraged buyout of most of America's infrastructure and assets by foreigner investors.

We will lose our country to foreigners while fighting a foreign enemy and without a shot fired on domestic soil.

One man which has somehow alluded capture now for over eight years by the finest military in the entire world.

Just when are some of those other promises going to be kept, Mr. Obama, such as making Iraq start picking up the tab actually for this rebuilding effort in which it seems the U.S. funds and builds government buildings only to then have them blown up once again?

While Ms. Clinton then attempts to switch hats, as it were, as ambassador for Iraq and urge what is left of corporate America unrelated to those military contractors to invest in Iraq?

It appears maybe that it would be only the global insurance companies that would profit on businesses that wish to now outsource American production to that country post the rebuilding effort, in hiring then cheaper Iraqi labor in order to then pay those stratospheric insurance rates.

Just how, again, can Congress and the President justify risking 30,000 additional U.S. lives in order to supposedly redress the loss of 2,500 - after, of course, having lost at least three times that many to date?

Is this now the mentality of those on the Hill in defending America, while of course leaving our borders open and affording foreign investors in our nuclear reactors throughout the country for those global markets?

Isn't it the U.S. economy, security and safety and not the global one, that is supposed to be the focus of our elected representatives, since it would appear that fighting a foreign enemy on their own home turf gives us a one down no matter what the engagement, and we've got plenty of risk now due to continued negligence and promoting "foreign investment" in American assets on our own shores at this point?

Isn't the risk of attack by foreign terrorists much greater from within at this point, than without with such skewered logic?

Just how many more lives will be risked in order to secure the Middle East as a permanent source of income for War, Inc. in the name of "jobs and the economy" for the telecom, networks, media, and thousands of military contractors?

Are these again some of the "new jobs" created in addition to those which were primarily taxpayer paid additional government jobs under the non-stimulus (rather than the red-lining promised)?

Do you think after these past two administrations particularly, the American public trusts either the Republicans or Democratic Globalists in any manner whatsoever, except to keep the balls spinning and give public appearances that belie the collusion now involved between both parties in continuing this fiasco?

Is this a war in providing for the common defense of America?  Or expansion of a global agenda and result of pemanent alliances with differing interests at the cost of America and Americans?

The proposed timeline and ending of this war really says it all.  2011.  Coincidentally, just prior to the next presidential campaign election cycle in order to be rehashed for the consumption of America and spun and spun some more by the Global Socialist Party now residing on the Hill.  It will, of course, end as "politically" as it appears that it began.

And an enemy for which this country would never, ever have if it had practiced the "defensive war" measures provided in America's founding documents per the "intent" of the founders.

These were trained terrorists, trained by the U.S. government in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets, from all reports.  So trying these individuals in America's federal courts once again also seems to be a political move in order to again rachet up the temperature in America for the continuing war when the details are rehashed on CNN and FOX of the "evidence" for the accused for all America.

Of course, since it will be a world audience involved the Middle Eastern countries will get the impression that the United States citizens are still out for revenge and blood after eight years since actual combat footage of what truly is occurring in Iraq has been suspiciously absent, unlike Viet Nam, so the blood lust will be reignited for the New York trial and the American people the convictors hearing the "evidence," from foreigners that speak little, if any, English at all.

A military target was involved, and these were "soldiers" trained in covert activities.  And the mastermind still remains at large, so once captured what type of "plea bargain" will be available for any of these now to be tried, one of whom at least it is claimed was an active participant, in order to convict Mr. bin Laden?

And since our military did train them initially, would they also not be more familiar with their history and an "open" military trial, per the Nuremburg Trials, more along the lines of what is called for here?

The timing of these trials, and now announcement of the surge in conjunction, seems War, Inc. is not about to end before this country is brought to its knees both economically, and in the theft of thousands more of America's youth.

A Georgia federal district court judge, Clay Land, in United States District Court once again turned down a valid challenge by a U.S. citizen with respect to the eligibillity challenges which have been undertaken by several different groups previously calling for production of Barack Obama's birth certificate as confirmation of his lawful natural born citizen status per the express terms of the U.S. Constitution with respect to any individual holding the highest office under it.
It appears that this particular judge no longer holds the common law, and codified law of the United States of "Res Ipsa Loquitur" (the thing as it speaks ) with respect to Constitutional interpretation.
And ignoring such a clear legal duty and provision with respect to the judiciary to make a clear and judicious review of such documentation for both legitimacy and legality is clearly in order here.  Especially since this nation is still involved in a "global" war on terror, and now domestic spying program post 9/11.
Of course, while our own borders still remain unsecured, and the Bush Administration then also afforded over 43 countries free pass Visa waivers with 48 hour turnaround security checks prior to his leaving office.
I think most individuals would agree, that such a provision was made for obvious reasons by the founders.
So that no other allegiance or loyalty to any other country, or their interests, would precede the president's duties and obligations to this country and its citizens in the carrying out of his official duties and functions.  Especially as Commander in Chief of the military.
And this particular case was brought by a soldier who owes allegiance to both this country and its Commander in Chief while on active duty.
And considering Mr. Obama's rather unusual upbringing, much of which was clearly outside the United States which he fully admits, and as a lawyer himself would appear would see the clear need for such provision.
Since political parties themselves were also not at all included as "legal" parties to the Constitution at the outset.  Since those federalists and anti-federalists actually settled their differences upon the ratification process, and agreement and later enactment of Patrick Henry's Bill of Rights in order to protect the "people" from abuses of both their federal and state government with respect to the "unalienable" rights stated thereunder.
The judge clearly showed his bias, and actually disdain for the Constitution in his further comments, calling such requests and measures from LEGAL U.S. citizens in this country, "frivolous."
And yet the federal government under the stimulus enacted legislation calls for the creation of a National Health Care Database containing all Americans very private medical records through their now obvious "state actors," the health insurance industry and their associated organizations ala the East India Tea Company and their "favored status" with the British sovereign at the time of the original revolution?
And are continuing on legislation with respect to this health care deform which is and has been clearly disputed as outside their also legal authority, and Constitutional duties and functions other than to regulate those industries more significantly in order to reduce those costs, since it has been the costs, not the availability, that has been the major problem for most of those that still remain uninsured.
Or denials in honoring most of the representations of many of those agents which sold them to the American public now progressively, in even renegotiating and changing the provisions unilaterally in many instances without any notice, or negotiation of the insureds paying those horrendous premiums.
While closed door meetings were held with the industries on these measures, and it appears will also be so convoluted again with hundreds of pages of legalese involved in order to further give the lawyers in this country and the ACLU another stimulus at the public's expense, the federal courts are now denying proof of the clear eligibility of a publicly paid employee that is facilitating now "fining" citizens in order to once again increase Washington's bottom lines and the insurer's and their stockholder's profit margins and capital gains?
The judge also stated that such a matter was not a "duty" of the court, and went so far as to state that if he so ordered proof, that this would open the door in the event a potential candidate lied about his age in order to gain office.
This just goes to show why Washington said that political parties in and of themselves could destroy this nation from within, if foreign interests didn't do so from without.  And it appears that both the political parties and their "foreign" interests are doing just that "progressively."
And since this off-the-wall ruling that flies in the face of all manner of law and the hundreds years precedent of res ipsa loquitor that precedes it with respect to Constitutional interpretation (which few judges have followed also in the past which also has lead to where we are today, an "unrepresentative" government on every level), I wonder if the district court judge involved just so happened to go to Harvard also.
Which apparently is also either teaching more and more British based "precedents" in this country as law, or is also even at those six figure per semester tuition rates, another of our failing schools.
I bet this one comes up when or if Arnold Schwartenegger decides to take a run for the roses.
But as with our liberally cluesless media, if that is the case and another such movement should occur, I doubt that those individuals will be called "birthers," as has been the spin placed by the Obama worshippers come hell or high water (and hell is looking pretty good to some of us at this point after these first eight months in the levels of back door taxation and property thefts of the citizenry are concerned for Mr. Obama's global agendas ala Bush).
They will simply be called Americans.
And any judge that would in any such event so rule as Mr. Land has in this case, Benedict Arnold.
My only problem with this entire matter is that insofar as my beliefs, Mr. Obama clearly does not fulfill the "intent" of the founders also with respect to the entire provision, and the background from which it came and reasons therefor. And why this particular case was brought in that federal district is beyond me, when it is not really one of the most Constitution honoring jurisdictions to begin with historically in some of their renderings in the past, along the lines of the 9th Circuit in wacko California, so liberal that it also doesn't recognize the Constitution in any manner whatsoever as of late.
And due to the hijacking of our entire government by two mainstream political parties at this juncture without any also Constitutional basis in fact, not "duly elected" per the judges also stated reasons for his refusal in that the "people had chosen" the president (right, and just what were the choices, your honor, since the two political parties have an inside track on the entire process and accept even campaign donations and/or sponsorship from foreigners at this point, and were illegally elected even to Congress in the first place, having accepted "foreign" campaign donations and sponsorship and thus not "representatives" of the citizeny of their respective districts in any manner whatsoever and thus in violation and "pretenders" at this point in violation of the entire basis for the election of candidates for the representatives government written within the clear terms of the Constitution itself.
At this point, not at all "representatives" solely of the districts in which the were elected but more so the national and global lobbying organizations, or even foreign countries lobbyists and their interests.
But just look at what the alternatives are in any event also.
Joe Biden, with Nancy Pelosi second in line?
Hell doesn't even begin to describe that pairing, and the additional havoc they would pile on top of the already crushing burden on the middle and lower income classes and "average" Americans.
And the other branch doesn't clearly know the meaning of the term "conservative" at this point, but simply another branch of the Global Socialist Party but with different and in some instances in varying degrees, even overlapping global corporate benefactors, that's all.
Hail Britainnia.  It appears that Congress and those on the Hill are selecting more and more "British trained" globally focused "global socialist" also judges for high federal office in order to protect also their job security, and power trip moves.
Such as those educated at Harvard, Oxford, Stanford, and those East Coast "ivy league" schools whose law school programs clearly have been teaching the British style of government with the "government as sovereign" mindset.
And appears clearly are not at all teaching the "intent" of those founders behind much of the provisions of both the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution itself.  Nor clear distinctions between the "limits" of and their obligations with respect to their function and  their true powers and duties.
And this one was clearly their function and duty, without any "rights of refusal" whatsoever included within the document which actually provides for Mr. Land's lofty salary, and that of his staff.

It was announced in the AP that the insurance industry lobbyists, who were key players in Washington over the summer in closed door meetings with Barack Obama and the Senate Finance Committee with respect to Obama's health care deform measures that have been progressively coming off the Hill, that the new revisions dropping the amount of penalties for Americans not carrying insurance coverage would result in higher costs (in the thousands in some respects) for other Americans for their existing coverage.

It appears that terrorism upon the United States public at this point isn't simply restricted to Middle Eastern sects, but politicans and corporate lobbyists as their standard operating procedures in order to forment more and more unconstitutional legislation and violations.

Such as Cap & Trade. 

Now we have the health care insurance industry terrorists flooding the media waves.

I have news for those corporate lawyers who represented those industries (who are not lawyers at all, since if they were they would see the entire unconstitutional focus of this legislation for what it is), fining Americans ANY amount for lack of coverage is unconstitutional and a "taking" of American's property without their consent for a "product," and a privilege and immunity given to their industry at the cost of the citizenry in general.

Especially since most of those citizens have been funding catastrophic care coverage at the state levels already for literally decades. 

And also due to the fact that in those figures that the industry uses, they are also factoring in huge profit margins for their corporate shareholders at the public's expense, and also their diversified portfolios which transfer much of those premiums into some of their riskier investments, such as real estate at the present time, invested in much of the West and Southwest and other areas of the country.

Where many of those insurers are also based who have seen some of those profits dwindle due to the home foreclosure and mortage scams of their also financial branches and arms, the banking industy in which they are also heavily invested.

Just where are these "projections" coming from?

And there lies the rub.  The health insurace industry can use such maneuvers because there is absolutly no regulation or accountability of those huge mega national and now global concerns to their rate-payers, from which they do get the bulk of their profits.  Not their shareholders.  Their rate-payers.

To do their jobs, this is where Washington should be placing its focus.  Regulation of those industries.  Not affording them, with the now government press agency, the AP, to threaten and terrorize Americans through the media in order to continue their spins and propaganda and thus also create these factions of those that are insured at the present time, against those that are and have been unable to afford their high priced policies for literally decades due to the lack of regulation and accountabilty of them.

Or who ended up using their services, but became increasingly dissatisfied with their products. 

Since many of those that are not covered prefer to remain self-insured and not have to deal with the bureaucracy and red tape and hassles in making a claim.  Not to mention those that object on religious grounds still to invasive medical procedures being fined if they do not meet the criteria and "approved" standards of any Washington based edicts for their coverage.  Such as the Christian Scientists have against many medical treatments.

It is not Washington's job to guarantee the insurers bottom lines, but as a corporate financial industry and product, allow also those that are not living up to those policies which have been sold, to be removed from the market place and fail.

Which is not what occurred with AIG, and much of their failure also had to do with spins, since while the American branch of that huge global health insurer may have been struggling, it was struggling due to the bad business practices of their London Mayfair office from all accounts. 

Which was heavily invested in high risk ventures with much of those British policy holder premiums, which is rather strange since Great Britian has a socialized health care system.

So just what type of policies was AIG selling in Great Britain to begin with that caused their eventual financial meltdown?

As has been the case from the outset, it appears that the entire focus of Washington with respect to true health care reform could use a 180 turn in rather than listening and seeking the advice and consulting with the "stakeholders" (i.e., predators on the American public), it should be instead holding those unregulated huge national and global sharks to the fire in explaining just why, after all the years of the bull markets in this country, it is now hiking rates for their policyholders, rather than reducing them.

And maybe due to that huge AIG bailout for the British that the American public is now being forced to eat, and in which Timothy Geithner recently stated that it has been difficult to track just where most of those billions have gone over than 60 billion now to other foreign banks and interests, they could pay off that debt by providing free coverage to all Americans for the next twenty years in safisfaction.

http://enews.earthlink.net/article/top?guid=20091012/4ad2b7d0_3421_13345200910121659508200

In light of the events with the Wilson incident during Mr. Obama's presentation to the American people and Congress for his health care agendas, it appears that the mainstream media, particularly the AP, are now doing the polka for the policians involved in this incident

From a report published today by the AP, it appears that supposedly there WAS a provision within that 1,000 page bill that provided for illegal immigrants health care needs, and that those involved in its drafting are going through it with a fine tooth comb in order that those provisions get redrafted and removed.

At least that is what is being told the public by the AP from its "sources."

 But what is so incredibly unbelieveable is the inordinate now focus that is being directed due to this little media stunt on strictly the provisions for illegals which were the focus of Mr. Wilsons' little performance.

 Since the entire bill in and of itself is so chock full of Bill of Rights violations on the American citizens and public it is quite unbelieveable.

 And especially since also there has been for years emergency health care provided by separate legislation for the illegal immigrants in this country.

 As a former 45 year border state resident, I can testify to that since when my now 21 year old daughter was four we had to rush her to the emergency room at one point for some digestive difficulties she was having.

 And the entire emergency room was filled with illegal immigrants at that time since it was flu season and they were all waiting for their free health care and meds courtesy of Uncle Sam.

 We ended up waiting four hours in order for her to be treated since the illegals had priority as we were self-insured at that time, and the hospital was under federal directives at that time to so provide such care since "emergency" was so ill defined and broad in that federal statute and bill (since the Arizona state initiatives denying such coverage had yet to be passed by the Arizona voters, but which also was and has been since ineffective because those hospitals play the system and simply then treat them and apply for those federal monies still available, legislated and appropriated since that bill's passage years ago instead).

Another of those bills and measures that was passed at least 15-20 years ago without the knowledge or consent of the American taxpayers, since the Constitution does only apply to Americans specifically per the Preamble, and those hospitals and health care networks received even public monies and support for their very exitence at the state and municipal levels, and many also receiving reserach and other grant monies billed to U.S. taxpayers.

So it does appear that the AP as a news source is reacting to the Hill's press releases, rather than digging a little deeper as to just how ludicrous that entire performance actually was in the focus of Mr. Wilson's objections.

 He's about 20 years too late, and if he is a federal legislator or has been even though South Carolina is not a border state, should and must have been well aware of the existence of this other legislation which already existed and has been reappropriated ever since.

And what a spin and joke, actually, and must have been merely a grab for media attention for both Obama and Mr. Wilson, and to shift again the focus of this legislation.

Given the entire real outrageous and  "illegal" provisions contained within it that trump Mr. Wilson's meek and errant staged outrage in their Constitutional violations.

In several media sources today it was announced that a "draft" of some changes on the proposed health care reform legislation was "leaked" to the AP media stating that the liberal and moderate Congressional members in both the Republican and Democratic parties have now scrapped the proposed public health care "option" and instead have now included a new provision that would mandate fines for Americans up to an amount of $3,800 for those that do not carry their own health care coverage.

Since the cost of health care coverage at its now industry set rates are more than most Americans can pay of those that remain uninsured in this country (which this Administration has pegged at over 50 million, without any statistical or factual data supporting this number, many of which are actually covered under state plans due to their lower income levels or inability to get coverage by state laws already at taxpayer costs), this "solution" really is quite laughable at this point the lengths that this Congress is going in order to shove what is not at all a "reform" of health care at all.

Simply another illusion and Act of Congress that is meant more to feed the financial and insurance sector most of all.

Included within the article was a proposal by Max Baucus (D-Mt) that was pegged a compromise measure, which included the fines and legislation that would mandate that health care providers were precluded from turning anyone down for insurance, although could charge higher rates and fees for smokers or older Americans.

Although if history is any indication, I can see that those exceptions in the not so distant future will be the subject of literally decades of "revisions" on just which Americans can be charged higher rates and premiums until it eventually includes all Americans.

In short, nothing more than a corporate welfare scheme as it has always been in order to gain additional taxpayer revenue that Washington can use for discretionary expenditures, while the same time feeding the banking and financial sector once again at the American public's expense.

Nowhere in this legislation is there any accountability, fines or regulation of those health care providers insofar as their honoring those politicies, or for refusing treatments. The fines are directed at the American public and citizens instead.

Mr. Baucus indicated that this provision in the legislation would be similar to mandatory auto insurance which all Americans must carry by state laws throughout the nation at the present time.

Although, of course, I beg to differ.

Not simply because the amount of coverage and also amounts of such fines are determined at the state level, which means that such needs are regionally determined by also a lot more regulation and accountability over some of those insurers in the different states, but also the very reason such also unconstitutional legislation was passed in the first place.

The reason that there were mandatory insurance laws for auto insurance and the focus of those laws are on liability only.

And the stated reasons were due to the fact that such legislation would end up saving taxpayers the costs of providing for the salaries of more judges to hear those property claims and losses through the courts.

And was also fundamentally unconstitutional to begin with in "mandating" the purchase of a product in order to drive a vehicle in this country, since there are no such provisions over foreign drivers in any manner whatsoever.

Especially those that come from Mexico, or even Europe where they drive on the other side of the road, and as this country has had more and more foreigners granted visas and as tourists, have impacted many larger metropolitan areas tremendously in property damages to American citizens.

Some states have realized these unconstitutional laws for what they are and do have provisions for bond coverage, or provision of bank statements to satisfy the minimum liabiity coverages mandated by state laws. 

But still are in no way "lawful" due to the fact that now in this "globalization" that Washington has embarked on progressively, global tourtists are exempted from this law and have created thus higher rates now for U.S. citizen drivers in order to cover also those claims and losses.

And at the present time, every state in the country now has some type of catastrophic health care for those that are either indigent or cannot obtain coverage due to pre-existing conditions.

So this "reform" is nothing more than another move to centralize more and more authority, and more and more power in Washington now over American's future health care needs, and their very lives.

And with many now jobless and homeless due to Washington's now progressive "global socialism" agendas under both Republican and Democratic Administrations within the past twenty years in order to feed big business industries such as the health care and banking sectors, if you don't have a home at this point, and your credit has been ruined in the process, how are you going to afford health care - much less then be fined for not being in compliance with this "law."

Is Mr. Obama aware that the insurance industry also uses their own internal "credit reporting" insofar as rates charged already with respect to both property and auto insurance?

Are Americans lives and health care now going to be "rated" according to their "tables" for the amount of those premiums also without any regulation or oversight insofar as what goes in those reports?

I don't see anywhere in the enumerated poweres of Congress where mandatory taxation with respect to purchasing a product, or any single payer public plan is included within the Constitution.

In fact, the taxation already which is now inflicted is unlawful for those sums at the present time which are withheld and sent to Washington technically, as is the continuation of Social Security in its present form since it was meant merely to provide for those that, upon the inability to work in their chosen field due to medical conditions or afflications, or orphans, widows or children of those who lose a parent or primary wage earner were provided a subsistence for their survival needs.

Now we are contemplating taxation and fining the citizens for not purchasing a product and for which the costs are unaffordable, by merely addressing the symptom without even doing a cursory evaluation and backtracking in order to identify what actually lead to this problem to begin with.

Lack of regulation over these "corporate" commercial interests, that have progressively increased their profit margins and their shareholder dividends at the expense of their premium payers, for the most part.

And doctor fees which are now out of sight due to both the costs of professional liability insurance in high risk fields, and also the costs in getting those educations at state and public universities that are now charging tuitions that are not even close to the CPI nor bear any relevance to the actual costs of that training in any manner whatsoever due to negligence on the part of state governments.

In which some of these universities could subsist on the revenue collected from their football and sports programs alone.

The crackpots in Washington just passed one of the largest taxes ever in that Cap & Trade scam, and now are contemplating fining homeless and jobless Americans for not having health care coverage?

And those homeless and jobless, after all, are providing theirs. In spades.

I have a heads up for Congress and Mr. Obama at this point:

End the War in the Middle East, and maybe we won't have so many future Americans that will also be without health care and needing publicly provided care since last month saw the highest number of casualties in eight years in that war, and pass legislation that the AIG debt that is owed to this country by that London based global insurer can be satisfied in increments.

By providing free catastrophic health care to all Americans for the next twenty years.

And fine them a million per denial of claim.

Since they do, after all, have credit worthy and profitable subsidiaries in over 23 different countries other than that London Mayfair office whose practices impacted the U.S. offices due to Washington's globalism agendas.

They are, after all, in the health care business.

And we are now already paying for it.

For Any And All American Conserve-ative Constitutionalists:

All the liberal mainstream and citizen journalists sites today are abuzz with the claimed "outburst" of Joe Wilson, House representative from South Carolina, during Mr. Obama's "sell ObamaCare" message and address to Congress last evening, which of course was really no Congressional address at all but another appeal to the masses for another of Mr. Obama's "in your face" agendas and programs at the expense of the taxpayers most of all.

This "health care reform" could better be described as "health care deform" at this point, since most of all those that were consulted were the industry representatives that have thus far created this scenario where many in America at the present time, even if they do have health care coverage, are finding those benefits shrinking year after year, while their costs continue to escalate.

Twenty four hour childbirth's and mastectomies have now become the norm, to the point where we now have an infant survival rate that is actually lower than Cuba's, after all.

So has doctors scheduled for seven or eight heart surgeries in a row in many of these corporately run hospitals and health care networks at the present time.  And "staff" infection rates as a result becoming more and more common contracted at those hospitals, no less.

Several years ago my brother-in-law went in for arthroscopic surgery due to a basketball injury he suffered, only to have to then be hospitalized thereafter with a staph infection contracted at the clinic in which he had the original procedure done.

During one of the two of my mother's recent heart surgeries, the surgeon involved (one from South America) indicated that he has seven such stint surgeries for collapsed arteries scheduled one right after another at the large, corporately owned health care "network" facilities in which he and his megapractice of doctors had contracted in the Southern U.S.

She had to go in for another emergency room visit again then within 60 days since the hospital staff failed to tell her that her recovery time might also result in periodic instances of angina while her heart was reoxygenating after the surgery, and then failed to give her the needed nitroglycerin in just such an instance.

She, of course, has a publicly provided plan.  Medicare.  With an AARP provided supplement.  But was not given the needed medications prior to release in order to avoid such an occurrence, which from my research happens in far more instances than it does not.

And due to internet marketing and such with no agents, per se, involved in much of these plans, denials of coverage on many claims are now also going through the roof.

What interested me is the reaction of those looney liberals (and I am neither Republican or Democrat, but hold with our Constitution as the true "Rule of Law" and in which it is clear the federal government has no authority to institute such a program at all without the "consent of the governed" in going through the amendment process in order to so do).

Given the unconstitutionality of this legislation at its root, I would say Mr. Wilson's reaction was rather mild in both his stated opposition, and also his choice of wording.

He interrupted Mr. Obama mid-presentation when he was addressing many Americans stated concerns (without also objecting as I do on Constitutional grounds most of all) that coverage for illegal immigrants would be provided.

Which is really laughable in and of itself, because at the present time illegal immigrants already have coverage, as this former 45 year border state resident can attest.

And Mr. Wilson himself should know that.  After all, he is a federal legislator and coverage for illegals for their what was supposed to be catastrophic needs only has been given to them for literally years due to existing legislation already passed or if not, the hospitals are getting paid by the feds at the taxpayer's expense anyway, since the new MO is passing unconstitutional legislation in one branch of Congress, and then funding it even it it is not "legally" law at all lacking full passage. 

That has happened with quite a few of these rather bogus unconstitutional propety stripping bills as of late, and the ones now being enacted by the Department of Homeland Security in those Fusion Center Task Forces and memorandums recently circulated.

So this "new" reform obviously is not precluding in any manner that free coverage which is already given to those illegals, and has been for years.  All state measures and ballot initiatives to the contrary, it is a federal law that provides such benefits to those who are non-Americans in emergency room visits and treatments.

And those corporate health care networks get paid quite handsomely for those visits, of course courtesy of the American taxpayers who are then billed for those services and visits.

Not their employers, who are paying in most instances below standard wages for their services, saving on state workmen's comp taxation, and then having the Americans whose jobs they have replaced picking up the tab for their health care needs while in this country, many not even on those massive temporary work visas Washington hands out nowadays like candy at the request of the states. 

Who, by the way, are just as much to blame, many of which now are pleading poverty and bankruptcy as California and Arizona, two states with an inordinate amount of illegal workers to begin with due to the "petitions" they rush off to Washington for increases in those visas each and every legislative session for their campaign backers benefits.

In many states, it has gotten to the point where it has adversely affected the quality of care and treatment of lawful Americans, especially in the border states during flu season, when there are six hour waits in hospital, especially during winter due to all the illegals there waiting for treatment for cases of the flu.

And I'm not speaking of the "swine flu" either, that strain that has suddenly now appeared during this recession, just as it did during the 1970's recession in order to bulk up Wall Street and the pharmeceutical industries and financial wheelers and dealers once again, at the American public's expense.

Washington is getting oh so predictable on their terrorism tactics in order to bulk up their favored industries and Wall Street's bottom lines at his point.

At least to the boomer's who have seen this all before.

I'm speaking of the 24 hour stomach flu, or regular flu, in which those illegals rush to the emergency wards for their free health care, while auto accident victims, or those with true medical emergencies are waiting in line for treatment, since Uncle Sam's reimbursements and provisions for those illegals exceeds most of those of the citizens paying megabucks for some of those policies in their provisions, or at least in the amount of paperwork involved and screening and complications with many hospital going through the pre-approval processes for insurance patients prior to treatment.

As a non-Republican or Democrat, it would appear this entire incident again is being used for political reasons and not seen for the truth in what Mr. Wilson actually stated. Which was, after all, the truth. And he didn't state it by half actually, as a former 45 year border resident can attest.

Mr. Wilson should have stated the obvious.

And when a public official of Mr. Obama's stature is misrepresenting facts to the public in a nationally held press conference called merely to gain sympathy and support for his unconstitutional program (which it also is, fundamentall), don't think Mr. Wilson's claimed "outburst" addressed the violative nature of this legislation on the rights of the people by half.

And political correctness actually has contributed to where we are today. And not calling a spade a spade.

Or treason for the treason it actually is.

You go, Joe.

After all, the founders would have been actually calling for the dueling pistols at this point with some of the treason that is now going on at the Hill "progressively" by both of the global socialist parties now in office, the Republicans and Democrats.

But in the long view since it appears Mr. Wilson actually averted the obvious, it appears there was a political agenda and media reason for this "outburst," since even Mr. Wilson should know that in Congress attempting to inflict and additional tax on the American people such as this public health care option would entail to begin with, our Constitution requires a whole lot more than simply townhall meetings in order to afford Washington to so do.

So it appears this "outburst" was a bi-partisan spin again, without truly addressing the crux of the matter and in order mainly to detract and deflect from the Constitutional abridgement it truly is, without the "consent of the governed" and going through the amendment process to so do in another "property" taking of the American people in the name of what is no more than industry corporate welfare and a governmental power move in taking what is and has been a state matter under federal control instead and then masked as "health care deform."

Without at all addressing the actual problems which resulted in this scenario to begin with.

Washington's failure to abide by the "Rule of Law" and actually effectively regulate these corporate commercial organizations benefitting at the public's expense and their policies and practices, rather than continuing, year after year instead, to get in bed with them and giving them corporate welfare and privileges and immunities that they are in no way "lawfully" entitled to from the outset.

To Any And All Conserve-ative Constitutionalists:

Posted today on many media sites due to the highly controversial intent of Barack Obama to initiate what can only be called a FDR "fireside chat" with America's youth through a televised "back to school" speech throughout the nation, my initial reaction to it as a 60's era Conserve-ative Constitution believing American was that it smacks of FDR's programs and agendas during a similar government initiated economic crisis in this nation - shifting the blame off those responsible (Washington) to asking the people to suck it up and endure.

Or silence and control the masses through using television instead of the radio for his message, since the message of hope and change Mr. Obama presented during his campaign rhetoric has clearly lost its glow for the parents of most of those children he is addressing.

His homey style of communication while wheeling and dealing with global corporate and foreign nationals to undermine both American labor and production that has been the focus of all his efforts since the inaugural appears he hopes such personal appeals can whitewash.

Last month saw the most casualties in the Iraq war almost since its inception. While Mr. Obama speaks of Twitter, Facebook and Google - an industry that is profiting the most actually from both the War in Iraq and the now domestic spying program.

And in using America's children for such a message, does seem to be the ultimate example of the hypocricy and self-aggrandizement that most on the Hill appear to be suffering. A social disease that is self-perpetuating, it seems, the longer thoy remain in Washington and out of touch with those to whom they are charged to serve. The Detroit GM workers I feel would have a clearly different reaction to Mr. Obama's youth message of working hard to reach your dreams.

Many of them, I'm sure, felt they had achieved given their circumstances a pinnacle of success in being involved in one of America's most vital and important inventions and achievements throughout the world.

It is clear that although Mr. Obama as one who graduated from one of America's most expensive and foremost Eastern univerisity's yet still has a basic lack of understanding of our Constitution and framework of government, that his ideas of the importance now in this country of a formal U.S. dictated education has lost its sheen due to the fact that the federal government has injected itself unconstitutionally into the education of America's youth.

Since that truly is something that the American people should decide for their own family's welfare. And also any such public educations would be better served with less federal involvement, and left to the states themselves to determine as was the founders also intention in Jefferson's establishment of the public school system, and the University of Virginia.

Nothing was said of the fact that there were quite a few of our U.S. president's themselves that had little formal education. One of the greatest, Lincoln, is a prime example. Our educational institutions "progressively" have gotten more and more liberal in their goals and agendas, and many American citizens are reacting also accordingly and pulling them out of public schooling in order to home school.

More and more each and every year. Too much of the wrong education can be more detrimental than studying quantum physics.

Or clearly the law and our jurisprudence system at this point in time.

Marxism and communist theories abounded in the Obama message, wrapped in an FDR media ploy and public relations move intended to sterilize Mr. Obama's image with America's youth given that his approval ratings are continuing to decline, as the parent's of those children Mr. Obama is addressing have watched their jobs and savings accounts dwindle due to Washington's global economic agendas and the world government agendas both parties on the Hill at the present time, the Global Socialist Party, now engender.

Creating new jobs is not Mr. Obama's primary function. Protecting the United States and its citizens from all enemies, both foreign and domestic, actually is. Protecting and preserving the civil rights also of those first ten amendments for all Americans in even choosing how much or how long to formally school their own kids is fundamentally one of the most foremost individual rights and liberties there is. Not promoting the U.S. school system or public education in general which has progressively resulted in a losing of the basics in pursuit of the agendas of both Washington and the politicos in the educational system in this country in general.

Protecting America's and American's sovereignty, in other words, both individually and as a nation, as a sovereign nation whose interests are best served by breaking the ties that bind with other nations and agendas that are clearly at cross-purposes to protecting our own vital economic bases and industries and American jobs here in this country. And the future of America's children actually lies in their parent's also more primary input and goals as their primary caregivers - not the government.

And better served protecting those children and the American people in doing their actual jobs, protecting their very lives and livelihoods from any foreign threat compromising either.

Not abroad, or the global expansion of our industrial base to other countries, thus then compromising our own national security also in the process.

Or aligning ourselves for literally decades after World War II with Israel, Britain and other nations whose agendas and intererests are at this point clearly different than our own.

And costing us now American lives in the thousands progressively in the process by not simply facilitating trade agreements which are economically beneficial in the present and short term yet still honoring their countries own sovereignty and our own in the process.

Obama's message was clear. Even going so far as to use his own personal story of his rather unusual upbringing in Indonesia and cross-nationalism in the process in order to garner both support and sympathy from an emerging generation of Americans for his global cause, again, painted in FDR style socialism and "the greater good," that this communique was clearly meant to transmit in its origins and mouthpiece.

The teacher's union must be thrilled as it appears that is the audience that just might have been behind this particular fireside chat. And maybe also those "struggling" banks whose profit margins Obama and Congress have been inordinately interested in protecting and enlarging at the general public's now loss and benefit such as the bank bailouts and "foreclosure rescue" aimed at priimarily satisfying those foreign investors at the American people's yet again expense.

And don't forget also America. Many of our greatest investors and achievers had little "formal" education at all. And many were schooled in their professions and trades outside the classroom, but instead by parents or other caring adults in their lives. Even in my generation, the federal government had far less involvement in local state or community education and really the days of phonics and the basic three Rs turned out some of our greatest inventors and free thinkers whose basic skills and language development were stressed, but who gained far more from then their own initiatives to follow their strengths to wherever they might lead. Using the public libraries more for their further study, and goal directed individual class study in their selected fields. Not "proscribed" agendas formulated by politicians at all.

Forced attendance through the public schools for such a message to our nation's children does speak of desperation at this point, and also clearly an agenda that appears to be at cross purposes with the majority of those children's true authority figures whose knowledge of their child's true gifts and talents and choice in how to develop those gifts is also being undermined in the process through "progeressive" world socialists such as Mr. Obama represents.

For some parents, this might be a good day to let your kids take a "wellness" day.

Since Mr. Obama mentioned washing your hands and staying home from school in order to avoid catching any of those health compromising "bugs."

Recently I have received several requests to attend TownHall meetings scheduled by Congressional members in order to "sell" their versions of ObamaCare to the public, and actually appear to be addressing citizens concerns with respect to this issue.

These TownHall meetings have now become the vogue for the Congressional members mostly to get some face and free air time before the public, and usually no more than opportunities to confound with their political agendas and excuses as a preface for their next runs for office with respect to contentious legislation - which ObamaCare is a prime example across the board in a great deal of its provisions with respect to America's Constitutional form of government and the huge potential costs to the public both for such an undertaking, and the administrative costs to boot.

Since, after all, there is catastrophic coverage for all citizens under most state plans which already exist in all 50 states.  So this legislation to me and many others seems simply another example of the state and federal government attempting to bypass the citizens, centralize more power in Washington, and have another source of revenue at both levels in order to rape for discretionary expenditures.

I wonder if there will be any reduction in state taxation as a result of this plan, since that also has been left out of much of the discussion, just how high most citizens state taxes are also at this point for the state provided plans already  in existence.  And the states do use the federal government as a heavy for much of their own Constitutional violations for their agendas in discretionary expenditures for their favored industries and backers.

 An unconstitutional taxation of the people, without representation since all consultation with respect to this "reform" has been behind closed doors with the "stakeholders" or industries that are, for the most part, responsible for the high cost of health care in this country today.

Below is my response to one such "invitation" who is a lawyer by profession:

Well, at least one not using the Christian Church as a backdrop for this treasonous legislation.

As previously indicated, the only power Congress has with respect to health care legislation is to do its job, and that is to insure freedom and protect the people from the abusive practices of these mega-conglomerate industries.

Not the "jobs and the economies" of the providers, but their practices and abuses which have lead to this. Corporatization of medicine has lead to 24 hour mastectomies and childbirths which have placed us now below Cuba in the infant survival rate in this country.

And factory line operations where there are more and more medical malpractice claims due to doctors having to do 12 or more operations a day. During my mother's recent heart surgeries, her cardiologist had seven operations scheduled back to back (and he was from South America, not a native born American and one of the "imports" for "science and technology" due to the fact that most medical clinics are also hiring foreign doctors who they can pay less due to the lesser tuition rates they have to pay in their countries for their educations, or further their currency stretches in ours for a U.S. education - such as many from India and South America). Seven heart surgeries back to back!!!

1. Establish a national complaint system as "interstate" commerce on insurers that are incorporated in more than one state in the country, or globally such as Zurich (Farmers) for citizen complaints of denied claims, hike or jack up rates without provocation which aren't based on claims made or ridiculous increases over the cost of living increase, agents who sell a policy but refuse to act as go between with the claims office for those commissions; internet regulation of commercial insurers advertising over the internet (free speech aside, corporations have no such right and consumer fraud is not free speech).

Also this database should be accessible to insurers and citizens for complaints on doctors who abuse the system by double billing or for tests not done acessible to both citizens and insurance companies for consumer fraud prosecution if willful and repeated; procedures and three strike rules for removal of licenses at the state level for doctors found guilty of gross negligence to protect the public, which is the real need, since million dollar awards under those punitive damage awards given since those lids were removed simply means that every five years that doctor is back in business during a 30 year career, or after mulitiple claims within five.

Doctors should also have access if insurers refuse treatments after prior approval, etc. Not inputting the citizens health care records, but protecting the citizenry from the industry abuses which lead to this.

2. Reinstating in codified law the common law on punitive damages that was removed by the TLA due to their greed (and YOUR industry), so more go into obstetrics and public health.

3. The complaint system should also be available for those supplemental carriers such as AARP when they do not pay off, or deny picking up costs which are not covered under any primary or government plan such as Medicare, when it is clearly provided in THEIR policies. They are using technicalities to deny claims after the primary carrier denies them in order to skirt around paying off on those claims.

Every single Congressman and Senator on the Hill is in violation of campaign finance laws at this point, and guilty of treason after the GM bailout, bank bailouts, and stimulus giving privileges and immunities to sovereign subject industries at the public's ultimate expense. You can't have a representative government when representatives are being elected by out of district PAC and commericial organizations, and thus not true representatives of the people at all.

In fact, any such legislation as is being proposed is blatantly unconstitutional in its current form. AND YOU KNOW IT.

For Any And All Conserve-ative Constitutionalists:

It was recently announced in several online media sources that the Mexican government, in their "partnership" with the U.S. in securing the nation's southern border with Mexico, has fired all their existing border agents, and hired new university educated border guards now armed with state of the art technology in order to work in concert with the U.S. on security issues.

I guess this public relations announcement was meant also to engender favorable response in the United States for Mexico's efforts to address the historically porous southern borders, which have progressively become worse each and every decade with respect to the security and crime that has occurred in the American border states.

Interesting, it appears the United States is now using foreign governments now in order to "stimulate" the economies of Silicon Valley. This announcement failed to mention that the American government under [George Bush entered into an initiative of literally billions in "foreign aid" to Mexico in order to address the border situation.

In other words, it was the American people and taxpayers that picked up the tab for Mexico's new agents university training and high tech gadgetry. Globally socializing now border security with other nations for Silicon Valley's corporate welfare and profit.  Or using the taxpayers and increasing the inflationary taxes and deficit to feed its now favored industries - the Silicon Valley telecom and security gadget industy.  I guess the contracts on the Iraq War aren't paying enough to get those Wall Street numbers where they would like them to be for those private investors though publicly funded for their next campaigns.

The main use of these new agents, since they will be at their posts primarily at the official ports of entry, appears to be in order to collect Mexico's VAT taxes for purchases being brought back from the U.S. across their borders for their citizens purchases at the local Wal-Marts in the border towns, in order to seize more of those U.S. dollars for Mexico's treasury.

And in order to possibly catch the stoned marijuana dealers that are stupid enough to attempt to cross Mexico's borders with the proceeds from their latest run. Trained dog sniffers came along with this gift from the U.S., it appears.

These measures can hardly be meant to address the true security threats and criminal activity that primarily endangers those Americans living in the border states from the drug cartels and criminal auto theft rings that cross those borders literally at will. Since they hardly wait politely in line for the security checks at the official ports of entry - but instead use the over 500 miles of open desert that is totally unsecured.

Which is also the port of entry for most of the illegal immigrants brought in by the human smuggling rings that also operate cross borders. With maps printed by the local Mexican governments in order to so do.

And although mention is made, as per Ms. Clinton's errant assessments and comments, with respect to also these measures intended to stop the smuggling of guns from the U.S. into Mexico - as any who have lived in a border state for any length of time is well aware, the machine guns and heavy artillery that those cartels obtain don't come primarily from the U.S. at all, but through their own southern borders with South America.

So, it appears in this public relations press release an attempt to silence those that have been calling for true border security at our southern borders now, especially eight years after 9/11 and with the increases annually in that amount of both illegal immigrants, and criminal activity that pours over those borders on a daily basis.  Which has, of course, now contributed (along with the increased property and auto insurance rates, and predatory loan practices of unregulated California lenders who sold most of those "creative" junk feed escalating loans in the West) to the high rate of jobless and homeless now in the border states in being the states with the highest rates of foreclosure during this housing crisis bar none.

With the border state residents in the inflationary taxes which will result in these foreign aid bills for Mexico actually resulting in paying for their continued victimization and abuse.  We are a bankrupted nation for all intents and purposes, but still handing out foreign aid like candy for other countries, while our government officials negligently and beligerantly at this point leave America's own borders vulnerable and unsecured - their primary function and duty.

 Mexico got the gadgets while the Americans living in the border states continue to get the shaft.

I wonder how many more will be stripped of their lives and property until Washington finally gets the message.  Is this part of the "we all must sacrifice" agenda here.  Sacrificing the lives and property of the legal Americans living in the border states for this global socialism agenda and to appease the Mexican government in continuing to provide employment for their citizens at the cost of the livelihoods of Americans?  And no less pick up the tab for it, endure the six hour emergency room waits for lawful citizens treatment, and smile or feel that Americans have somehow done their patriotic duty?

It appears Washington does have a problem with the definition of the type of patriotism the founders were also speaking of, in addition to being able to read the provisions of both their jobs, and legal limits with respect to U.S. citizens.  And that foreigners were not Americans until achieving citizenship status, and going through an application process, medical exam, learning the language toward truly assimilating.  And cutting their ties to their former homes of origin, even if those countries afforded dual citizenship.  This country did not, only allegiance to it.

Or perhaps is it their intent to cut loose the border states eventually, therefore leaving more discretionary tax revenue for those in the East to distribute to their Wall Street banking benefactors in the process?  Mexico's form of government is not at all similar to ours, nor its own Constitution with respect to foreigners found unlawfully in their country.  Nor anyone suspected of criminal activity upon a Mexican citizen.

It appears more and more the border state residents have become strangers in a strange land - their own country.

http://enews.earthlink.net/article/top?guid=20090816/4a879250_3421_1334520090816108637384

In all the debates and townhall meetings, public forums and the like it has amazed me that what is occuring is simply discussions of what the eventual health care reform legislation should look like and encompass, and not at all the fundamental violations of American's "right to choose or not choose" whether to be insured, or at what level of care.

There are many religions that prohibit invasive medical treatments in their practices. We do have freedom of religion in this country, and would appear any such legislation mandating that Americans must have health care coverage is an abridgement of quite a few of the Bill of Rights freedoms that our founding fathers fought and died in order to secure.

This legislation is being promoted by the left wing for feel good reasons most of all at least at the citizen level. What is being also missed is the parties and industries involved and who is being consulted, and also the inherent benefits to them in any such legislation. Politically and otherwise.

Although the Democratic Party has always held itself out to be the party of the people, rather than industry - Mr. Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi clearly demonstrated that they are just as much big business political lackeys as those in the Republican Party have historically been.

In fact, two of Mr. Obama's most ardent supporters and campaign contributors are Warren Buffett and Bill Gates. This legislation stands to profit both enornously, since one is a Wall Street guru heavily invested in the health care industry through his Geico Insurance (which provides and gives discounts to government employees), and the other the founder of Microsoft, who stands to also profit handsomely with the National Health Care Database which was included with the stimulus bills (and hidden for the most part from the public) sums for the software to begin this massive unconstitutional undertaking.

Placing the most personal and private information any American has on a federally accessible database would have the founding fathers storming the White House and shouting for the call to arms.

Both are also believers and support foundations that are dedicated to zero population growth, as are many members of the Democratic Party from the 1960's era that were involved in that movement. And the U.N. and WHO are also believers in population control and promote seminars and initiatives dedicated to it.

And interestingly enough, both Mr. Buffett and Mr. Gates have three children (not two, replacement) of their own.

So the hypocrites abound in this legislation, which for all intents in purposes, Hippocrates had nothing to do with. And would end up compromising many ethical doctors Hippocratic oaths also in the process in governmentally determined treatment plans, rathr than physician determined. And it appears neither does the AMA anymore, another announceed supporter for the provisions contained in Mr. Obama's proposed "solution." Using the "corporate" medical community when many within it are vigorously also opposed to any such legislation.

Which is sounding more and more like the "solution" Hitler used in order to determine who was and was not ultimately worth of life, or whose life was worthy for the "greater good" of the Fatherland.

China instituted the "one birth" rule for their population under Communist control long ago. And in the process, infancide rates due to sexual preferences became commonplace.

Lady Liberty had different plans for this nation, and more heart and soul.

It is difficult watching loved ones age and the physical deterioration that goes along with it. It also forces us many times to address our own mortality and untimely end.

In our fast food world now of Twitter and turnaround mastectomies, is life and death now to be determined according to what is more expedient and cost effective for the state (i.e., politicians and their stock portfolios, since all future legislation will be directed toward reducing more and more the "insurers" or health care industries risk and losses if history now serves correctly).

How many elderly people have they spoken to that value each and every day they have left, so long as they are still able to breathe? And while they may be in pain, isn't pain a part of all facets of life be it emotional or physical and simply just makes those painfree moments all the more cherished?

Obama's getting REALLY desperate at this point about his plans to force the industry sponsored health care reforms down the American people's throats come hell or highwater.

Proof?  At a recent townhall type meeting, Obama used the "threat" of a worsening economy if health care reform isn't done, and isn't done now.  He pointed to his "success" in the recent announcement that there had been a drop in unemployment rates last month, the first one since August 2008.

Not mentioning, of course, that that drop just may be due to the fact that many Americans unemployment benefits at this point have run out, or that there is temporary and seasonal jobs available during the summer months that our college students used to have that are now being filed by those with masters degrees, or at least bachelor's.

Also, failing to mention that last month there was also a 7% increase in the number of home foreclosures over the month before, with another 300,000 losing their homes.  If Americans have lost their homes and jobs, just how ARE they going to afford any health insurance coverage at all, be it government issued or private carrier?  The hypocricy and spins are getting more and more ludicrous by the day.

Mr. Obama's "foreclosure rescue" remedy is now being used by those banks apparently in order to stimply buy down the debt and repay on some of those foreign and rebundled investors' investments, while continuing to collect the usurous late fees, interest, appraisal fees and costs on those homeowners until finally lowering the boom.  A scam, as it were, dressed as a rescue for homeowners in order to skirt around the government's unlawful actions in affording those banks to resell those mortgages on the secondary market in the first place.  And who are merely using the Federal Reserve branch banks in order to now satisfy those investors, after raping the American people of their homes anyway.  Many of whom paid down payments that were far in excess of minimum downs also in order to even get some of those predatory loans they were marketing. 

Most sold out of sunny California, where Silicon Valley is profiting actually the most now in the "science based" technology focus of this and the last administation and the war in the Middle East, while then still claiming poverty in the process.  Disneyland doesn't end at the parking lot after exiting the tram in that state.  No do white collar criminal activities, and maybe the welcome signs should remove Arnie's name as Governor, and replace it with Jack Sparrow.

The only economic strengthening measure that would result from this heinous legislation at this point would be when those privatized state and federal lockups are turned into debtor's prisons for the stimulus of those "corporate" entities, and strengthening the economies of mostly the banks when the new usurous payday loan sharks afford the young then to open up medical 401(k)s for their future medical needs.

I really wouldn't put it past those banks that this health insurance reform is simply another stimulus for the banks, in order to diversify and rape the American people with their outrageous loans, fees and charges some more.

Since a good many of those insurers also hold massive Wall Street investments also in those Fed branch banking institutions.  As do most in Washington.

Appears this bill is meant to strengthen the economies of the Tories on the Hill most of all.  If not, then why is there no provision that, as civil servants, they MUST be covered by the cut rate governmental plan, and buy THEIR own supplements with their six figure salaries out of their also taxpayer paid Cadillac federal pension plans?

 

Under the guise of "stimulating the economy," the terms of the Making Homes Affordable Act is beginning to bear scrutiny.  Just whose economy is the focus of this stimulus?

Due to many recent reports in the mainstream media with respect to Obama's foreclosure rescue and remedy under this "solution" which was passed by Congress after the bank "bailouts," with now lawsuits being filed, and inordinate delays with many, many additional homeowners losing their homes right and left, I began again doing some research on the holdups and complaints.  And the provisions of the program.

There were another 300,000 homeowners made homeless last month according to RealtyTrac.  Over 77% of the homes that are being foreclosed upon are homes in the states of California, Nevada, Arizona, Florida and Michigan.  Michigan is no surprise due to the fact that unemployment there is off the charts due to the difficulties which have been reported in the outsourcing of jobs which has occured in the auto industry. 

It is also, coincidentally, the home state of IndyMac Bank which was one of the primary lenders of some of those creative loans backed by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.  And a state with an inordinate amount of properties that are "governed" by another layer of government given the power of foreclosure for nonpayment of added property taxes in the form of homeowner's associations.

The other states listed in the top five are all Sunbelt states, having an inordinate amount of retirees and those on fixed incomes, and "retirement communities" also with this added layer of government and extra property taxes in the form of homeowners associations. 

And California just so happens also to be the home of a great many also of those lenders for homes financed in those states, with IndyMac, Countrywide and Bank of America holding a great many of those subprime and creative adjustables that were marketed heavily during the boom, and then rebundled and resold on the stock exchange also mostly to global investors.

It appears what has been occurring is that while all these homeowners at risk of losing their homes are in processing for renegotiated loans due to now the lower valuations of their properties, those interest and late fees are continuing to pile up and are being collected at a rather high rate under those original loan terms.  Also, for most of he counseling or interventionary actions by these service providers, there are fees also involved for their services which are being mostly picked up by the taxpayers, but also in nominal fees to these homeowners in some cases.

Bank of America has reported it only has renegotiated less than 4% of its loans at risk.  And was one of those rebundlers and is based out of Los Angeles (although now owned by Merrill Lynch under the terms of the behind closed doors bank bailout).

In the end, most of these homeowners after continuing to pay what they can which is being credited first to the late fees and interest, of course, are in the end losing their homes anway.

Not to be reading any deviousness on the part of these banks and lenders, or Washington (although at this point the evidence now points to the fact that Washington and the bankers are clearly bedfellows in this manipulated crisis), could it possibly be that this entire "Act" was simply another "stimulus" for Wall Street and the financial sector for the U.S. banks at the expense of both the American people, and some of those foreign investors?

Could some of these banks, as "agents" of the federal government now since those notes were unlawfully allowed to be resold on the global market outside our Constitution's provisions with respect to "globalizing" our economy to begin with,  be merely negotiating down the balances due to those foreigner investors, with the banks then foreclosing anyway and getting a bang up steal in reassuming those properties in the process for their own real estate portfolios? 

Banks only do make money when homes "turn over," not when they are paid off.  And so do the corporate foreclosure lawyers, realtors and any number of other industries that are tied to banking such as title companies, appraisers and the like.

A great many of the Bosnians refugees who were taken in during the Clinton era received new automobiles for themselves and their children who were driving age, from reports of parents who have had children in U.S. schools with many of the Bosnia refugees.

The homes in which the prices are being most depressed are high illegal immigrant states also, and there has been word that another attempt to legalize these individuals is going to be another of Mr. Obama and this Congress's major focuses.

I wonder if a new home in the West or Southwest or reduced rate American taxpayer backed loan is going to be part of that package?

At the news that continues to come off the Hill, such a move wouldn't surprise me in the slightest at this point.

After all, bankers profit and Wall Street's survival, no matter what the cost to any and all native or naturalized existing American Joe the Plumbers or the American middle class in this nation, appears to be the major focus here. 

 

 

 

For Any And All Conserve-ative Constitutionalists:

It was reported in the mainstream media today that the jobless rate had a minor decline the month of July, the first such decline since August of 2008, with the Obama Administration then taking credit and predicting this was a "strong indication" that perhaps the jobless rates and unemployment would begin to correct after the losses which have occured this past few years.

The jobless rate according to the Department of Labor is hovering at about 9%.  I would say those figures would be low, since it doesn't take into consideration those individuals who have lost their small businesses during this economic tsunami (who are not eligible to collect unemployment) nor those whose benefits have expired and are still not working with little likelihood that their situations will change anytime in the near future in their former lines of work.  Also July is a big vacation month for many, and vacation pay can and is lower than workweek pay in many instances and also many are now working as temporary help for any overflow.  Temporary labor needs are higher now in seasonal industries such as retailing and the needed temporary "back to school" workers specifically hired for short term employment needs.

After all, Obama himself laid off literally thousands in Detroit with the prediction that those jobs would not be coming back.  So what is an ex-autoworker really to do that has spent his entire life on a production line what with the outsourcing that has occurred that has eroded our industrial base here at home to less than half it was during the Industrial Revolution which, along with our agricultural base, kept this country a major economic power for well over 150 years?

Mr. Obama and this Administration's focus is on green jobs and science based technology.  In other words, promoting Silicon Valley most of all and the large public utility companies.  But these measures have been tried before, in the late 1960's and 1970's and it actually was the environmentalists and such that actually prevented new energy sources from being developed and utilized during the last gasoline crisis when prices went from less than 30 cents per gallon to well over $1.00.  The largest price increase since the automobile was invented by Henry Ford.

The wind tunnels and turbine energy sources were banned since none of those liberals wanted those ugly towers in their communities.  Nuclear power was developed as an alternative source of energy with promises to local communities that cleaner nuclear energy would result in lower energy costs for all.  What then happened after all those bond elections and federal grant and ratepayer's monies were spent to build those nuclear power plants?

Those public utility companies were then privatized by the local governments for added revenue in sales taxes, and the rate payers utility bills did not go down - they went up in order to provide for the investors dividends and other capital gains on their investment.

Thus, the costs of energy now in Phoenix who has the largest, Palo Verde Generating Station, less than 50 miles from the metro area have exploded due to its privatization and lack of any true regulation anymore by the state in the costs it now passes on to the ratepayers for their investors' profit.

And now has stooped so low as to recently institute a rate increase based upon an "inspection" done by the Federal Nuclear Regulatory Agency (instituted after both the Chernobyl and Three Mile Island disasters) supposedly calling for some expensive repairs that were then passed off once again to the rate payers for the fines and costs of bringing the plant now into compliance (although this plant is actually much newer than some on the East Coast which was finished in 1988, and thus was built after those disasters and included upgraded safety precautions and measures during its construction).

After work on Palo Verde was finished, Arizona unemployment also climbed considerably since it had started also on the science and technology bandwagon as the home of Hughes, Honeywell, and other government contractors, and its reliance on its historic sustainable industries - copper, cattle, cotton and citrus - fell by the wayside in furtherance of those objectives, and as a state marketing itself mostly to retirees for their early retirement years.  In the process, the climate which had made the state a haven for those with respiratory diseases and afflictions, ended up driving out more than it brought in insofar as permanent or long term residents, which has contributed to the urban sprawl and transient nature for the majority of those that call Arizona a "temporary," at best home.

Now it is also one of the states facing the largest number of unemployed and homeless due to the mortgage foreclosure mess, since along with many of those new and "transient" residents came also the East Coast, Western and Midwest real estate speculators and land fraud "get rich quick" artists.

The focus now of the state has swung to the Obama agendas in the health care sector specifically, although at this point most of the retirees that do end up retiring in Arizona usually when their health begins to truly fail end up moving back to their homes of origin in order to be closer to extended family members.

But I digress except to make a point.

Since a good portion of the population is not at all gifted in the field of science and technology naturally, no matter how much the focus of our state and private universities and money is poured into them in order to facilitate this agenda, just where is Washington planning to "outsource" our agricultural base for all the land that is going to be needed for these wind towers, nuclear generating plants, and new "green" manufacturing plants anyway?

Are they planning on turning Kansas and Nebraska into one huge wind turbine, or nuclear generating station in order to meet the entire Northern Hemisphere's future energy needs?  And the State of Texas or New Mexico into one huge solar panel for those in the Southern?

We already have the technology, but the people were not at all impressed with the technology that came along with that technology, after all, in the 1970's. 

So what does Mr. Obama and this Administration think has changed since that time, other than the fact that due to those same environmentalists our petroleum reserves and offshore wells have been literally hamstrung by regulatory codes and laws on limits of production, atmospheric or environmental particulates that have been so broad based that Nebraska's farmers are fined during planting seasons for excess particulates, and we are now in wars and buying more and more foreign oil due to a segment of the population that is never satisfied no matter what "alternative" fuels or greener technology is proposed. 

Including, from Mr. Obama's positions during the election campaign, himself as one of those liberal leaning wackos for whatever reason, Wall Street or his base.

So other than placing all Americans health care records on a national database and invading their rights to privacy over their most personal property and information, their very own physical health, and passing a stimulus for Wall Street again at the American public's expense fining now those power plants or setting up galactic bidding wars for Wall Street's benefit without removing the environmental restrictions which have gotten us into this mess to begin with, just where are all those now laid off GM workers and the other now unemployed going to find their own job stimulus for jobs in which they are qualified since it is clear they would also not meet the criteria for the loans now being offered up by those banks and lenders for educational purposes due to either their age, or their financial prospects and ability to repay?

I suppose what I am really saying here is that I'd put the cork back on that champagne if I were you.

 

For Any And All Constitutional Conserve-atives:

Another story beaten to death by the mainstream media and the Obama Administration came to a conclusion Thursday at the White House with Mr. Obama, Mr. Biden, Dr. Gates and the Cambridge police officer who "arrested" Dr. Gates purportedly due to a "crime in progress" call he received at the Gates residence having a cold one for all the news cameras.

With all the spin that has been occurring in the mainstream media, much of which since 9/11 has left much to be desired in the way of factual journalism and which act more as media reps for "their" politicians due to Big Business corporate ownership and who merely play off each other with respect to political news on the Hill, even the details of this supposed "crime" have been questionable.

Starting with the fact that it has now been reported it was a "senior citizen" who made the call. I'll let that one go for now, since it appears now the seniors are going to be brought into this political circus perhaps for poor eyesight in not recognizing Dr. Gates in the middle of the afternoon, mind you.

The spins on this "story" have been just too incredible to believe at this point.

And appears at least in my educated opinion watching how this has progressed now for almost a week and a half, this was a staged event being used for political purposes most of all. Especially now that even Colin Powell was on Larry King putting in his two cents with respect to supposedly a dereliction of protocol in that an "adult supervisor" (or SWAT negotiator?) hadn't been called in to mediate.

Mr. Obama has been losing points fast with the American public, especially in light of his "solutions" which have not been solutions at all per his campaign rhetoric but simply continuations of the same agendas and even upping the civil rights violations now on the American people of the Bush Administration.

Other than calling for closing Guantanamo he is really 0-3 on his promises to end the war, look out for Joe the Plumber and the middle class (tell that one to the laid off GM workers in Detroit, I dare you), and solving the mortgage mess and crisis.

There was just something a little strange about the "convenience" of this entire incident, and the amount of press it received for my liking. And it appears a good many other Americans also. Good way to shift the pressure and heat off the Hill for the next tax scam on the American people, the L. Ron Hubbard/George Orwell "Science Based" Universal Health Care Plan.

And also keep the racial thing alive as a diversionary tactic and method to use to facilitate civil unrest since civil unrest means the government can use it also as an excuse for much of its extra-Constitutional now security measures against Americans so long as they can keep the fear factor alive.

Inciting civil unrest actually is how many communist leaders and governments came to be. And just why aren't our own borders secured, or some of these foreign individuals from Middle Eastern countries with active terrorist cells not simply deported at this point?

Or, in fact, since America is still at war (although never called Constitutionally or "legally" declared under Bush or that Congress) then why aren't all non-green card holders deported at this point until we have ended this "conflict" or "engagement" or whatever the heck it is since it appears those on the Hill have about as much clue as the American people why we are STILL now eight years later over there? 

And all foreign entry visas denied until it is? 

After all, I'm sure Mr. Powell is aware of this.  After any attack on any military installation in this country is it not SOP that the "base" is locked down until any additional threats are addressed, and all passes then denied to any and all entering or leaving the base until the crime is solved and perpetrators brought to justice?  The military bases in this country actually have far greater "common defense" provisions than our entire country - especially for those living in the border states most of all due to the criminal activity, theft and violent crimes that can be directly tied to it. 

Many Americans could sure use those jobs.

I know, the finale for "So You Think You Can Dance" is next week and Nigel and that other British MC just might have to miss it and the shows producers and network would then have to get an American replacement that might result in a point or two drop in the ratings.

That health care "solution" in appointing a Health Care "God" using actuarial tables for treatment plans is looking more and more like the "science based" Cap & Trade scam which was propagandized to the hilt, and quite obviously meant to feed the Wall Street bankers for that carbon credit market that will be initiated on the backs of the American public in higher utility bills that wipe out that little crumb of a tax rebate and credit thrown out at election time.

Especially now when those inflationary taxes and utility bills start soaring off the charts, in addition to the continued loss of jobs and homes that is still escalating.

I wonder how many members of Congress are heavily invested in energy development and utility companies. Or for that matter Wall Street itself. Maybe 100%?

And then the "spins" on the Beer Summit being a "teachable moment" for America and America's children.
 Please.

Does Mr. Obama and those serving now in our federal government in all three branches truly think that they are examples that America's children should use for role models? A Commander in Chief that speaks of transparency, while hiring three law firms to prevent disclosure of his birth or academic records in order to even verify that he meets the minimum qualifications of the Office of the Presidency? 

A Supreme Court that has gotten increasing more and more political and sovereign favoring in its rulings with respect to Americans Bill of Rights protection, and has refused over six legal challenges to Obama's citizenship status? 

And A Congress that just engaged in a "sleight of hand" in order to also circumvent all those challeges in using a bogus "Resolution" congratulating Hawaii on its 50th anniversary as a state by including a cute little sentence introducting this Resolution with respect to Mr. Obama's birth again without any clear evidence or documentation, in order to also deny the people their right to review the evidence that Obama meets those absolutely minimal requirements (although clear that his status, from the founders "intent" with respect to that provision would clearly make him a foreigner and not "natural born" or "naturalized" American at all, due to reasons behind that provision itself, and their intent in so providing).

Forget the next Beer Summit. Our taxpayer dollars would be better spent in group therapy for those holding federal office, and would assist in at least minimally reducing that federal deficit and taxpayer bite that already has left more Americans homeless and jobless than at any time since the Depression.

Do I hear "Cheers" out there in the South, West and Midwest?