Stupak Sold Out The Babies And America
Mar 24, 2010 Political
Bart Stupak held out for a long time. He said that he needed language in the health care bill that would disallow the use of federal dollars for abortions. He sounded principled and he had a little gang that followed him. The votes of the gang were obviously needed because it passed by just four votes.
The initial word was that Obama was going to sign an Executive Order stating federal dollars would not be used for abortion. The EO has no weight and the bill Obama signed into law will be the final word on the matter. Obama, by the way, had a big ceremony to sign the bill but had no time to sign that pesky EO.
He might get around to it.
But does it matter? Stupak claimed the EO allayed his worries and changed him to a yes vote. The reality is that Stupak received $726,409 in federal grants for three small airports in his district. After that money was obligated, he changed his vote. I do not believe in coincidences in politics so there is no doubt in my mind that Stupak was bought off. The airport money bought his vote and the EO provided him cover.
Add this three quarters of a million dollars to the amount of money the health care legislation will cost. We can add that to the 10 billion dollars the IR-SS will need to track insurance compliance, the amount needed for the doc-fix, and the untold millions or billions used to bribe other members of Congress. All of this money is part of the cost of the legislation no matter where they hide it because it was needed to pass the legislation.
Stupak showed his true colors and now we need to look closely at his other so called pro-life hold outs to see what special money they got for their votes.
We are going to run roughshod over Congress this November and throw a lot of the bastards out of office. They will pay for their treason with their jobs though I have no doubt Owebama will find them other jobs in government.
They are unworthy of their jobs and they are unworthy of the name American. They are traitors who usurped the Constitution and they need to go. Nothing less than a bloodbath is acceptable.
And if these people think they will sway public opinion with their trinkets and shiny beads they have another thought coming.
If they are not in a solidly blue, safe seat, they will be in trouble.
Mr. Stupak, I hope you feel good about your decision and I hope the thirty pieces of silver were what you really wanted because you are history this November.
It is time to abort these sell out Democrats.
UPDATE: Stupak intended to vote for the bill all along even if the abortion issue failed. This video spells it all out. Stupak is a weasel. [Thanks to the Lonely Conservative]
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: bart stupak, constitution, lies, Obama, traitor
States Prepare To Sue Feds
Mar 23, 2010 Political
Looks like some of the states of these United States have decided to sue the federal government over the recently passed health care takeover bill. Virginia, Florida and at least seven other states are preparing lawsuits challenging the Constitutionality of the insurance mandate the bill contains.
By the year 2014 the federal government will require all people here to buy health insurance. It will be the first time in history that an American has to purchase something to be a citizen in good standing.
The lawsuit from Virginia will contend that forcing people to buy health insurance is unconstitutional and is not regulated by the oft abused Commerce Clause. Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli put it very simply:
“If a person decides not to buy health insurance, that person by definition is not engaging in commerce,” Cuccinelli said in recorded comments. “If you are not engaging in commerce, how can the federal government regulate you?” al-Reuters
He is, of course, correct but whether the courts will see it that way is another thing all together. It is possible that the courts will say the government can require us to buy insurance to have good standing in this country even though this runs contrary to the freedoms our Founders fought so hard to obtain and preserve. Then again, freedom is always only one generation away from extinction and this generation, the Obama generation, is hell bent on taking freedom away.
The other issue is that Virginia passed a law that states its citizens cannot be compelled to buy health insurance. This directly contradicts the federal mandate and will lead to a Tenth Amendment battle. While federal law usually trumps state law the federal government’s law must be Constitutional.
Also, the Constitution specifically states [paraphrase] that the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited to it by the states are reserved to the states or to the people. The Constitution does not give the government power to force people to buy something. It regulates commerce but commerce involves voluntary buying something. As was stated, if you choose not to buy something then there is no commerce.
This is a key part of the legislation because the expected revenue from the mandate is designed to offset covering those with preexisting conditions.
The issue will be interesting because the federal government will claim it has the right to control the states insurance because insurance is commerce but the federal government regulates interstate commerce and insurance companies are prohibited from selling across state lines.
This will likely be an interesting legal challenge that will have an impact for a long time to come. If the court decides the federal government can force you to buy something what will they force us to buy next? Maybe they will say we have to buy GE solar panels before we can own a home. Maybe they will say we have to buy a GM if we want a car.
I can’t imagine the courts will allow this to stand but then again, the SCOTUS allowed private land to be taken for private industry gain which runs afoul of the Fifth Amendment which only allows private property to be taken for public use with just compensation.
I can’t wait to see how this all plays out.
No matter what, the debate over the health care issue will not be settled this week.
If this is allowed I can’t wait to see all the snot nosed kids who voted for Obama when they realize that the law they pushed so hard for does not provide free health care.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: constitution, florida, health care, lies, virginia
The Health Care Shell Game
Mar 19, 2010 Political
The CBO numbers came out and Democrats are giddy. They believe the numbers reported mean that the health care takeover bill will save money and reduce the deficit. This is far from the truth. The CBO can only grade what they are given and they are only given items that are expected to give the desired result. It is a shell game that all politicians play when they want to hide the true cost of any legislation.
The reality of the health care takeover is that it will increase the deficit. The doc-fix is something that has been going on for a long time. In order to reimburse doctors the amount needed for Medicare patients, a separate bill is introduced each year to fix the problem. The fix is usually added to some other spending bill to reduce the cost of Medicare. Last year it was added to the Defense bill so the cost, on paper, was not borne by Medicare.
The doc-fix was supposed to be a part of the health care takeover bill and it should be. It would have been a permanent part of health care so that there would be no future need for doc-fixes. But that fix caused a deficit so the Democrats removed it from the bill and made it a separate piece of legislation. The money must still be spent but removing it from the health care takeover bill kept the CBO from scoring it against the bill. Keep in mind, this is still a cost that must be borne no matter what bill it appears in.
The CBO states, despite what Democrats claim (Obama made the claim today), that the health care takeover would increase the deficit. This is an assessment based on including the doc-fix in the health care takeover bill.
The Congressional Budget Office said Friday that rolling back a programmed cut in Medicare fees to doctors would cost $208 billion over 10 years. If added back to the health care overhaul bill, it would wipe out all the deficit reduction, leaving the legislation $59 billion in the red.
The so-called doc fix was part of the original House bill. Because of its high cost, Democrats decided to pursue it separately. Republicans say the cost should not be ignored. Congress has usually waived the cuts to doctors year by year. Yahoo News
Republicans are correct in saying that this cost should not be ignored because it is a cost associated with health care. Democrats are deliberately ignoring it to give the false impression that the health care takeover bill will reduce the deficit.
It will actually cause the takeover to be 59 BILLION dollars in the red. That is 59 Billion more dollars added to the deficit.
This is a shell game being played in order to get this takeover passed. The bill is not about health and it is not about care. It is about control. Once the government controls health care it will control the people and this is what Democrats want, control over you.
Keep in mind that VP Biden said that the government would control the health care companies (it is about control) and Nancy Pelosi said that this was the start and that more would be done after this passes. They want the public option and this is what she is talking about. When Obama was being skewered by Bret Baier this week he disclosed that this is a start and that they were working incrementally to get more. He has stated in the past that the public option was the goal and he alluded to that in the interview. He pointed out that Canada did not get where it is all at once, that they did it in steps. This health care takeover is the first of many steps to get to a public option and take complete control of our lives.
To ensure that we are controlled by the government the bill puts the IRS in charge of checking on each of us every month to make sure we are insured. If we do not have insurance they will fine us and take the money from any refund due or otherwise fine us. The government will use the IRS to enforce the dictatorial rules on us and that will cost about 10 BILLION more dollars that will have to be paid but will not be counted against the cost of the legislation even though the expense is a direct result of it.
The process is unconstitutional and it is contrary to what a free people expect. Once government controls our lives we have lost our freedom and this is what Democrats want.
We also need to understand that Obama is in favor of using the same jaded and unconstitutional processes to pass the rest of his agenda. How far will this go? How far does it have to go before Americans revolt?
I do not know the answer but I know that I will not relinquish my freedom without a fight.
And all true Americans feel the same.
We will teach these people that they work for us and that we are not their servants.
One way or another they are going to learn this lesson.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: constitution, deficit, health care, irs, lies, Obama, shell game
Is The Public Option Back?
Mar 16, 2010 Political
The public option was dead and had a stake through its heart but now, like Jason, it appears to be back. The Democrats have passed a shell bill and will insert items into it. Pam Geller of Atlas Shrugs reports that this language is now part of the bill:
Subtitle B—Public Health Insurance Option
SEC. 221. ESTABLISHMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF A PUBLIC HEALTH INSURANCE OPTION AS AN EXCHANGE-QUALIFIED HEALTH BENEFITS PLAN.
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—For years beginning with Y1, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (in this subtitle referred to as the ‘‘Secretary’’) shall provide for the offering of an Exchange-participating health benefits plan (in this subdivision referred to as the ‘‘public health insurance option’’) that ensures choice, competition, and stability of affordable, high quality coverage throughout the United States in accordance with this subtitle. In designing the option, the Secretary’s primary responsibility is to create a low-cost plan without compromising quality or access to care.
I have no idea if this was ever in the Senate Bill but I am pretty sure the title of Public Health Insurance Option and the the last sentence that states it is the Secretary’s PRIMARY responsibility to create a low-cost plan pretty much means that this is a public option.
The Democrats are using unconstitutional methods to pass the bill, are using sleight of hand to get things in the bill and are lying to the American public. This is how they roll and we cannot trust them. We cannot trust anyone who would usurp the Constitution in order to impose his will on us.
This bill must be defeated and it must be defeated badly.
I am not sure about all of this but I think tomorrow at 10 am we might have a better idea. Dennis Kucinich is scheduled to announce how he will vote on the bill. He has been a firm NO vote all along because there was NO public option. He has been courted and, at the same time, shamed by Obama and now the once adamant Congressman is silent about his plan.
If he announces that he will vote YES then we will know for sure that the public option is back in play.
Never, ever, trust a Democrat.
Big Dog Salute to Jasmine
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: constitution, kucinich, lies, Obama, pam geller, public option
Constitution Slaughters The Slaughter Solution
Mar 13, 2010 Political
By now anyone with a head and who is not trying to rewrite history over this issue knows that the Democrats are working full speed ahead to pass unpopular legislation in order to take control of our lives by controlling our health care. They want to vote for Obama’s signature legislative item but they are worried about the ramifications of passing unpopular legislation especially in an election year.
It is a double edged sword because they need to pass it now because they will lose too many seats to pass it next year. But if they pass it now they will lose even more seats and Obama will have no future agenda because Republicans will not allow anything he wants to pass. It won’t get considered. This will be the price for ramming legislation through without following the Constitution. I bet then we hear Democrats scream about being left out of the process and how ham handed the Republicans are.
Anyone who complains should be locked in the basement so we do not have to hear them again. This would include Obama.
The most recent idea coming from Democrats is to consider a bill voted on and passed if another piece of legislation is passed. This is a way to avoid voting on the unpopular bill but getting what they want passed.
In the Slaughter Solution, the rule would declare that the House “deems” the Senate version of Obamacare to have been passed by the House. House members would still have to vote on whether to accept the rule, but they would then be able to say they only voted for a rule, not for the bill itself.
Thus, Slaughter is preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill “passed” once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes. Democrats would thereby avoid a direct vote on the health care bill while allowing it to become law! Doug Ross
According to Constitutional Attorney Mark R Levin, this rule is unconstitutional. The House and Senate must vote on a bill and it must be sent to the president to be signed into law. So far, so good because they are voting on a bill but they are not voting on the bill that will become law and they are not voting in accordance with the Constitution:
U.S Constitution, Article I, Section VII, Clause II.
Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively… [emphasis added]
In ALL cases the bills shall be voted on by Yeahs and Nays. They cannot vote on one rule change and say it means they voted on another bill. Every BILL (singular) must be voted on with yeahs and nays. Our Founders set this up for a reason.
Of course the Constitutionality of something has never stopped Democrats from doing what they wanted but I am pretty sure there will be a lot of legal challenges to any process that does not follow the Constitution and the legal process in accordance with the law.
Note to Democrats, just because you change the rules does not mean the rules adopted are Constitutional.
Here is a link to the US Constitution for those who are challenged in this area. It would be particularly nice if Politicians read this.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out because the left is worried about the interpretation of the Senate Parliamentarian when it should be worried about the Constitution.
Can they use reconciliation to fix a bill that has not been agreed upon by both chambers? Don’t know but they cannot vote for a rule and say it counts as voting for a bill.
The other interesting thing that I see is Joe Biden has a big role in this as President of the Senate. This is the guy who scolded Dick Cheney and cited the wrong part of the Constitution when discussing the role of the VP. Seems that Biden was unaware that the VP has Executive and Legislative responsibility and that this is spelled out in the Constitution (it really helps to read it).
In any event, Biden might get a chance to learn what the VP is allowed to do.
Now it would be funny to see them do all of this only to have it nullified as unconstitutional, or declared not a law because they did not vote on a BILL. They would be back to square one and a lot closer to the election. They would never get another chance and that is a good thing.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: constitution, illegal, joe biden, Obama, slaughter, stock market, usurp