Posts Tagged ‘Healthcare’

I am proud to say that I voted for this guy in 2008 – Chuck Baldwin for the Constitution Party.  Also, I am proud to say that I didn’t sell out my beliefs, morals, and convictions to vote for McCain-Palin in the name of keeping “Obama out of office.”

By McCain’s admission he was in “lockstep” with President Bush (he said he had voted with the President about ninety-five percent of the time), and the American people saw this as an extention of “stay the course.”  But, in all reality, the American people have all the blame on our shoulders for the state of this nation.

By Chuck Baldwin

Among the scariest words ever heard are, “We are from the federal government, and we are here to help you.” Shiver me timbers, matey! When you hear those words, pick up your peg leg and RUN, because you are about to get hammered. And that is exactly what is fixing to happen to the American people when the new Obama national healthcare law is fully implemented: we are going to get hammered.

Anyone who believes that the federal government can manage anything efficiently is 8 years old, rationally challenged, or in the business of profiting from the federal government’s inefficiency. The only thing the federal government can do with precision is destroy things (and people). That is the one thing the feds can do with complete and total proficiency. Our first and greatest President, George Washington, understood this reality. He said, “Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” Amen.

A recent AP report should serve as another illustration as to the folly of trusting the federal government with the supervision and care of anything beyond those narrowly limited responsibilities defined in the US Constitution. The July 27, 2010, report said, “A U.S. audit has found that the Pentagon cannot account for over 95 percent of $9.1 billion in Iraq reconstruction money, spotlighting Iraqi complaints that there is little to show for the massive funds pumped into their cash-strapped, war-ravaged nation.”

The report went on to say, “The Pentagon has repeatedly come under fire for apparent mismanagement of the reconstruction effort�as have Iraqi officials themselves.

“Seven years after the U.S.-led invasion, electricity service is spotty, with generation capacity falling far short of demand. Fuel shortages are common and unemployment remains high, a testament to the country’s inability to create new jobs or attract foreign investors.

“Complaints surfaced from the start of the war in 2003, when soldiers failed to secure banks, armories and other facilities against looters. Since then the allegations have only multiplied, including investigations of fraud, awarding of contracts without the required government bidding process and allowing contractors to charge exorbitant fees with little oversight, or oversight that came too late.”

See the report at:

http://tinyurl.com/us-loses-iraqi-funds

Did you get that? “THE PENTAGON CANNOT ACCOUNT FOR OVER 95 PERCENT OF $9.1 BILLION IN IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION MONEY.” But this is the same federal government that says it can manage America’s multibillion-dollar healthcare system efficiently and with less cost. GAG!

Another report that caught my eye was this one dated August 12, 2010, and carried on My Way News. The report said, “The $700 billion U.S. bailout program launched in response to the global economic meltdown had a far greater impact overseas than other countries’ financial rescue plans did on the U.S., according to a new report from a congressional watchdog.

“Billions of dollars in U.S. rescue funds wound up in big banks in France, Germany and other nations. That was probably inevitable because of the structure of the Treasury Department’s program, the Congressional Oversight Panel says in a new report issued Thursday.
“The U.S. program aimed to stabilize the financial system by injecting money into as many banks as possible, including those with substantial operations overseas. Most other countries, by contrast, focused their efforts more narrowly on banks in their nations that usually lacked major U.S. operations.”
I’m sure everyone is glad to hear this, Amen? Aren’t you happy to learn that your hard-earned tax dollars “had a far greater impact overseas” than in the United States? In other words, ladies and gentlemen, big foreign banks (and internationally-owned banks) were the primary beneficiaries of the taxpayer-funded Wall Street bailouts.

The report went on to say, “But the report says that if the U.S. had gotten more data on which foreign banks would benefit the most, the government might have been able to ask those countries to share some of the cost.

“‘There were no data about where this money was going,’ panel chair Elizabeth Warren said in a conference call with reporters on Wednesday. ‘The American people have a right to know where the money went.'”

See the report at:

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100812/D9HHSM180.html

Dear Reader, are you getting this? “IF THE U.S. HAD GOTTEN MORE DATA . . . THE GOVERNMENT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ASK THOSE COUNTRIES TO SHARE SOME OF THE COST”? Holy slimeballs, Batman! This is the same government that is collecting nearly 2 billion pieces of electronic correspondence (emails, text messages, cellular calls, phone calls, etc.) EVERY DAY from virtually EVERY CITIZEN in the country. This is the same government that wants to electronically take our clothes off and look at every square inch of our naked bodies every time we get on a commercial airliner. But this same government was not able to obtain the data necessary to determine which foreign banks were going to receive billions of taxpayer bailout dollars? And, “There were NO DATA ABOUT WHERE THIS MONEY WAS GOING”?

Ladies and gentlemen, I ask you, who are the morons here? These government politicians and bureaucrats (who are either the most inept, incompetent fools to ever live, or the most deceptive, duplicitous con artists on the planet), or We the People for putting up with these nincompoops?

At this point, I invite readers to listen to this brief archived audio sound bite from former President Ronald Reagan (one of my favorite quotes) at:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=145

For those of you who are reading a hard copy of this column and not an online edition, and, therefore, are unable to link to the audio above, the file quotes Reagan as saying, “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” Do I hear an “Amen” out there?

How, in the name of common sense, can anyone (or any State) be willing to forfeit to the federal government one additional cent or even an ounce more authority knowing that every dollar it grabs and every authority it garners is used only to increase the size of the shackles that it puts around our necks?

And you want THEM to manage healthcare?

In reaction to Congressman Pete Stark’s comments at a recent town hall meeting, 86% percent of those polled say “there should be limits on what the federal government can do.”  When you take something despite the best intentions you may have, it is called theft.  However, when the government does it, it is called “legal plunder.” 

“Legal plunder” takes a very narrow doorway and expands anyway that the government sees fit.  An attendee challenged the congressman to explain his support for Obamacare saying that it “infringes upon the inalienable rights of other people.”  Furthermore, the attendee went on to say that it is a form of slavery and violates the thirteenth amendment to the Constitution.

That is when big government Congressman Pete Stark said, “The federal government – yes, can do most anything in this country.”  Consider for a moment that under the mandate, those who are “required” to “buy” these insurance plans could be penalized by the IRS if they don’t.  Consider for a moment that the Cato Institute’s website reports that despite the Obama administration’s spin, Obamacare will not be “free” and “no cost“.  Also, Cato reports that Obamacare will not, despite popular belief, will not reduce the cost, and for that matter, the quality.

The simple fact of the matter is, is that the federal government, when constrained to the confines of the Constitution, cannot do just anything that it wants.  However, we have to remember that the federal government has ignored the Constitution for a very long time.  Whether it is domestic policy, foreign policy, or some other matter, the Constitution is like the nerdy kid in gym class that gets picked last for the basketball team.

Tea Partiers are the violent ones?  In case I lose the video because You Tube has tried to get rid of it before, the following video is of a Tea Party activist who is excercising his First Amendment right and a black man (Obamalover) attacks him for it.

And this is where they got their marching orders from…

Independent journalist Alex Jones has come under fire from Fox News blaming for inciting violence.

I have a theory on Obamacare and it is this: It is not going to lower the price of healthcare or make it more affordable, it will raise the prices.  Employers and people will have to pay more money out-of-pocket.  At such a high cost, Obamacare will cause more irreparable harm to our economy and dollar.  As Ron Paul said, “failure of our economy will cause the repeal of Obamacare.”

Here is a news article from www.infowars.com:

Obamacare not such a good deal for kids or young adults

Prior to the passage of the “historic” Obamacare bill, Democrats went hither and yon in their effort to sell the insurance corporation crafted plan like snake oil. They said it was for the little people and if you opposed it you were a racist or some kind of rightwing extremist.

    Now with the ink barely dry on the bill, the truth is beginning to come out.

    “Insurance companies wasted no time after the bill was passed to unearth a loophole that allowed them to deny coverage to children with pre-existing illnesses for the next four years,” writes Sahil Kapur for Raw Story.

    Unearthed? They knew it was in the bill all along because they wrote it.

    “If a company sells insurance, it will have to cover pre-existing conditions for children covered by the policy. But it does not have to sell to somebody with a pre-existing condition. And the insurer could increase premiums to cover the additional cost,” said William G. Schiffbauer, an attorney who represents insurance companies.

    Rest assured. Obama and crew “are working to bridge the gap.” Maybe they would have bridged it if they had read the bill. Nancy Pelosi said they’d have to wait for it to pass before they could read it, though.

    Next up, young adults. “Health insurance premiums for young adults are expected to rise about 17 percent once they’re required to buy insurance four years from now,” according an analysis produced by Rand Health.

    Not that they can do anything about it. Obamacare is mandatory. If they don’t like it, men in black ski masks will drop by.

    No doubt other news about goodies for insurance corporations will emerge soon enough.

    “President Obama should frankly feel ashamed that he promised Americans a public option, got people to believe real change was possible, and then never truly fought for it — instead, pushing a mandate that he specifically campaigned against.”

    Politico.com is reporting as President Obama’s approval rating drops, George W. Bush’s goes up.  According to polling fifty percent say they would rather have Obama in office, while forty-four percent say they want Bush back.  Many attribute the decline in Obama’s ratings to the president inheriting a faltering economy from the Bush administration.

    Perhaps the greatest measure of Obama’s declining support is that just 50% of voters now say they prefer having him as President to George W. Bush, with 44% saying they’d rather have his predecessor. Given the horrendous approval ratings Bush showed during his final term that’s somewhat of a surprise and an indication that voters are increasingly placing the blame on Obama for the country’s difficulties instead of giving him space because of the tough situation he inherited. The closeness in the Obama/Bush numbers also has implications for the 2010 elections. Using the Bush card may not be particularly effective for Democrats anymore, which is good news generally for Republicans and especially ones like Rob Portman who are running for office and have close ties to the former President.

    For me President Obama seems much like meet the new boss, same as the old boss.  His slogan was Change we can believe in even though he really didn’t describe what kind of change that would be.  Now we know.  More and bigger wars, socialized medicine where you can be forced buy something you don’t need or cannot afford.  And if you don’t you can be fined or prosecuted.  Not to mention microchipping is in the bill.  More ignorance of the Constitution is to be expected as bills that number 1,900 pages slows down the process of government.  What about Obama’s oppoosition to NAFTA?  That must have been more political talk.