For Any And All American Conserve-atives (not the British variety ala Fox News):

In light of the upcoming funerals and media coverage of the loss of additional American lives in the wake of the Fort Hood incident in Texas this week, it appears now the media spins are getting wider, deeper and more and more furious by the day.

Since America's presence in the Middle East in some form or another has been a fact since that British "taking" of the land now comprising Israel prior to World War I in an agreement entered into between a British Lord of the Realm and a British banker zionist, America's continued loss of life on behalf of this foreign non-U.S. based accord is becoming greater and greater by the year.

And what has been interesting has been one fundamental question which the media has not in any significant manner raised during the past several days of the "analysis" that are being made on both liberally based and focused mainstream sources - funded by either the Republican Globalists or Democratic Globalists ala FOX and CNN.

Just why would an avowed pacifist and war protestor enlisted or continued serving in the U.S. military during the continuation of this war, which has now gone on for more than eight years after the attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001.

Most enlistees, or even those career military officers - which is more likely since the accused is or was the base psychiatrist apparently - tours of duties come up for renewal in two to four year increments. 

The outrage of the American people, and the clearly questionable now basis for our continued presence in that region has been a well known fact as based upon false intelligence for over five years at this point.  And was, after all, the major focus of most of the liberals in their other extra-Constitutional positions who, however, were the major supporters of Mr. Obama in his run for the roses as the "change" candidate, after all.  Although disagreement with the continuation of this war as not in any way at all based upon Constitutional provision, or the intent of the founders with respect to defensive wars as hoping this country would remain as neutral as possible in such events as the continued Middle East situation, is not a liberal position at all, but actually a conservative one.

Most of these so called "progressives" and "liberals" of course now have continued to be suspiciously silent, although Mr. Obama is clearly following the Bush agendas and agreements which were reached with the "new" Iraqi government in his last 100 days in office calling for the withdrawal of all American troops by 2011, coincidentally just prior to the new U.S. presidential election cycle. 

So it will end just as politically as it began apparenlty - and not legally or Constitutionally brought or now ended in any manner whatsoever.

Now it is being reported the suspect will be tried in a military court, as deemed not an overt act of terrorism.  And, of course, terrorism itself is a practice used by many in our media and also those now serving on the Hill against the American people now more so than even most of these branded extremist Iraqi groups - whose very existence and training were, after all, at the hands of the U.S. military to begin with.

The suspects now behavior prior to the incident is now uncovering some connections to spiritual leaders in this country and the Middle East.

But just how did most of these individuals, after all, be approved for immigration to this country I haven't a clue, although the suspect appears to be an American citizen by birth and not an immigrant or naturalized citizen.

And at last count, over 80% of the American people are dissatisfied with our continued presence in this war now that the focus has shifted from the events surrounding what occurred those many years ago, to building up a U.S force and presence now in that region on behalf of Israel most of all once again.

And, of course, to fatten the bank books of the Wall Street financiers and those invested in the military industrial and manufacturing areas in this country.  All those "science based" technology firms which this Administration and the last were feeding at the cost of American soldiers and families.   Silicon Valley is bursting at the seams at this point, although California's governor whining about a shortfall.

Unbeliveable.

My heart goes out to the families of those affected, but it would appear that the perpetrators and blame that is shifting is being shifted from the true source of the cause of their actual losses.

And that is, once again, a foreign and military policy in this country that is centered not on national security whatsoever, but nation building and agressive and pre-emptive wars.

At the cost of the families of many Americans, not simply those that were and have been lost now in the past eight years - and a domestic security problem that has not been solved at all by the creation of that massive Department of Homeland Security.

Since that Department has decreased, rather than increased, its budgeting and funding for the measures needed to truly secure this country rather than giving monies to Mexico and Israel in the form of foreign aid for the Silcon Valley venture capitalists profits, many of whose investors are foreigners also, after all, with British and Middle Eastern investors.  

Funds were once again cut for the needed border fencing and security, and instead this and the last Administration also expanded its Visa waiver and immigration policies ten fold since 9/11 occurred.

In fact, a better name for this agency at this point is the Department of Homeland Insecurity.  With the running of their paid ads warning Americans to "have a plan" appearing to be the only real attempts to actually address the true defensive measures that would fundamentally secure this country from any such future incidents.

Such as reducing the number of airports and such available for those traveling to this country.  As Ellis Island was in the past maybe having three or four points of entry, rather than affording foreign based and owned airlines, ships and other modes of travel access to the interior airports and such would and could reduce the threat of any further attacks.

British Airways was given a contract for service to Phoenix years ago, and there are many foreign owned airlines with such contracts throughout the nation at the present time. 

It does appear that break downs in communications and also the shear number now of agencies involved in these domestic and foreign surveillance departments are having an adverse affect and not the solution, but part of the problem.

As it appears is becoming now clear in this incident, as it was in the original loss of lives on September 11th - since that also as blamed on a breakdown of communications between the FBI and DoD.  Now we have the FBI, DoD and Homeland Security pointing fingers.

So just where is the change, except more of the same, and around another 50 more dead or wounded Americans?
 

Just to continue to point out now how ludicrous this health care deform continues to be, and how unconstitutional actually instead of regulating those corporate interests rather than getting in bed with them as those on the Hill did all last summer, it was reported in the mainstream media that AARP is now on the bandwagon in order to facilitate passage of this massive bill that was written by AARP, the AMA, corporate labor unions, and financial sector and health care industries.

The spokesman, however, it was reported didn't want to "jump the gun" in the piece published today, since he said it was scheduled to be announced on Thursday by the "corporate" offices of AARP.

AARP ceased to be a senior advocacy group literally years ago, and is now nothing more than a front for the various special interest groups and insurers mainly that those members are marketed to for the supplemental insurance plans under Medicare at the present time.

Policies that in most instance are merely gravy for those insurers, since as the primary care provider Medicare actually calls the shots and approves the levels of treatment.  And many doctors due to all the red tape involved with Medicare actually have posted notices that the are now refusing to accept any new Medicare patients.

And you think things would change in that respect with any 'socialized" Washington plan for health care?

The doctors will simply once again shift the costs for their reduced rates to either those that can afford it, or in upping the ante for their research grants and other already government welfare that these industries at the present time receive.

This story, however, was under the story about the cat in Iowa that was discovered to have swine flu, now politically renamed H1N1 so as not to upset some of the faith that believes pigs are satanic and unclean, as they were a part of pagan worships from the Roman age in Greece and Rome.

And those Iowa farmers do deserve a little kick in the pants apparently for getting all heated up after an Iowa judge "legalized" gay marriage "rights" in the State of Iowa, over the protest of a good deal of the population since it did appear that Iowa already had a civil marriage statute that actually already was in force at the time the case was brought by those gay activist civil rights lawyers who are also getting paid their legal fees courtesy of the American taxpayers for these state and federal actions under another one of those "hush hush" 1,000 page bills that Congress no longer reads.

And if this country has to now pass a formal bill and law stating that all members of Congress must read a bill before it is voted on, this country is in a good deal more trouble than most of us already have concluded watching the past Bush and now Obama Administrations since our government now resembles more Barnum & Bailey than the Stars and Stripes at this point.

While it continues to be the civilians and American people who are being victimized and made homeless and jobless more and more by the day.

You know, the GM workers, and those real Joe the Plumbers, not the Mayor Bloombergs, Arnold Schwartezneggers, and other venture capitalists who are selling off this country's prime real estate, and industrial base now right and left.

Congress, the Supreme Court, and Executive office are now titles that are merely the politically correct terminology for "insider traders" and "corporate lobbyists" themselves at this point. 

As a matter of fact to show that AARP is not at all an elder advocacy group, I got an application from them many years ago actually.

Before I was even 50 hawking their "reduced rate" insurance policies and other trade affiliated vendors.

I guess 45 is the new 65.

 

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 the continuing media reports on all the wheeling and dealing that is now going on at the Hill on now the Baucus proposals, and the "stakeholders" (read:  industry beneficiaries) of this clearly ludicrous and unconstitutuional health care deform, one factor and point appears to be clearly missing.

Since most states throughout the nation already provide health care for indigents, and also those who are uninsured, in fact even illegal immigrants are provided health care in this country for emergency treatment at hospital emergency rooms courtesy of Uncle Sam and the U.S. taxpayers as has been the case now for over 20 years, nothing has been mentioned now about all the revenue collected by the states which has gone to fund those programs through sales taxes, sin taxes and a host of others.

Or whether there will be offset credits then made against these "fines" and or costs of provision to the taxpayers for all the public assistance and federal grant monies some of those large medical health care providers already receive for both medical research, and patient care under various state and federal programs and grants.

The real mystery is why health care costs have escalated in this country at the rate that has made it now unaffordable for most and what lead to this, since for literally decades most of those health care networks and providers have been getting federal and state grant monies also paid by the public for new equipment, building costs, and all sorts of other reasons, yet the costs then to the public have exceeded the CPI by over a thousand percent in the last ten years alone.

The cost of tuition at state and local universities also has quadrupled and bears now no relevance at all to either the CPI or the costs since most of those public universitities are also the recipients of state and federal tax monies and grants, and funded in many by state citizens property taxes, and alumni grants.  In fact, most state universities at this point could subsist on their athletic programs alone.  Not to mention the out state tuition they have been collecting from foreign students which are now educated in this country from many Far Eastern and South American countries in the medical field, such as India. 

Many seeking and receiving training in the specialities that U.S. doctors left due to the high costs of malpractice that is charged to U.S. citizens, but not at the same levels as those foreign doctors as green card holders or "permanet residents" but not "U.S. citizens."

Nowhere in all the townhall meetings were any questions posed as to whether or not some of those state taxes now collected would then be minimized in order to offset some of the potential costs of this rather unlawful federal program.  Arizona under a citizen initiative passed several years ago collects money from those that smoke to fund provision of health care benefits for children in that state.  But nothing has been said as to whether taxes such as these would then be rebated under any federally concocted program.

Which is why these matters were best left for state determination of the state citizens bearing the burden of those costs, which provided more local accountability.

These health care networks and clinic are state chartered and incorporated, and as such the state governments have been the ones who have been woefully negligent also in their duties in regulation over their practices, since according to my reading of the Constitution, the federal government has power over "interstate" commerce (across state lines, national concerns, and global ones, especially other than costs, the provisions of those policies do not at all vary state-to-state, but are "boilerplate" in almost 90 percent of the cases since their corporat lawyers for those insurers have been busy little beavers using those premium payments in order to also lobby for those industries "privileges and immunities" in much legislation which has occurred also at the state level).  The states have their power over intrastate commerce (commerce conducted within the state primarily by state chartered corporations, and it appears many state legislators are behind this in order to score more unaccountable revenue then for the state coffers from the citizens for their discretionary spending, while also then taking the heat off of them for the out of control costs which have also escalated at the state level in taxation to provide for these programs - and benefits for even non-emergency care for non-Americans at that at private health care clinics, which is then passed off also to the public for added profit over what the citizens already provide to Uncle Sam for also those benefits. 

A double whammy, in other words, for these programs, and appears this is nothing more than, again, in corporate speak attempting to "cut out the middle man," the states - now that Washington has totally abandoned the U.S. Constitution and are acting more like Boards of Directors for U.S.A. Inc. 

According to the true "Law," the federal government would have regulatory power ovedr the national and global health care providers, and the states then further for any of those those incorporated within their states and yet restricting their business and domiciles within simply their own state borders, and the country and state run facilities.  At the present time, there is absolutely zero or no regulation insofar as "citizen" protection for those megacorporate financial concerns which rake in those premiums on either the federal or state levels.

It appears that taxation without representation is actually ending up now doing exactly what the founders predicted. 

If any fines or mandatory provisions are to be anticipated in any such legislation, according to the Commerce Clause itself, wouldn't those fines and fees need to be directed toward the big business commercial organizations that are now not providing any coverage?  And any such fines then also rebated to the public in lesser costs then in the future for those services.

Or will it be like the I.R.S. who collects massive amounts of fines and penalties against many Americans for the U.S. Department of the Treasury since it came into existence, yet instead of then the bite on the remaining taxpayers lessening, it has only increased? 

Just where has all that revenue thus far collected in fines from the American people by the federal government also gone from all the various regulatory agencies throughout the years?

This "plan" is so chock full of holes, appears nothing more than another bureaucratic dark hole painted with a "feel good" spin. 

Sort of like Cap & Trade, and the Patriot Act. 

Presented to the public in the guise of the "public's good" and protectionism, but which is merely protectionism for the criminal element whose own health insurance is funded tax free and at no cost by those that are being made increasingly homeless by Washington's "self-protectionism." 

For Any And All Conserve-ative Americans (not Global Socialists):

Due to many recent events, and some independent research I have done on my own rather recently as a now a political exile from the State of Arizona due to the ramifications which have progressively occurred to many long term residents and former natives in the loss of their homes, jobs and very state to an invasion now that is occurring from Mexico with the federal government's explicit support (hence, twice attempting to provide a "pathway to citizenship" and also amnesty for Mexican nationals in this country presently), and other rather recent legislation that was foreigner friendly at the cost of Americans, it is long overdue in asking some fundamental questions.

Is Washington purposely facilitating a leveraged buyout of American assets, in corporate speak.

After the truth of the bogus "foreclosure rescue" scams have now come to light more and more as throwing money at the Federal Reserve bank branches that were primarily responsible for writing some of those overly restrictive, and high cost "low interest" or "interest only" loans (when many were loaded with junk fees and costs also on the front end) as being nothing more than using those banks to "buy down" those investor's debts in order to then flip those properties for more banker revenue, the MO in Washington is becoming clearer.

Those homes now are being depressed to the point that if Mr. Obama (as Mr. Bush) again pushes for an amnesty, some of those properties taken from the existing Americans who were raped of much of their assets, and now with credit reports precluding any new home purchase for at least a decade, that it will be those "new" Americans that will be seeking some of them. 

Who, of course, won't speak very fluent English and thus prime patsies for the next economic manipulation and depression in the next 20 years under those now 40 year loans.  That has been the case since this is the third such manipulation in the Southwest in 30 years.  First in the 70's, then during the savings and loan Keating disaster, and presently.

Right now, foreign investors own a great deal of stock in some of America's foremost industries, some outright now such as China and the Hummer Division.   And even a great many of the American public utility companies, believe it or not, when Washington and the state governments afforded those "public" corporations then to privatize. 

Even our nuclear power plants at this point, since Palo Verde in Arizona was privatized after the ratepayers were promised the moon in reduction of utility costs in order to "go green" and go nuclear. 

After which, rates skyrocketed then to provide for those foreign investor profits, since their currency also was then higher than our own due to Federal Reserve manipulation. 

Which is, after all, owned by the European and British banking cartels.

Interesting enough also, while then homeless yet also concerned for the somewhat declining health of my elderly parents who live outside New Orleans and were evacuated for both Katrina and Gustav recently, and as a now struggling artist and photographer I visited the French Quarter while I was there for an extended period of time during which time my mother suffered two heart surgeries for blockages in her arteries by a South American heart surgeon. 

As having both a public and private supplemental plan provided by AARP, the corporate practice to which he belonged failed to check for a blockage when her blood pressure was off the charts and did relatively nothing insofar as testing basically until she eventually did suffer the inevitable.

At that time I also had a chance to visit the still recovering New Orleans greater metropolitan area. 

And made a visit to the French Quarter, which I had visited on former trips with my family since my extended family has lived there over 30 years.

The area is still struggling and rebuilding.  Mostly with federal contractors hiring illegal immigrant labor for much of the construction, and has it own now Hispanic Chamber of Commerce in order to promote their agendas and welfare. 

And the homes which were built on the only really habitable land there in the French Quarter which was surveyed by those original settlers and chosen for their settlement as a port on the highest ground available, are still standing and suffered relatively little damage due to the degree of construction used by those original inhabitants.  And of course also built on the highest ground near the Mississippi.

Many are now listed for sale mostly by a British real estate firm, Sotheby's of London, and being marketed to mostly British and Candian citizens. 

In fact, I ran in to several of them while walking through the Garden District taking some photographs.

Due to the differences in accents, it didn't take a formal statement of country of origin.  Some of the licenses and identifying personalized stickers on their vehicles also were in plain view.

And the most famous "new" American who now owns a good deal of our media and internet news sources is also a former Brit from Australia, Rupert Murdoch. 

And bringing his British style of reporting and political agendas with him in the process as not really also assimilating to this country, but attemping to make it more like his own.

So for all you foreigners wishing to leave yours in the belief that America still stands as that beacon of freedom and liberty, and land of opportunity in order enjoy the fruits of your labor, and lower taxation I have news for you.

The British won the war, apparently, without most of the American public being aware, and without firing a shot.

They simply bought our bank.  And have progressively also been buying up most of our valuable real estate. 

Including those homes now being lost that you hear about on your news in the Southwestern United States for the Mexican nationals, and Canadian retirees.

Who, of course, will be the next victims in this global pyramid scheme.

 

 

 
 

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."

As a 1960's era Conservative, who has become even more so in my elder years, the hoopla surrounding Ted Kennedy's death this week simply has been too incredible to believe in both its scope, and also the coverage given by the mass media of his life and funeral.

Ted Kennedy was the patriarch of a truly controversial family, after all, in the history of America from any real factual or logical perspective.  The Kennedy myth has been contrived and contributed to much over the years by the liberal leaning press most of all.  And they responded to his death true to form.

Much inaccurate spin has also been done in the media using the terms "liberal" and "conservative" when describing both political beliefs, and those that now serve in all levels of government, both on the Hill and at the state level. 

A liberal to a 1960's era Conservative or by "pure" definition, simply is one who believes the federal government is "sovereign" and above the state government (and people even when acting outsided their "legal" sphere) in powers and duties, and also believes that the Constitution is a "living document" which can be molded and shaped by governmental officials in any of the three branches on public opinion alone, or contrary to public opinion if it so suits them or their special interests, without going through the formal amendment process contained within the Constitution itself.

A true conservative is merely one who believes that the document that was created between both the federalists and the anti-federalists and executed that hot summer day in Philadelphia, created the most unique and free government than which before that time had ever existed, and  which recognized no "class of citizens" above any other - especially not government officials.

 Other than the slavery issue, which was rectified by the 13th and 14th amendments, the rest was pure genius and insured liberty for all - not simply a select few - and protection against governmental overstep at both the state and federal levels.

Since the 9th Amendment even preceded the 10th, it left any and all further changes to its provisions needing the "consent of the governed" not in simply poll results, or unlawfully enacted federal statutes and legislation, but actual voting and "express consent," of the governed, the people in the several states themselves through their state governments during the ratification process which does, after all, take then 3/4's of the states and their citizens to agree.

Mr. Kennedy's family's legacy is that of liberalism, to the point of socialism and that government is sovereign and the rights of the people respected according to their class distinction most of all.  While representing mostly blue collar and minority Americans publicly, much of the liberals agendas have actually harmed, and not helped, those minority groups progressively. 

Since the attack right now is on the middle class working poor actually most of all under both the liberal agendas now in Washington - those of the Republican big business liberals, and the Democratic big business liberals - with simply a change in "corporate" groups of benefactors.

While occasional mentions were made of Chappaquiddick, and that horrible incident in 1969 one year after the untimely end of another Kennedy, the spins continued in that regard also.

As one who does remember it well, at the time members of both political parties were aware that some deals were struck in that incident in order that Mr. Kennedy be afforded to enter a plea to a lesser charge than the charge for which he was clearly guilty - involuntary manslaughter. 

A tragic accident, given also the timing when most individuals that had suffered losses the degree to which he personally had less than a year before, the methods he used to cope y by any standard were not healthy and actually personally more harmful for him and clearly those within his circle of friends and family, but understandable. 

But in an equal society of "justice for all" such a "privileged" action would not have been the case.  His liberalism also served him well in that instance, but not the American people or the victim's family if taking an accurate poll of those who remember when.

His bargain with the devil did ultimately cost him his favor with the American people, by and large, except his most ardent supporters even to this day.  With the exception of his loyal constituency in Massachusetts also, of course, fundamentally one of the most liberal states of all.

The American people got their justice and never quite trusted the Lion in the Senate long before the current status of displeasure a great many of this country now have for the direction it has taken even progressively since that time.

John Kennedy's liberalism took us into Viet Nam, to begin a history now of over 40 years of engaging in more and more non-defensive wars on foreign soil in countries engaged in civil wars. 

I wonder if Lincoln would have appreciated such interference in America's own back in 1865?

I for one who lived through both the highs and lows since the time the Kennedy family burst on the political scene,  feel for the personal loss of Mr. Kennedy's family as one who was, by default, left with an enormous responsibility as the patriarch of a large Irish-Catholic immigrant family while also tragically having to also cope with his own enormous individual losses.

May he now rest in peace. 

But the myth, after all, was just a myth.  And feel we have lost much more than we, as a nation, have gained in those forty years.

And the hope I feel and changes I would like to come can only be done in moving backward, not forward, into more and more liberalism.

 

For Any And All Conserve-ative Constitutionalists:

In listening to Barack Obama's Western "Sell ObamaCare" tour, as a child of the 1950's and 1960's, the only impression that I had listening to a small fraction of his hard sell spiel in the various Western states on this ludicrous legislation in its current form is to that of the old Al Wilson song, "The Snake" ("Take me in, tender woman....take me in for goodness sake").

Since the lyrics are copyrighted but are on the internet for "educational purposes," I'll leave it to the reader to do that research on their own.

The most egregious portion of this legislation actually is one that has not been brought up in any significant manner whatsoever during the public townhalls that Congressional members have been conducting across the nation in order to also propagandize the entire unconstitutional focus of this legislation and Washington power move.

And according to the 9th Amendment, would appear to undertake such an action at all would take a formal amendment of the Constitution, with the "consent of the governed," given voice and vote as not at all within the parameters of Washington's enumerated powers even in light of the abridgements which resulted in both Franklin's New Deal with respect to Social Security, and many other power moves since then in violation of it.

Social Security, after all, was original presented to the public as a "temporary" measure due to World War II, and also was to provide for orphans, widows, children and the affirmed most of all from that war.  And ease this country back also from the stock market crash and depression which preceded it after World War I.

And there were at that time lids on eligibility as understanding that those that had profited then from those wars, should help pay the costs in both blood and treasure that were the result as a Godly nation.  Of course, those wars too were manipulated for bank profits also most of all and debts from World War I actually also lead to World War II.

Right now there does exist in all 50 states already catastrophic coverage for all citizens who are either unable to afford private health care coverage, or are uninsurable for any reason. So in effect all this is really is another method in order to centralize more and more power in Washington, and less and less local accountability to state citizens in the process and gain more revenue for the states for discretionary purposes - along with the corporate entities that will also profit.

Within the stimulus and tied into this legislation is the establishment of a National Health Care Database using Bill Gate's technology and college grant monies to students in order to input all Americans health records into a "Big Brother" database.

If you think straightening out your credit report is next to impossible when it is inaccurate or there has been any "identity theft," just imagine the potential for error or mistaken identity on a national database of your personal medical information. Or that such a database in the future could be used against you for future unrelated reasons.

You think this is Obama's definition of "scare tactics?"

If history serves and never more so than in recent history, the "rights" of the public and citizens under our Bill of Rights is not at all recognized by either the legislative officials at federal or state levels even, nor the judiciary. Rather, the new buzzwords in order to deny or disparage those rights have been "in the interests of public safety" or "state interests."

In other words, the "corporate" not "individual" rights at all.

Just imagine how those corporate lobbyists will eventually gain access to those records under progressive legislation in order to deny employment to those with chronic (although not work related) health conditions such as AIDs, HIV, asthma, heart murmur, previous cancer treatments, addiction counseling, etc.

Just imagine how lawyers special interest groups, one of the most active group of lobbyists bar none for their welfare, can then also eventually gain access to those records without warrants or subpoenas for civil or criminal actions.

Just where is the supposed largest "civil rights" organization, the ACLU right now?  Probably helping the lawyers write this 1,000 for their eventual "corporate" welfare.  I wonder how much the taxpayers costs will increase now also in order to handle all these potential civil rights abridgement cases once that behemoth database and its bugs start to rear their ugly head in denied coverages, loss of life, etc.

Those costs are nowhere in the economic projections that I can determine.

What Mr. Obama is clearly asking is the American people to deny history.

What happened when so many Americans were the victims of the abusive practices of the IRS in their out of control pursuit of Americans for past due taxes, even for sums that were not taxes at all but simply agency determined interest or penalties?

Washington merely created another "agency" called the Taxpayer Advocacy Office that is nothing more than another branch of the federal government and also a benefactor of tax collection. It did not provide adequate oversight or regulation of the IRS in any manner whatsoever, even though there is much debate to this day about the 16th Amendment and how it was ratified "without the consent of the governed" for taxation of the people's income and diametrically opposed to the founder's intent for taxation in this nation.

Skirting around in providing that these extra taxes would be technically indirect taxation through corporate employers doesn't erase the inherent Constitutional violation such legislation entails.  It is not within the original parameters of the Constitution, and is a seizure of wages (property) for governmental purposes most of all at its most basic level transferring the fruits of their labor back to Washington's "sovereign" governmental contractors and "approved" providers.  And violative of the Bill of Rights with respect to even religious provisions for many, not to mention "search and seizure" of personal and private records by federal personnel without any recourse for misuse or access with respect to that federal database.

What did Washington do after all the complaints of citizens on the practices of collection agencies and the credit reporting bureaus in their unregulated practices?

Simply provide legislation that allows citizens to file a two sentence "dispute" of items contained in the report, which are sent to the reporting agency for their "version," which for all intents and purposes was no solution at all. Especially against the agencies which rebundled debts and continued to attempt to collect even on satisfied principal balances attempting to then gain more sums each time those debts were resold for their own profit.

Obama is attempting to actually reassure a younger generation that does not remember that Washington's word with respect to legislation such as ObamaCare and a host of others has been about as trustworthy as The Snake's.

Case in point: the foreclosure "rescue" which already has proved it was more for the banks and lenders, than the defrauded homeowners who are being stalled while collecting all those bogus fees included in those contracts and even more for the services of mortgage advisors and "new" appraisals, prior to carrying out those eventual foreclosures in order for the banks and realtors to get most of those properties on the cheap in order to flip for their profits.

So next time the Snake charmers come to your town, or Mr. Obama makes another of his folksy speeches, our younger generation might remember the addage that was the battle call of their parents generation upon which Mr. Wilson's song actually was based and had political ramifications for many.

The "Don't Trust Anyone Over 35 Mantra" was directly related to politicians and politicos during that era of the first true pre-emptive war.  It might be expanded to now include politicians that use scare and terrorism tactics themselves in order to forment their political agendas.

The history in this country which has brought us to where we are now with respect to health care provision, is like the story of The Snake, proves that "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

It has been "progressive" power moves and Constitutional violations that have created this "crisis," after all.

Silly woman.
 

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.

Interesting in all the debates now on the mainstream media that some rather pertinent facts and observations have also been kept from the public in all the brouhaha surrounding Obama's and Congress's plans for health care reform.

At the present time, there is already a socialized health care program for seniors at the federal level called Medicare.  At the state levels there is also now health care plans that are funded for the indigent, those that have been denied coverage due to pre-existing conditions, dependent children of the working poor, and even illegal immigrants for emergency care services (which are used to visit hospital emergency rooms for cases of the flu, and result in six hour waits for lawful Americans in many hospitals now throughout the country).

In effect, we already have health care insurance and provision for all Americans at some level or another.  There is also self-insurance for the wealthy, and those that choose to self-insure for regular doctor visits but simply carry catastrophic care. 

Right now, all of these programs are funded by the citizens at either the federal or state levels, with the states then required to provide matching sums with respect to some of these programs (except the one for the illegals, which is picked up at the federal level, which is why so many of those local initiatives denying such services to the illegals are really quite ludicrous since those services and costs are federal laws, not local, and the health care industry know that).

It appears what this truly is is simply another way to centralize more and more power in Washington, increase our federal deficit then in the process for the benefit of the European bankers that rape the American people for their services in printing our currency, and Wall Street once again for the health care sector.

And, of course, the politicians for their future careers.

What also has been left unsaid is that the costs for these programs will now come out of every American's paychecks through their corporate employers, and as with social security, leaves the door open then for future legislation then involving "matching sums" from those employers for those benefits.

And the fact is, since the federal government cannot mandate that health care providers accept lower cost insurance or a government plan for any patients that they treat, can result in paying for years into this program and then when needing care not be able to find a health care provider that accepts these plans.  Right now due to the low payment levels involved, there are many providers that do not accept new Medicare patients. 

And while many of them do accept new patients for childbirth, most OB-GYNs won't accept them for surgical reasons otherwise.  Since to do so would mean they have "committed" to that patients future care and then cannot deny them treatment when the costs of their treatment or specific needs outweighs the amounts the state or local plans are willing to pay. 

Ethically, once a doctor accepts you as a patient, he cannot deny then future treatment.  Thus, why so many doctors have now posted signs indicating that they will not accept future Medicare patients.

So you may be paying for this "universal" plan in taxation, yet then be unable to use it for your elder care needs when you may truly need it if there are not enough doctors in your local community that are willing to take on new patients.

And since the next generation of Americans is far fewer than the previous baby boomer generation was, this scenario has more basis in fact, than fiction.

So continue to believe the spins, America, but what the government wants in this legislation is merely to centralize more of the power in Washington, and more access to the fruits of your labor through their corporate "state actor" entities, since special interests wrote this legislation, after all, and that is who both Congress and Mr. Obama have been hard at work consulting.

Hoping that the older generation doesn't connnect that the AARP is the largest provider of supplemental plans, and speaks for the industries and trade groups that market through them, not at advocates for seniors at all.  Nor does the AMA speak for most doctors either, simply their own also supplemental plans and trade groups.  Nor the unions, just in order to get more for the corporate health care provider under their banner who also sell "supplmental" plans to their members.

That's why the "corporate" interests have been meeting with Congress all summer behind those closed doors.

Just to make sure their "interests" and wallets were covered.  Not yours.

During all the townhall meetings and such with respect to this claimed "reform" of health care in America which is being promoted by the Obama Administration, it has truly astounded me and many other Americans that the key issues with respect to this legislation have not at all been addressed.

And that is the "legality" of any such legislation under our current form of government as encompassed by the U.S. Constitution.

Just how many aspects of this plan would not hold muster under the light of Constitutional provision?  Fundamentally, almost all of them.

Starting with the fact that it is not within Congress or the Presidents enumerated powers of office to "mandate" that Americans must buy or "purchase" health care coverage at all.  Their job is to to ensure freedom, not to take freedom away, in determining just what Americans choose to spend the money that is the result of the fruits of their own labors.

The 16th Amendment and income tax itself violated that "intent" and those provisions (since the 9th Amendment superceded the 16th, thus requiring the 'consent of the governed' for any such legislation), and now the Cap & Trade tax that was recently sped through Congress (while even shutting down the Energy Committee website to remove the right of petition) another.

"Globally" taxing Americans now for the "greater good" of the planet was not something the founders would approve of in the slightest.  Especially without the American people's express (rather than implied) consent using simply polls and media propaganda for the basis of this ludicrous legislation.

Within the stimulus bill were sums that were included to hand over to Bill Gates and the telecom industry in order to facilitate also a federally funded database containing all Americans most privileged and personal information - their health care records.  Definitely a violation of the privacy "search and seizure" provisions of our Constitution, and fundamental Bill of Rights violation.

Who wants a federal lackey in Washingto to know whether or not you have ever contracted an STD or had an abortion?  Or are HIV positive?  Or underwent cancer treatment but have been determined to now be cancer free?  Or saw a counselor during a traumatic life event or loss for a mental health tuneup?

Think of what a political tool and weapon this can be, in addition to such a fundamental privacy violation.  Or how those records could then be subpoenaed by lawyers in civil suits without privacy protections unrelated to the case, or eventually by employers in order to deny employment based on physical health even though the position and the health concern would have absolutly nothing to do with your ability to carryout the needed job functions.

Think how many more court actions and judges for those courts at taxpayer expense are going to be needed for all the legal challenges when this information is misued, or there is a security breach by some governmental employee that makes that movie on stolen identity a nightmare come true?

There is no inherent right for the government to overstep its Constitutional authority, but it appears that in the last decade that is all the government has actually done.  Overstep its Constitutional authority time and time again.   And then been negligent in doing its true duties in others.  Such as truly securing our borders.

So much so to the point now where Americans are truly becoming outraged at these townhall meetings, but the socialists and fascists still haven't gotten the message and are now through DHS attempting to marginalize make the American people and victims of this governmental abuse those to "watch."

How dare they.  Isn't it the American people who are paying their salaries, and were to be representatives of them with respect to their duties and those concerned citizens outrage maybe justifialble due to the Constitutional violations and Washington's demonstrated arrogance now time and time again?

The spins continue.  Just today there was an article again on the internet attempting to "explain" the Myths and Facts of Health Care Reform.

Of course, using "myths" again to obscure the true "facts."  That Congress and the President are outside Constitutional authority in even wading in these waters.  Especially during this current economic meltdown that has left many jobless and homeless - and will now be facing increased energy costs due to the last Constitutional abridgement if they can still hang onto their homes.

While they continue to feed the bankers and insurers that are primarily responsible for this economic meltdown, rather than protecting the people and citizens from such abuse.

Rather, the true "reform" would be to back up and reinstitute our Constitution, and instead use those telecom monies in order to set up a national complaint system for abusive insurers that deny coverage, or doctors who are overbilling and abusing the system.  And then stripping those insurers or doctors of their licenses to do business for criminal fraud. 

Reinstituting again the "common law" on punitive damage awards (not compensatory) so that ethical doctors can stay in practice.  Why do you think our infant mortality rate is now less than Cuba's?  All those obstetricians that had to leave practice in the 80's due to the removal of those caps might just hold a clue.

Co-ops are what insurance companies actually were to begin with.  What is also needed is forbidding those commercial corporations that exist on public sums from investing in high risk investments with those premiums, such as what occurred with AIG. 

Not profiting off their criminal activities yet again with this legislation.  And also the terms of the policies which are sold, and coverages which are now standardized and information shared within the industry without citizen recourse also as to what is included in that industry pool.

Obamacare once again shows that Mr. Obama's representations during this last election cycle shows that not only was his campaign rhetoric a bunch of hogwash with respect to the war, protecting the middle class, and Joe the Plumber, but even his actual credentials.

A Constitutional lawyer actually is a little familiar with the Constitution.

Which Mr. Obama clearly is not.

Nor is the 111th Congress that is even giving credence to this legislation in its current form.