The claim from the left has always been that there are 45 million people in this country who do not have health insurance. This number is an inflated number that counts illegal aliens and those who can afford or are offered health insurance but choose not to buy it. The real number is probably less than 20 million.

We had this health care takeover in order to accommodate these people and there will still be quite a few uninsured while we are spending trillions of dollars on an unsustainable program (refer to UK). But that is a discussion for another time.

The Democrats are not happy the GOP is going to hold a vote on repeal. They have been claiming that this is a waste of time and that the Republicans should be working on the economy and job creation instead. After two years of ignoring jobs and the economy in favor of the progressive socialist agenda, these people are now saying we need to focus on jobs and the economy.

Since the health care takeover is a job killer (yes I wrote killer) then repealing it will help with the job situation. It will also cut unnecessary and wasteful spending.

While Democrats are squawking about focusing on jobs they are also indicating that repealing the takeover will cost us money. Only in their twisted world can cutting a program that spends trillions be adding to the deficit.

The latest ploy is for the Democrats to claim that between 50 and 120 million non-elderly people will be uninsured in a few years due to preexisting conditions if the takeover is repealed. I am having a bit of trouble with this math.

Where did all these people come from? How does the regime know that this many people will have conditions that will cause the denial of health insurance? If we accept the grossly inflated number of uninsured as 45 million (or even 30 million as has been the case in some discussions) how did we get to 50-120 million?

Surely these people are here now and are insured. Since we are not getting 50-120 million people dropped every three years how can we now claim that this will be the case. There is no history to support this and since there are, according to the regime, 30-45 million uninsured, how on Earth do that many more people suddenly end up uninsured?

This is another scare tactic using information from some regime friendly report (that might have been produced by the regime) in order to scare people into opposing the repeal. This is why Democrat friendly media outlets are producing polls that over sample Democrats when asking about the repeal issue. They want to give the appearance that the folks are OK with the takeover.

The people are against this monstrosity and want it repealed. This has been shown time and again in accurate polls and it is part of the reason the Democrats suffered a historic defeat last November.

Now they are working to spin anything they can to keep the vote from taking place.

Though this will not be repealed as long as Democrats control the Senate and the White House the vote is important because the Republicans promised they would do it.

Imagine that, politicians keeping their word.

Unless the repeal is attached to the bill raising the debt ceiling there is little chance of it being repealed but we can make sure it is not funded.

Regardless of how all this takes place there is no way in hell that there will be 50-120 million people dropped from insurance due to preexisting conditions.

The Democrats lied about the takeover bill, lied about what was in it, lied about how things would take place, lied about it funding abortion and lied about death panels.

Now they expect us to believe them when they make an obviously outrageous claim about the number of people who will be uninsured.

Never trust a progressive/Socialist/liberal/Democrat.

They lie whenever they speak and they are only interested in controlling people.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

The nanny state is alive and well. Nanny Pelosi spoke after a group of Democrats presented their views on repeal of Obamacare. They gave the standard lies and some said how much it would cost to repeal, standard stuff one expects from the nanny state but Nanny Pelosi took the case.

In this video from The Blaze (linked from WBAL Radio) Pelosi states that even if everyone in America was happy with their health care and it was affordable for all, the government takeover was necessary because the system was not sustainable.

Listen to what this moron is saying. She indicates that even if EVERYONE had health care and liked it and it was affordable she and her nanny state Democrats would have had to take it over because it was not sustainable.

Excuse me while I laugh. OK, I am back. If everyone has what they want and they can afford it then the system IS sustainable. The system is and has been sustainable but according to Pelosi even if the system was completely ideal and everyone had coverage they liked and could afford, the government would need to take it over.

This is more proof that the takeover had nothing to do with the stated goals and everything to do with involving government in our lives.

It is absolute proof that this is about one thing and one thing only. CONTROL! They want to control us and they know it will be easier if they control our health care.

I have an idea. Government as we know have it is unsustainable. Spending is out of control and we are 14 TRILLION dollars in debt. We have a bloated government that is simply unsustainable.

So let’s take it over. It is necessary and, according to Nanny Pelosi, the proper thing to do.

We started today and if the Republicans don’t do the right thing we will fire them and replace them with people who will. We will keep replacing these people until we get folks who will do what is right by this country and the people who make it work.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

So, what is terrorism? How about we check old Webster’s:

the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

Hmm. Okay, how about “terror”:

: 1 a state of intense fear
2 a : one that inspires fear : scourge b : a frightening aspect c : a cause of anxiety : worry d : an appalling person or thing; especially : brat
3: reign of terror
4: violent or destructive acts (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands

So, logically, a terrorist is one who uses terror to coerce people into doing things they don’t want to do, right?

So then, what is a person (or a group of people) who threaten me with physical violence if I sit at home and do nothing? Is there any way they cannot be considered terrorist? If I, personally, were to threaten you, good reader, with physical violence against you if you sit at home, am I a terrorist?

Well, according to the US government, in such a case, YOU are the terrorist. Yes, you, the one sitting at home doing nothing, are a terrorist when you do nothing, even when threatened by another. Yes, the logic is insane, but I will explain.

The US government is now threatening me with physical violence, imprisonment, fines, and anything else they can dream up if I go into an airport and do not obey their every order. They give me no option to retreat or leave, instead, once I have purchased an airline ticket and entered the airport, I must voluntarily give up all my rights, or violence will be used against me. If you do not accept that, you’re living in a fantasy land, because that is, without any exaggeration, where we are today.

But now that is not even enough!

Yes, seriously. Now, according to Obama and the DHS, I am a terrorist and need to be put on a terrorist watch list! Yes, really. Why? Because I’m opposed to having my privates fondled by TSA agents. No, not because I took any action at all. No, not because I’ve gone to an airport and refused the free sexual assault. Just because I sat at home and refused to fly.

According to recent reports from the Department of Homeland Stupidity, anyone who objects to the screening process should now be placed on terror watch lists. The directive, apparently approved by President Obama says that

any person, … that actively objects to the enhanced security procedures, the [applicable DHS administrative branch] is instructed to identify and collect information about the persons or entities, and submit such information in the manner outlined [within this directive].

If you oppose the new “security” procedures, you’re to be put on a watch list by the US government. It just never ends with these bastards, does it? And people still claim this is a free country. As I continue to say — this government is illegitimate. I’ll just live free and the government can do what it wants. After all, they have more guns and blindly obedient servants than I.

So, while there still are people who claim the TSA is doing what they’re doing for safety, this story makes it very, very clear that this has absolutely nothing to do with safety.

In the story, a man strips instead of submitting to a groping. He strips down to his underwear. At the point, it is obvious to everyone that he has no explosives. So, at this point, Mr. Wolanyk is no danger to anyone. So what does the TSA do? They arrest him.

Again, after making it very obvious that Mr. Wolanyk has NO weapons or explosives or ANY kind of prohibited item, the TSA arrests him. On what charges? Failing to complete the security scan and — get this, it’s a new one — illegally recording!

The TSA is making this clear — they are NOT going to back down. Instead, they have identified the enemy, and it is people. The TSA has increased the odds. If you now refuse to follow their orders — any orders — you will be jailed and fined. If you do not submit, or attempt to record them, you will be jailed. This, very clearly, has absolutely NOTHING to do with anyone’s security. You are guilty beyond any reasonable doubt if you enter an airport, period. Oh sure, they’re just “following orders.”

I found this post interesting. In it, various TSA officers are reported as saying how sad they are for the comments they get from people. My response? Too bad they’re not getting more comments. Nope, sorry, I have NO PITY for these people. They are scum (and I really don’t say that lightly). If your job is really that bad, quit! I’m serious. Maybe that’s the only way to get these bastards to stop — keep insulting them until enough of them quit that the TSA just can’t do their “job” any more. The TSA agents are NOT “people like everyone else.” They’re people who are molesting and arresting others.

On the good side, perhaps this will be enough to finally wake people up and start a revolution for freedom. Hey, I can dream.

Social Security was never supposed to be a complete retirement plan. It was a plan that provided insurance to those who retired so that they would have some income after their working years ended. There have been revisions along the years and they have expanded the scope of Social Security to something it was never intended to be. One of the provisions enacted was to index cost of living allowances (COLA) to inflation. When there is inflation the COLA goes up and when there is no inflation there is no COLA.

The government has announced that, for the second year in a row, there will be no COLA because there is supposedly no inflation. Prices are rising but there is not yet a measured inflation.

One would think that since there are rules in place that they would be followed. This is a pipe dream when it comes to Washington DC. Last year the politicians passed a law to give Social Security recipients a $250 check to make up for not getting a COLA. If the mechanism in place determined that there should be no COLA then why did they circumvent that mechanism and pay the money anyway?

When I originally wrote about this recent COLA news I indicated that it would not be long before Congress worked to send another check to people who did not get a COLA. Keep in mind that they did not get a COLA because of the law that Congress passed, but that makes no difference.

After all, it is an election year.

As I predicted, the Congress is working to pay another $250 to offset something to which Social Security recipients are not entitled (in accordance with the law).

Representative Earl Pomeroy (Democrat, North Dakota), who introduced the legislation, had this to say:

“Seniors who rely on their modest Social Security payments need these cost-of-living adjustments for their day-to-day survival,” Pomeroy said. “Passing this bill will ensure that the lack of cost-of-living adjustment will not jeopardize seniors’ ability to survive on their benefits.” My Way News

The message here is that Seniors are DEPENDENT on government. Seniors, according to Pomeroy, rely on the payments from government which means that they are at the mercy of the government when it comes to the amount of money they will receive. He also is saying that the laws the Congress passed dealing with COLA jeopardize senior’s ability to survive.

In other words, seniors depend on government to survive. This is not a place anyone should EVER desire to be.

By any measure, money paid to Social Security would have returned much better profits than government if invested in the market. The claim that seniors would have been wiped out is wrong. First of all, the most recent legislation would have exempted people over a certain age so they would have been unaffected. Those who are younger would have had plenty of time to recoup the loss. Second of all, if the money had been invested the return would have been higher so the amount lost would not have been as devastating.

In addition, had the system been set up that way decades ago, people would be much better off and not waiting for government to hand them a few more scraps. If those accounts belonged to the people (it IS their money) they would control it, it would not be taken by the government to spend on worthless endeavors and the money could be passed to heirs thus ensuring growth of wealth in this country.

But government can’t have people being wealthy and independent in their senior years.

How else will government control the people if they are not at its mercy?

The lesson is to save as much as you can. The old saying about paying yourself first is great advice. Decide how much you can save and then invest it in a vehicle that pays good interest. A balance between interest and risk is a good idea.

If people fail to save they will be at the mercy of government, which is just where they want you.

They need that to pander for votes.

And to control the population…

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Looks like the Democrats need to get in a huddle and get the game plan set so they are all on the same sheet of music. While Joe Biden is out blaming George Bush and the Republicans for the country’s problems (they inherited a mess you know) Barack Obama is out blaming Congress. In this instance Obama is closer to the truth than Biden.

George Bush was president when things went bad but they did not go bad until the Democrats took over Congress. They have been in charge of both chambers since 2006 and the country rapidly deteriorated since that time.

I know there is an election coming and I know the Democrats are set to lose quite a few seats and possibly both chambers of Congress but they need to get their act together. Biden is predicting that his party will not lose control as he is expected to but it helps little when Obama is blaming the inaction of Congress for problems, a Congress controlled by his party.

My prediction, and it is at odds with Biden’s, is that the Democrats will lose the House and I am betting even odds that they will lose the Senate.

This might be best for Obama (and might explain why he blamed Congress) because a Republican Congress will make him look good as it did Clinton. Bill Clinton gets a lot of credit for things that were done as a reult of the actions of a Republican Congress and having a Republican Congress is probably why he got a second term.

Obama might be hoping to be so lucky and all indicators are that he will at least get the same opportunity Clinton had because despite Biden’s cheery outlook, the Democrats will lose control of the House.

I might be wrong though. After all, Biden was the one who called this the Summer of Recovery…

And we see how that is working out.

Sources:
al-Reuters
LA Times

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

I have told you time and again that the health care takeover is not about health and not about care. It is about control. It is about the government controlling our lives. The progressives have been very coy about this by veiling their arguments in faux compassion and concern for those who have no health care insurance. Everyone has access to health care, the question is, who will pay for it?

The fact that most people are happy with what they have is of no consequence to progressives and they ignored these people to revamp the entire system to “take care” of the small portion that cannot pay. There were plenty of ways to fix that problem without interfering with everyone else but those solutions would not allow the government to gain control and that is the only thing it wants.

According to Representative John Dingell:

“The harsh fact of the matter is when you’re going to pass legislation that will cover 300 [million] American people in different ways it takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people.” Breitbart [emphasis mine]

To control the people. This is what they want and now it has been verbalized by one of the enemy.

Make no mistake about it, the government wants to control each and every one of us and it has moved closer to that with this health care takeover.

If it were about a true concern for people it would take place sooner and well before Obama has to run for reelection. But until that time, the same number of people will be uncovered and will die each and every day. Of course the same number of people will die even after this is fully implemented.

Control. It is how the Marxists rule over the serfs.

Never surrender, never submit.

Wouldn’t this be a kick in the pants? It looks like it is possible that a Republican could win the Senate seat that was held by Barack Obama. There is some infighting in Illinois among politicians who wanted the seat (part of the Blago deal making) but did not get it. The seat went to Roland Burris and he is not running for reelection.

Democratic Party leaders in Washington — and the Obama White House — failed to recruit a candidate strong enough to scare Rep. Mark Kirk — the Republicans’ best bet — from the race. The only luck they had was the decision by Sen. Roland Burris — appointed by now-indicted former Gov. Rod Blagojevich to fill Obama’s remaining term — not to run to keep the seat. Chicago Sun Times

It looks like Mark Kirk has plenty of money and will make a contest of the whole thing.

Wouldn’t it be interesting if the seat held by Obama turned parties and that took the filibuster proof majority away from Harry Reid (who will likely be gone as well) and the Democrats?

The debate about the health care overhaul bill continues as more Americans voice their opposition to the plan that will allow the government to take over about 17% of our GDP. The government is interested in taking control of health care because then it will control our lives. The bill is not about health and it is not about care. Government has a couple of things in mind besides health and care.

The government wants to control your access to health care. Politicians are lying to you when they say that you can keep your plan if you like it. You can keep it until you need to change (whether you change jobs or your employer drops coverage in favor of government care) and then you will be stuck with the government plan where some bean counter gets to decide if you are treated. This is about controlling people like the government does with Social Security. The elderly are trapped in that system and are at the mercy of politicians who have spent all the money paid into it. It is going broke and there is no trust fund. Today’s workers are paying for today’s retirees. There will be no money left in the very near future.

The government will soon run out of all that Social Security money to confiscate and back with worthless paper so it needs a new source of income. You have heard them say how much money insurance companies make. The government wants to put them out of business and take that money in so it will have more to spend while rationing care.

Remember, the goal is for them to get single payer health care. Obama has said that this is his goal and that it might take 15 or 20 years but that is what he wants. Many other Democrats are on record as saying that they want single payer and that the way to get it is by passing a health care bill that they can use to get us there. This is why they are scaling back. They can say that the government option is off the table but they have said they can get things incrementally. They will get some sort of bill passed and then keep adding to it until they get what they want, complete control. Control of health care is a major way for government to gain more control over YOU.

Do we really want government types making decisions about our health? What about end of life? Do we really want government types forcing end of life decisions on us? That is what will result if we are forced to receive end of life counseling upon reaching 65 (an age where we are not old enough to draw Social Security). If they can steer us toward death then they can save health care dollars and Social Security payments.

Right now, each of us has the right to decide our end of life desires. We can decide to have food or water withheld and which medications, if any, we are to receive as well as the procedures that we do or do not want performed. Once government is involved a bureaucrat will be guiding people in that process and those who are vulnerable will be moved to taking decisions they might not actually want. Doctors will be rated by how well they are doing in this area so they will have incentive to move folks toward death.

Once health care is under government control there will be nothing stopping government from actually taking those decisions for us. They can simply pass a bill that changes health care and allows someone else to decide your end of life issues. Think that can’t happen? Look at what is happening in the United Kingdom:

In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, a group of experts who care for the terminally ill claim that some patients are being wrongly judged as close to death.

Under NHS guidance introduced across England to help doctors and medical staff deal with dying patients, they can then have fluid and drugs withdrawn and many are put on continuous sedation until they pass away. Telegraph UK

There is a pathway in the UK health system that allows clinicians to decide if a person is near end of life and then withhold food, water and medication and keep the person sedated until he dies. People can become dehydrated and get confused and be taken to the hospital where, using the pathway, it can be decided that the person is near end of life and care withheld. Sedating drugs can mask recovery so people who would otherwise recover die because the sedation keeps them from showing signs of improvement.

It is not a leap to say that we could go from mandatory counseling (the word shall means it is mandatory) where people are guided to death to a system where the decisions are made for them. It will not matter if the decisions are in the best interest of the patient and it will not matter what the patient or his family want because the government will mandate the decision.

The UK has had government run health care for a long time but this pathway has only been around since 2004. This means that government changed the health care delivery to include a pathway that takes end of life decisions away from the patient and the patient’s family.

Once government gets its claws into the flesh of health care it will continue to dig deeper and deeper until it runs everything and makes all the decisions. Remember, Obama has appointed people to positions that will decide for you. They are people who have long histories of advocating allowing people to die rather than extending lives. They have histories of advancing Euthanasia. They are on the record stating that the elderly will have to deal with their fate. They are on the record as wanting to advance principles where life is given unequal value based upon age and condition. The elderly, handicapped and mentally ill are not worth as much to them as the young and healthy.

Is this what we want in this country? Do we want government controlling health care and our lives? Do we want the government to have the power to decide if we live or die? Do we want a complete overhaul of the system so that we can include the very small percentage of people who have no insurance?

If this were about health care and reform then Obama would have voted for reform all those times he had the chance in the Senate. He did not want reform and neither do the rest fo the Democrats. They want control. If it were about fixing what is broken then they would not be scrapping what works and replacing it. They want control.

It is time to wake up America. Do not let them pass any kind of health care overhaul. They will work to add to it and take control of your life.

Stand up and be counted.

Your life depends on it.

Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland was involved in a Town Hall meeting and was asked by a person about health care and why the government would fine him if he did not get a policy. Robert Broadus laid it out for Cardin:

“I decided not to get the health insurance. That’s working out for me because I’m able to save that extra money and give it to my family members and use it on myself. Senator Cardin, I want to know are you going to tell me an individual…that I have to buy health care or else you’re going to fine me $2,500 every year I don’t get it? Our founding fathers assured us we have a Bill of Rights and I want to see you uphold that,” Broadus said in an increasingly emotional voice and to scattered applause. WUSA9

Cardin’s answer was a scary one because he basically stated that the guy would have problems if he had a serious medical condition. This could be true but Cardin made it sound as if the guy was a freeloader who would not make arrangements to pay his bill.

Cardin responded by asking Broadus what would happen if he became sick, broke a bone, had a car accident and ended up in an emergency room.

“You don’t pay. You are part of the population that shifts its costs over to a person who does pay, and they’re paying for you,” Cardin said.

Explaining how hospitals have often to absorb those costs, Cardin said many hospitals would chose simply to leave the community.

“I just think the overriding public interest is to require you and everyone in this country to have health insurance,” Cardin said.

Cardin said that it was in the public interest to require everyone to have health insurance. Why? Cardin’s lame excuse about hospitals and individuals who pay absorbing the cost falls flat. Hospitals and people who pay already absorb a great deal of cost. Hospitals also absorb the cost of government run Medicare and Medicaid. The government sets rates and never reimburses the total cost. This is one reason that patients have a plethora of tests and procedures. It is done for two reasons. The first is to prevent a lawsuit for some undiscovered problem and the other is to jack up the bill so the reimbursement is higher.

Additionally, with government run health care or a public option, if you will, everyone pays the bill. Well, the people who pay taxes pay the bill. There is no difference between the cost being spread out in the case Cardin describes and the cost being spread out among the populace in order to cover everyone.

There are plenty of ways to solve this problem that do not involve the government getting involved. Government does not have any money and it does not make money. Government extorts money from people who produce and then redistributes it to those who don’t. Washington DC only consumes, it does not produce.

Cardin is out of touch with reality because he is like the rest who want complete control over our lives. They already hold the elderly hostage with Social Security and Medicare and now they want to expand their reach to hold everyone hostage.

It is all about control over our lives and nothing more.