Health Care Take over at any cost

A government-takeover of healthcare at any cost. With this singular mission, House Democrats are moving swiftly — as early as next week — to send the Senate government-run healthcare bill to President Obama for enactment — and may do so by avoiding a vote on the actual bill in a futile attempt for political cover.

How can this happen? The short explanation is simply legislative trickery. The longer explanation is that any number of procedural gimmicks may be used — and used simultaneously. Here are just two of the schemes under consideration:

 

The Slaughter Solution

Named after Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D-NY), this strategy would create a legislative trick to approve the Senate healthcare bill through the House of Representatives without an actual vote on the bill. That’s right. The Majority thinks they can circumvent democracy and hide their true actions by simply claiming in companion legislation that the Senate healthcare bill passed the House.

 

The result of this shenanigan: the Senate healthcare bill goes straight to President Obama for his signature.

 

Reconciliation

“Reconciliation” is an expedited budgetary mechanism designed to control the size of government and balance the government’s financial ledger with a simply majority vote.  But Democrats in Congress are planning to abuse the legislative process by using “reconciliation” to vastly grow the size of government – with a government-takeover of healthcare.

 

The Majority is also baiting their Democrat Members to send the grossly-unpopular Senate healthcare bill to President Obama by promising “corrections” to the bill through a reconciliation package. But what this bait-and-switch tactic really means is that the kickback-laden Senate healthcare bill becomes law while the so-called “corrections” being made to quell widespread disgust at their backroom deals and to appease their union allies faces an uncertain future in the Senate.

 

 

Either option — alone or combined — tramples basic principles of democracy and defies the will of the American people. At town hall meetings, through letters and calls, and in recent elections, the American people have loudly stated that they do not want a government-takeover of their healthcare.

 

Regardless of what the American people want, the Majority has proven its commitment to utilizing backroom deals to force government-run healthcare down their throats. Here are just a few of the special deals still in the Senate bill:

 

·         The “Cornhusker Kickback:” Provides that Nebraska — and only Nebraska — will see its full Medicaid costs paid for by the   rest of America.

 

·         The “Louisiana Purchase:” Gives an extra $300 million in Medicaid funding to Louisiana.

  

·         “Gator Aid:” Shields 800,000 Florida residents from Medicare Advantage cuts. 

 

·         Special Exemption for Insurer Proposing 56% Rate Increase:  Exempts Michigan Blue Cross/Blue Shield from the new tax on health insurers, despite an Obama Administration report highlighting the insurance carrier’s proposed 56% rate increase in 2009.

 

Our freedom in healthcare is being bought and sold in Congress. This is beyond disgraceful. But since Democrats have a 75+ vote majority in the House, our nation could see government-run healthcare enacted next week. 

 

 

     Common sense states that if you have to trick and bribe people into voting for your bill, then it's going to be a worthless bill.  People need to stand up and stop this crap, unless you want to hand more of your money over to this oppressive government.  This President and this congress have just proven themselves to be criminals and mobsters.  Under the RICCO statutes, Obama, Reid, Boxer, and Pelosi should be arrested for high crimes and misdemeanors.  They have proven themselves to be aristocrats and that they consider us their own private property.  

      We, as sovereign American Citizens are no one's property, and we won't be treated as such. 

 

Carbon Dioxide isn't a deadly poison

At the Copenhagen summit for climate change, there is a rumor that they are going to declare Carbon Dioxide a deadly gas.  Would you think they were stupid?  After all CO2 (carbon dioxide) is something that we, as living beings exhale every minute.  Then, thanks to the great creation that we live upon, plants take in this waste and spit out oxygen, which bonds with nitrogen and we breath it in. 

If true, this is tyranny, and it could lead to a tax on breathing.  Can you image having to pay a tax to breath in and out?  Would you pay it?  I wouldn't.  Why should I pay for something that our planet gives us for free.

Rumor is that the globalists and power elite want to be the only people to live on Earth.  Common sense has it, that if there are only 5000 people, and they are the power elite, who have never done honest work in their lives, what makes them think that they'll survive alone?  I hate to tell them, but without farmers, ranchers, gardeners, they won't be able to grow their own food, or butcher their own food.

Why don't we take these morons and dump them on an island in the middle of the ocean and see how they'd survive without servants.

Rumor also has it, that our idiot of a president will surely sign this stupid treaty and doom us to the death of a thousand cuts.

Would you buy a new house without first looking it over?

Would you buy a house without first walking through it, to make sure all of your furniture will fit?  Of course not, then why should a representative or Senator vote on a Bill without first reading it?  If our elected officials had any common sense, they wouldn't vote on any Bill set before them, before they'd had the time to read it.  At the very least, they should vote "no" until they've actually read the bill.

Take, for instance, the Cap and Trade Bill, and the Health Care Bill in the house and Senate.  These bills are 2000 pages each and they have been sprung on the representatives and Senators at the very last minute, no debate is allowed, and the idiots still vote before reading them.  I'm guessing that it's the same for the Stimulus bills, and every other bill that runs through congress. 

I think that Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid should take a step back and give the representatives and senators three weeks to read over the bills, then vote.  Because as it stands, they are violating the law and forcing people to vote on things they haven't read.  I am predicting that if they don't stop this, the American citizens will start a revolution and nobody will be able to stop it, until it's over.

Why Relgions should stay out of politics

Can we say, "Un-freakin-believable?"  I'll reiterate what I've always said, "Churches should stay out of politics."  Why would I say that?  It could be because the Church's job isn't to influence policies, or to influence science, but in reality, it is because the Church is supposed to take care of people, without government help. Or maybe it's because of stupidity like this.

As usual, when religion and politics intermingle, people forget about science and about common sense.  350/million is stated as the upper limit of CO2 in the atmosphere.  What would a church know about what happens when it goes above?  As a scientist, I can tell you that in the billions of years that the Earth has been around, it has never gone above the 350/million.  If anything, everytime CO2 has gone up, plants have flourished and O2 has been released to counteract the CO2.

It it true that we are supposed to be stewards of the world, but that doesn't mean that we need churches telling us what to do, or even governments.  We should be working as individuals to fix our problems.

There have been rumors that Al Gore wants his brand of Enviro-nonsense to be recognized as a religion.  For Real?  Science that 1/2 of the scientists in the world now disagree with should be a religion?  What's next, Church of Optimus Prime?   

Hasan psychotic? Why was he promoted to Major?

If you haven't seen my other articles on Major Hasan, you can read them here and here.  Today I was browsing the news sites, when I came across this one.

What caught my attention was the following paragraph.

Hasan had been a trouble spot on officials' radar since he started training at Walter Reed, six years earlier. Several officials confirm that supervisors had repeatedly given him poor evaluations and warned him that he was doing substandard work.

Both fellow students and faculty were deeply troubled by Hasan's behavior — which they variously called disconnected, aloof, paranoid, belligerent, and schizoid. The officials say he antagonized some students and faculty by espousing what they perceived to be extremist Islamic views. His supervisors at Walter Reed had even reprimanded him for telling at least one patient that "Islam can save your soul."

I've been working for a living since 1992, and I know from personal experience that on the times when my work was substandard, I was threatened with termination from my jobs.  Why then, was Major Hasan not passed over for promotions, and why was he promoted to Major?

I think it could have been one of three reasons.

1) Islamophobia - I think that because he was a Muslim, he was given chance after chance after chance, and all because they didn't want to offend him, or have him go to CAIR and complain that he was terminated because of his religion.

2)  Political Correctness - If it had been a Christian Psychologist that gave the "god can save your soul," speech, he or she would have been fired, but since Major Hasan was a religious minority, and he wasn't christian, nobody did anything about it, or did anything but complain.

3) Fear - They were afraid that if they released him, they'd have to answer questions about why they did it, and they just let it go.  

To be perfectly honest, if he was all that they say he was, then why did they keep him in the army?  Maybe if they had terminated his employment, 14 people would be alive now.  

 

Those crazy lovable russians

Today seems to be a day for whacky news articles. This one, about the Russian's and weather modification made me chuckle.

I suppose if we wanted to attack Russia, we could do it on a day when the air force is doing weather service. (chuckles)

Their economy must be good, if they can afford a city budget of 60bil. But, with all that money, I wonder why they haven't thought about doming the city over. After all, if Houston is thinking about it, surely Moscow would be a good site for one too.

Global Warming, for real?

After reading this article, Underwater Cabinet Meeting, I could only shake my head. Come on, do these people not know that we respire carbon dioxide and breath in oxygen?
I also keep wondering if nobody has read the new science reports that state, "Solar flares at a minimum, temperature drops, global warming a myth." Let's take these one at a time:
1) Our local star is the source of heat for our planet. We ride in the third orbital zone and when there are solar flares, it gets hot, and when there aren't it gets cool. Or more accurately, when there are a lot of sun spots, it gets hot, and when there aren't, it gets cold. It's called solar convection and our environment traps the heat under the clouds.

2) If you want to get rid of Carbon Dioxide, stop killing trees, or plant more trees. But then, if we planted more trees, we'd have a green house environment and maybe the ice caps would melt. The world used to be covered in forests as far as the eye could see, and that's why there was an abundance of life and water. When we started stripping the land of trees, we got hot temperatures, no water, and dust storms that blocked the sunlight and radiation from the ground.

Which would you rather have? Con artists getting rich selling so-called, "Carbon indulgences," or be able to keep your money for yourself?

Here's a few things heard on the news in just the last week or so.
1) Electricity companies urge congress to pass cap and trade bill.
Well, duh.....if the cap and trade goes through, they can buy carbon credits and still charge you an arm and a leg for electricity. They'll sell their own investors into slavery to make more profits. It's just greed, pure and simple.

2) Al Gore denies global cooling.
Well, this one may not have been on the radio, but it's true none the less, because he's still trying to hype the global warming myth, because it's his company that will sell the carbon credits and he looks to get very rich on the deal. Again, greed, pure and simple. You can bet he won't have to worry about it, nor does he.

3) NASA/Scientists report drop in temperature/ no change of temperature.
This is a given, considering that for the past ten years, the temperature has only gone up 1/10th of a degree. In that time, it's actually stayed pretty much the same. The only places that have reported increases are places where the gauges are within 50 feet of blacktop. You see, the tar and oil traps heat. So go figure...right?

4) California to outlaw plasma televisions.
Come on really? We'll outlaw modern technology because a 52 inch TV leads to global warming? What would you have us do, get rid of TV's, computers, heaters, air conditioners, ovens, stoves, microwaves, iceboxes, and go back to primitive technology? I am very doubtful that any device that's energy star rated actually contributes to global warming, but then global warming is a myth. If California makes plasma's illegal, then that will be a step toward tyranny. Why would you want to destroy california's economy? Could it be because the "terminator" is just a stupid moron that's actually a liberal?
Or could this be vast conspiracy to get people to move out of california so he can sell it to mexico? (Sarcasm, folks, I don't actually believe that he's capable to running such a fantastic conspiracy, after all, he is an actor, and rather bad one at that.)

So, what we are actually looking at is just another chance for the nanny state to take over and tell you what's best for you and your pocket book.

After all, global warming is just a myth.

Gays in the Military: Why do you have to flaunt your sexual behavior in public?

After reading this little blurb, I only have one question?
Why do gay people feel that they have to display their sexual behaviors in public?
I've always been a firm believer of "What goes on in the bedroom stays in the bedroom." If two guys want to stick their joysticks in places not designed for joysticks, then that's their business, but I do draw the line when it comes to public displays of affection.

A soft kiss on the hand, or quick smooch in public is okay, but guys, girls, and those who haven't decided which sex you are: I don't want to know about what goes on in your bedroom, nor do I want to see it in public.

Do I think gays should be able to serve in the armed forces, yes. Do I think it should go further than that? No. Because war is not about Sex on the battlefield, it's about fighting and winning. Do I care if the top general or admiral might be as gay as a three dollar bill? No, but I don't need to hear about his or her sexual exploits.

Do I think gays and lesbians should be able to get married? No, because Marriage is a sacred institution, given to us by the creator in order to procreate.

Do I think it's okay for two committed gay or lesbians to have a relationship? Sure, but don't call it marriage, call it a civil union, call it a gayraige, or something. Don't insult my spirituality or my religion by calling it what it isn't.

Should gay or lesbians be able to adopt? Sure, if two adults are in a committed relationship and feel they can help raise orphans, go for it. I don't care.

Personally, I think the federal government should be out of the marriage game altogether and leave it to we, the people, do decide what our relationships are. It's not up suits in DC to tell you that you can't cohabitate, or get a job, or visit your companion in the hospital, or collect your partners insurance policy after they die. Those things are legalities that we all deserve, regardless of sexual orientation, but you don't have to take it out of the bedroom.

So, in this case, maybe don't ask, don't tell, isn't such a bad thing. After all if you don't ask me about what goes on in my bedroom, I won't ask you what goes on in yours.

President Obama gets Nobel Peace Prize

When I heard this, I was understandably confused and angered. I mean, what the hell has President Obama done to deserve a peace prize? Nothing. Nothing at all.

Since becoming president, he has done the following:

1. Gone on the Obama's apology tour
2. passed the bailout package that sent us into depression
3. passed the cash for clunkers program
4. bought out banks
5. appointed thieves and socialists and communists as czars
6. told Israel to stop building on their own land
7. has not taken a firm stance against russia, iran, or Venezuela
8. has attempted to put the ex-president of honduras back in power
9. has tried to pass the medical reform bill that nobody wants
10. has used the race card twice and insulted the harvard police by calling them stupid.
    
11. has had one beer summit
12. Has called patriotic Americans terrorist and cowards
13. has all but ignored the general on the ground in Afghanistan
14. has tried to get the olympics and failed
15. has fired one Inspector general for accusing his friend of fraud.
16. has broken laws that he himself has signed.
17. has buddied up to hugo chavez and fidel castro
18. is engaged in destroying our way of life.

So, in my honest opinion, he has done nothing that could even remotely entitle him to win the Nobel Peace Prize, and like his idol, Jimmy Carter, will probably use it to bash us over the head and further his socialist agenda.

It leads to an interesting question: What is the criteria for getting a Nobel Peace Prize? Is it selling out your country, or using your race to accuse everyone else to being racist, or maybe even running roughshod over the constitution?

Religious Leaders should stay out of politics

After two days of silence on health care, Obama re-engaged Wednesday, urging religious leaders to back his proposals and preparing for a pep talk to a much larger audience of liberal activists, whose enthusiasm has been questioned.

To which I say:

Religious leaders should stay out of this fight, because when you mix religion and politics, you always invariably tend to lose the message you want to send. The mandate of the church, as set forth by God and Christ, is to spread the good news of the ressurection of Christ, and the joy of his redeeming grace.

I don't recall a time when God said, "dabble in the politics of mortals.". So that means that God has never been interested in illegal immigration, political refugees, or even healthcare. The creator is, as always, is more interested in your immortal soul than he is your mortal body.

Anytime religious leaders forget their task, they end up going against the will of God and things like what happen in afghanistan and iraq happen, namely people killing for political reasons, but blaming it on God.

President Obama losing message

The title says it all: President Obama is losing his message on the proposed Healthcare bill that he wants passed before 2010.
It's not just the white house, it's also the democrats who have lost their message. It seems like they have forgotten that they didn't inherit their seats, but were voted into office.
At a recent town hall meeting, a democrat representative screamed at local doctor who just wanted some answers, while another one accused Republicans, senior citizens, and Veterans who want answers, and flock to the meetings to get answers, of being "Political terrorists" no better than Timothy McVeigh.
Of course, it's not all democrats that do this. So far, the "Blue Dog" democrats have held their own by bucking their own party. My hat is off to them. Keep up the good work.

My big question is: Why do those people who don't a single thing about the medical system, want to change it and mess it up? That leads to another question: Why in the hell should illegal immigrants get any part of healthcare in this country, where they legally don't belong?

That question was a brought about by the Hispanic league of representatives, who told Obama not to change a single thing in the bill. They did this because there is a loophole big enough to drive a mack truck through. Nowhere in the bill does it say "Only legal American Citizens can get these benefits." The HLR thinks that if it's left alone, they can get illegal immigrants rights to more free medical care.

I say that this is stupid, and they should remember who voted them in. They don't work for non-citizens, they work for us, the card carrying american citizen. If this is not fixed, it won't make a difference, because as soon as it starts, people who want it for free, so they don't have to pay for it, will flock to it and it'll be as broke as social security, medicare, and medicaide.

Having worked in the medical field, I can tell you that a majority of the ER visits are illegal immigrants who won't pay to go to a private physician, or those who will wait until their sick kid throws up five times at midnight, before going to the ER.

The Emergency room is not for the common cold, flu, or stomach aches, it's for things that will kill you if you don't get treatment.

In short, I believe that the Democrats should leave the medical system alone, and if they want to take on a cause, they can take on the trail lawyers, who are the real reason why medicine is so expensive.

Let's face it, the government doesn't have a good track record with taking care of private information. Because of that, I don't want them to have control over my medical care, or my medical information.

Czar's, Czar's, Czar's.

According to my research, there are 31 Czars in the United States Government. As best as I can tell, these people didn't have to undergo any congressional interrogation before being appointed to their positions of power.

If we go strictly by the constitution, any cabinet level position must be confirmed by the senate, and if these Czar's haven't been confirmed by the senate, then they are above the law, and the Senate has no oversight into their activities.
Take for instance, Obama's new Healthcare Czar, who wants everyone to send "fishy" emails and letter to the white house, so they will know who is dissenting against the Universal Healthcare that he wants.

Also, consider his E-Czar, who was a thief, or his pay Czar.

For cryin' out loud, this is the United States of America, not the USSR, we don't need no stinking czar's running around.

If you want people in cabinet level positions, we, the people, get to have our representatives get oversight, and that's the law.

Give me Liberty or Give me Death

The White House announced early in the week that "Dissenters are spreading misinformation about the Healthcare reforms. If you get a 'fishy' email, forward it to the White House." To me, this smacks a bit of the Evil Empire.

Say what you will about Bush, but never in the last 8 years did he collect people's email addresses, names, and personal information in order to create a database of dissenters. The fact that Obama's healthcare Czar did, is almost a high crime and misdemeanor.

When will congress start to get a handle on this problem and tell the President that he is not the chosen son of Abraham here, and he is not the high pontiff, nor is he god?

To my Texas mind, all these Czar's running around puts me in mind of the KGB, and I don't like it.

Science: Are humans to blame for Global Warming?

Is it just bad science that compels astronauts and some fringe scientists to conclude that humanity causes global warming?

Onboard the space station, the canadian astronaut said that "the polar ice caps have melted, and some of the snow is gone." He attributed this to human caused global warming. But, is he just blowing smoke, or do we, as the residents of the planet, have to take some of the blame?

Evidence shows that the Earth is coming out of a global ice age, and sunspot activity is the highest it's ever been, and the volcanos around the Ring of Fire, are pouring billions of tons of Carbon into the air.

Is it folly to imagine that we two legged masters of the Earth can be the cause of the ozone layer depleting, or is it just bad science?

I seem to remember these same scientists as those who were on the Global Freezing bandwagon thirty years ago.

I suppose the next question is, "What do we do about it?" Somehow, I don't think that just taxing a person for driving a car, or breathing, (yes, I can see where this is going,) will fix anything. All it's going to do is a) rake in big bucks for someone to sell pieces of paper with "Carbon Tax Credit" written on it, b) make people feel better about themselves, and c) destroy a vibrant economy that's already reeling on the ground.

If the government was really serious about fixing the problems, they'd mandate that the auto manufacturers have to make cars that run on 80% electricity, 20% something else, or simply say, "You have to make electric cars that travel 800 miles on a charge and can be recharged while moving down the road." If government were really serious about cutting down on smog combustible vehicles, they'd tell BNSF (The railroad through Texas, Oklahoma, etc,) to make some room in it's schedule for passenger trains between the bigger cities. I know I'd ride it between Lubbock, Dallas, Amarillo, etc. I'd rather read a book than drive.

But, the government won't, because they'd rather steal your money and make speeches, than fix the problem.

Or at least, that's how it seems to me.

Independence Day, 2009

I was out tonight with my family, watching the fireworks and listening to the Lubbock Youth Symphony, and I was reminded why this country exists.

Below you will find the Declaration of Independence from 1776. I would so much love for us to get back to what they wanted us to have. We have forgotten about the founders, who took independence by force and risked losing their lives to do it.

I hope that after reading this, you feel as I do, and thank God that we live in a free country and enjoy the fruits of our labors.

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

hen in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Have I become so jaded that I can only see the wrong?

The other day, after reading my blog, my wife turned to me and asked, "How come all you can do is complain? Why can't you find anything good in what's going on?" To be honest, I had to sit back and think about it. Have I become so jaded that I can only see what's wrong with the first black president is doing?

After some soul searching, I realized that maybe I am jaded, and I might have a reason to be, but that's only because I feel like I'm Paul Revere, and the current administration are the Red Coats marching on Bunker Hill.

To be perfectly honest, I am to the point that I hold all politicians in equal contempt, and want nothing more to do, than smack them in the back of the head, like Gibbs does on NCIS. I want to get their attention and whisper, "Hey, read the constitution. It's not your job to control private businesses, or take care of the non-contributers, or even manage the economy. Your only job is to defend our country, create laws, and then let us enjoy our lives, our liberty, and our pursuits of happiness."

If I could, I'd quietly point out that this is the United States, not midevial Europe, and that Senators and REpresentatives are not members of the aristocracy. After all, that is what our founding fathers fought to free us from. But now, 233 years later, our public servants consider themselves the rulers, and are even talking about leaving their senate and house seats to their children, all the while, trying to take away our abilities to live independant lives and our god given rights to speak out against tyranny.

Franken wins Senate Seat: What's next?

After spending 8 months in court, and spending millions of dollars, Al Franken has finally won his bid for a place in the US Senate. But, what do we have to look forward to?

An unnamed senator was heard to say, "We have 60 democrats now, let's just push our agenda through the senate and ignore what the republicans have to say."

To be totally honest, the democrats only actually have 58 votes on any day, since Senator Byrd and Senator Kennedy only show up for major votes.

In my opinion, if the democrats try to push legislation through without giving the republicans any say so, then they are leaving 50% of the american people without a say so, and there could be dire consequences for this country.

I am of the feeling that politics has become more of a "We're going to do it our way," instead of "Let's work together."

So now that the democrats have their 60 votes, are they going to raise taxes on the businesses that make our country so strong? Or will they take a vital healthcare industry and make it no better than a second world system?

Are the liberals so enamoured of collectivism that they have forgotten what our founding fathers fought to bring into being? Namely, a country where a person who works hard, can make money and leave his children more than what he had.

Personally, I'd rather have a 50% balance in the house and senate, just so that they have to work together.

High Crimes and misdemeanors

Last year while Obama was running for president, he co-sponsored a bill that made it harder to fire Inspector Generals without giving them 30 day notices, and submitting their name to congress.

Does it surprise anyone that our anointed president has already broken a law that he, himself helped create? If you said yes, then you must have been asleep for the last six months.

Americorp Inspector Gerald Whalpin, an unpolitical man, tracked down fraud in the Americorp and because the con artist was an Obama supporter, he got a call in the middle of the night, telling him he had an hour to either quit or he would be fired. Can you guess where that phone call came from? If you said 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, you're right. He got a call from the office of the president, threatening him, and when he didn't choose to resign, our anointed leader arbitrarily called him senile and said he was confused.

At the very least, this is the breaking of a federal law, and if our president did indeed threaten to fire him, then he should be charged with High Crimes and misdemeanors, and impeached. So far, he's done more illegal things than any other president, other than Nixon.

For 8 years, we had people trying to impeach President Bush because of faulty intelligence, and for going to war with Iraq.

Before that, we had people trying to impeach President Clinton for alleged sex acts in the oval office.

Compared to what has happened to the IG, those were the equivalent of toilet papering someone's house. Neither Bush or Clinton actually broke a law, while this president (If it's true,) has already broken one he himself co-sponsored.

Government healthcare soars to 1trillion over 10 years

I am starting to think that the Democrats and Obama want to deliberately devastate our national economy. The last time I posted, it was chastise the President for trying to create a national healthcare nightmare, and putting a 600 billion price tag on it. Now, they've upped the price to 1 trillion.
Once again, I say this is a bad idea, and for a handful of reasons.

1) Most importantly, it is not the Governments job to take care of it's citizens, or make sure they have healthcare insurance. That is up to each citizen to make sure he and his family is taken care of.

2) The government already has a healthcare insurance program, that the've run into the ground with all the impact of an asteroid strike. It is called medicare. In the last 10 years, they've cut the medicare benifits that hospitals get from 100% to 50%. What's to stop them from the same to this new program?

3) The people that wouldn't be covered by this policy. Would you believe 18-30 year olds, the poor, and most likely those with medical disabilities. 18-30 year olds don't buy insurance, because the spend money on the latest shiny, the poor because they can't afford it, and those with medical problems, because insurance companies won't cover them.

4) Once the government starts offering insurance, it can undersell other agencies, it can enforce state mandates, and can practice unfair practices. Consider insurance for people over 65, there used to be companies that offered policies, but once the government got into the old person's racket, they started offering policies for pennies on the dollar, and other companies couldn't handle that, so they got out.
The federal government can create state mandates, that other companies have to pay for, while the federal government doesn't.

5) The government can't control the budget as it is, and can't control spending, and can't keep costs down.

Between you and me, I consider this another way in which the Federal Government, the Democrats, and some republicans think they can create a dependant state, where our every need will be met by a beaurocracy. I really think this is a bad idea, since everywhere this has been done, Doctors have moved, quit their jobs, and refused to deal with the government. Consider Canada, Britain, and France.

If this is allowed to become dejuer, the federal government will appoint someone who will go over your records, and will say, "I'm sorry that you have cancer (Broken hip, fractured jaw, snapped spine, etc,) Mr. Smith, but it will be six months before you can go to a doctor and get treatment."

Already there is talk to repealing the tax breaks that companies get for buying employees health insurance. Take for instance, your company pays for you a 3000 dollar a year policy. If the government starts taxing that, then your employeer will probably drop you from that program, and say "To hell with it." Does anyone actually think that thier company will give them a 3000 dollar a year raise?

The governments thinking is that your health insurance from work is like a part of your wages, so it can be taxed.

WHAT DOES IT TAKE FOR YOU PEOPLE TO WAKE UP AND SEE THAT YOUR GOVERNMENT WANTS TO PUT YOUR BUTT BACK IN SLAVERY?

Everything this government is doing is trampling on our Lives, Liberties, Properties, and Pursuits of Happiness.

If we don't stop them, we'll be vassals to the state, and those in the senate, house, and white house, will own us. If we allow this to happen, we deserve what we get.

As for me and mine, I will not be a slave that belongs to anyone. I am a free person.

So-Called Healthcare reform is actually, "kill the healthcare" reform

It looks like President Obama, once again, doesn't have the first idea about how the Healthcare system works. In his weekly address, he said he'd found 303billion dollars that would be one part of the 600billion healthcare reform.

Of course, this is coming from a man who has never worked in the medical field, has never visited a public hospital, nor can he obviously balance the federal checkbook. I'm going to take a few things from the article and put them into perspective.

In his address Saturday, Obama refers to a 10-year total of more than $600 billion in “savings” for health care. However, he does not explain in his latest comments that, under his revised budget released last month, $326 billion of that amount would come from tax hikes on Americans making over $250,000 a year, “loophole closers,” and higher fees for some government services.

What this means is 1) He's going to raise the taxes on people making 250 thousand a year. In my opinion, this is stupid, because those people who make 250 thousand, work themselves to the bone to earn that money. Most of the people who earn that kind of cash, donate to charity.
(If you close the loopholes, they may decide not to donate.) Honestly, I think it'd be easier if they dropped the graduated tax nightmare that is our current system and would go to a flat 10-15% sales tax. Just between us, when you tax people for making money, you are punishing them for going after the American Dream, and if you tax them too hard, you'll discourage them from even working.

The bulk of the new $313 billion in savings would come from cutting or reducing the growth of payments to hospitals, medical equipment manufacturers and laboratories — though the major cuts don't target doctors.

Oh yippee yay, you won't pay the hospitals (ie, the nurses, radiology departments, lab departments,) the medical equipment manufactureres, or outside laboratories, but you will keep paying the doctors. For crying out loud, if you don't pay the hospitals, equipment manufacturers, or labs, then the doctors will have to practice out of their cars, because without the payments to the hospitals, the nurses, lab techs, and xray techs will look for other jobs, and leave the doctors to do everything themselves, and those of us who have worked in hospitals, know that most doctors never show up in the hospitals, and wouldn't know a blood pressure cuff, from a CBC lab test. Nor would they be able to take xrays, or carry out the lab tests themselves. So in effect, you'd be chasing off the people who do the real work.

Over the next decade, $110 billion is slated to come from reducing reimbursements to take account of what Orszag described as the ability of providers to improve their efficiency. “Health care services should be able to achieve and do achieve productivity improvements over time,” he said. According to a fact sheet released by the White House, future increases in such Medicare payments would be reduced based on an assumption that health care providers achieve half the productivity increases seen elsewhere in the economy.

What does he think this is, an automotive manufacturing plant? Of course hospitals will only be able to achieve half the productivity increases, that because nursing is a full time job, and in more severe cases, one nurse can only take care of one patient at a time. The same goes for surgeries, and major trauma. Medicine isn't an assembly line project. The doctor has to see them, order tests, interpret the tests, and make a decision on their condition, before he can say that they will survive or not. A typical motor vehicle accident that arrives at a hospital takes anywhere from 30 minutes to an hour (per person) before the doctor can clear them from backboards, or send them home. It's not as easy as "can you feel my fingers, okay you can go."
Surgeries are even more labor intensive, and even the easiest one can not be finished in 30 minutes.

For this administration to think that they can fix it like this, just shows that they don't know what they are talking about. Maybe they should have to be a patient in a local county hospital for a day.

I hate to tell you, but in the last 14 years, the average payment from medicare has dropped from 100% to 40% and that makes it harder to hire staff, and keep them employed. People in the medical field, are just like everyone else. They want a stable job, want cost of living increases, and want to chase the American Dream, but when you cut the cost from Medicare/insurance, etc, a full time position gets changed to part time, and they lose money. For some reason, this doesn't work when trying to keep employees.

So, what's going to happen? Will the government only be happy when the illegal immigrants have insurance, at the expense of the rest of us?

I'll readily admit that I'm not a politician, and hence use common sense, but to me it seems that the dwellers of malaria infested DC don't actually care about us. They only care about lining their own pockets and selling our future to our enemies. However, not once has any of them said, "I don't need 110thousand a year, so I'll vote against the automatic pay raise."