Emergency Inside the Healthcare Bill Total Government Control in your life!!!!
menace:
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus has something to say to gun owners: "Own a gun; lose your coverage!"
Baucus' socialized health care bill comes up for a Finance Committee vote on Tuesday. We have waited and waited and waited for the shifty Baucus to release legislative language. But he has refused to release anything but a summary -- and we will never have a Congressional Budget Office cost assessment based on actual legislation. Even the summary was kept secret for a long time.
But, on the basis of the summary, the Baucus bill (which is still unnumbered) tells us virtually nothing about what kind of policy Americans will be required to purchase under penalty of law -- nor the consequences. It simply says:
* "all U.S. citizens and legal residents would be required to purchase coverage through (1) the individual market...";
* "individuals would be required to report on their federal income tax return the months for which they maintain the required minimum health coverage...";
* in addition to an extensive list of statutorily mandated coverage, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius would be empowered to "define and update the categories of treatments, items, and services..." within an insurance plan which would be covered in a policy constituting "required minimum health coverage."
ObamaCare and gun control
It is nearly certain that coverage prescribed by the administration will, to control costs, exclude coverage for what it regards as excessively dangerous activities. And, given Sebelius' well-established antipathy to the Second Amendment -- she vetoed concealed carry legislation as governor of Kansas -- we presume she will define these dangerous activities to include hunting and self-defense using a firearm. It is even possible that the Obama-prescribed policy could preclude reimbursement of any kind in a household which keeps a loaded firearm for self-defense.
The ObamaCare bill already contains language that will punish Americans who engage in unhealthy behavior by allowing insurers to charge them higher insurance premiums. (What constitutes an unhealthy lifestyle is, of course, to be defined by legislators.) Don't be surprised if an anti-gun nut like Sebelius uses this line of thinking to impose ObamaCare policies which result in a back-door gun ban on any American who owns "dangerous" firearms.
After all, insurers already (and routinely) drop homeowners from their policies for owning certain types of guns or for refusing to use trigger locks (that is, for keeping their guns ready for self-defense!). While not all insurers practice this anti-gun behavior, Gun Owners of America has documented that some do -- Prudential and State Farm being two of the most well-known.
The good news is that because homeowner insurance is private (and is still subject to the free market) you can go to another company if one drops you. But what are you going to do under nationalized ObamaCare when the regulations written by Secretary Sebelius suspend the applicability of your government-mandated policy because of your gun ownership?
Remember, the federal government has already denied more than 150,000 military veterans the right to own guns, without their being convicted of a crime or receiving any due process of law. They were denied because of medical information (such as PTSD) that the FBI later determined disqualified these veterans to own guns.
Is this what we need on a national level being applied to every gun owner in America?
Incidentally, failure to comply would subject the average family to $1,500 in fines -- and possibly more for a household with older teens. And, although a Schumer amendment purports to exempt Americans from prison sentences for non-purchase of an ObamaPolicy -- something which was never at issue -- it doesn't prohibit them from being sent to prison for a year and fined an additional $25,000 under the Internal Revenue Code for non-payment of the initial fines.
http://capwiz.com/gunowners/issues/alert/?alertid=14152471
menace:
President Obama's credibility was dealt another blow yesterday, by a fellow Democrat who broke Obama's phony pledge to Congress that "No federal dollars will be used to fund abortions." Now both the House and Senate versions fund elective abortions, making Obama's words more untrue than when he first spoke them.
The "new and improved" Senate plan released by Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) not only directly funds some abortions, it also dramatically increases the number of babies likely to be killed by ELECTIVE abortion using tax-dollars and federal funds. Abortions that were not previously funded but will now be funded include, at least, killing children in cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother. (The life exception is sometimes valid, but never should an innocent child be killed just because its father happens to be a criminal.) Yet the new Baucus funding also covers elective abortions of convenience, as confirmed by U.S. News and World Report quoting National Right To Life:
"The [Baucus] bill contains provisions that would send massive federal subsidies directly to both private insurance plans and government-chartered cooperatives that pay for elective abortion. This would be a drastic break from longstanding federal policy, under which federal funds do not [yet] pay for elective abortions or subsidize health plans that cover elective abortions. For example, current law prohibits any of the over 250 private health plans that participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) program from paying for elective abortions, because these plans receive federal subsidies. These private plans cover over 8 million federal employees and dependents, including members of Congress." [But that restriction is effectively overturned by the Baucus bill.]
According to Focus On The Family Action, under the Baucus bill:
* $6 billion would go for health insurance cooperatives, which would be permitted to cover abortion.
* Abortions permitted under the Hyde Amendment would be mandated under the minimum benefits package [of the Baucus bill].
* Tax credits and cost-sharing credits could be re-labeled to pay for abortion under private premiums.
Ashley Horne, federal policy analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said despite the White House's stance that there will be no abortion funding in any health-care bill, both the House and Senate versions mandate such funding. "We don't care about rhetoric when it comes to protecting innocent, preborn lives," she said. "We care about results."
Over 50 young people prayed with me in Washington DC during our all-night "27 hours of Prayer" vigil on the West Lawn of the Capitol Sunday night, with national pro-life leaders like Pat Mahoney and Chris Slattery, and we prayed specifically that abortion funding would be struck from the President's health care bill.
At first, I was encouraged, hoping that God had answered our prayers, when Senator Baucus promised that abortion funding would not be mandated in his "new and improved" version of the Senate bill. But upon further inspection, I was horrified.
Time Magazine now confirms: "Under the Baucus plan, like the House plan, certain individuals would get government subsidies to help buy private insurance in a publicly-established exchanges. There would be a guaranteed choice in each health insurance exchange between at least one plan that does not offer abortion services beyond rape, incest and the life of the mother, and at least one plan that does, allowing consumers to choose their preference."
In other words, if you couldn't afford an abortion yesterday, it will be free tomorrow, so long as you simply choose the right plan, tax-payers will fund your abortion, even elective abortions of convenience, above and beyond the cases of rape, incest, and life. Ironically President Obama will sign a bill that fulfills Margaret Sanger's racist vision to exterminate poor children, many of whom will be African-American, through abortion.
By creating an "accounting scheme" child-killing providers must pretend "to segregate funds internally, so that only private dues, and not federal subsidies, pay for actual abortion services," but they are not required to increase the co-pay, so the abortion is essentially free to the young woman who receives federal dollars to electively kill her child, or costs the same as any other doctor's office visit.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN PETITION, AND WE WILL FAX ALL 52 "BLUE-DOG" DEMOCRATS IN THE HOUSE, AND ALL 100 SENATORS, TO OPPOSE OBAMACARE.
Congressman Joe Wilson (R-SC) issued an apology after his outburst, "you lie," toward President Obama during his health care speech to Congress on Wednesday. "I let my emotions get the best of me," Wilson said in a statement. "I extend sincere apologies to the president." We commend Wilson for his quick humility. But questions remain:
Did Obama tell lies during the speech? Was Wilson right after all? And why doesn't Obama apologize just as quickly for calling conservatives liars? In their fact-checking, the press confirmed FIVE WHOPPERS told by the President himself:
OBAMA LIE #1: "No federal dollars will be used to fund abortions."
THE TRUTH: The Capps Amendment to HR 3200 has a Section 4B that reads: "Abortions for Which Public Funding Is Allowed. -- The services described in this subparagraph are abortions for which the expenditure of Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services is permitted." The Washington Times reported: "You can't get more explicit than that." And FactCheck.org exposed Obama's lie too: "Despite what Obama said, the House bill would allow abortions to be covered by a federal plan and by federally subsidized private plans." So President Obama lied, plain and simple.
OBAMA LIE #2: "I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits either now or in the future. Period."
THE TRUTH: The Democrat controlled Congressional Budget Office said Obamacare would add $220 billion to the deficit over 10 years, but will not succeed at shrinking the overall costs of our nation's health care. Republicans claim it's more like $600 billion increased deficit spending. (Confirmed by Associated Press, 9 Sep 09.) Either way, Obama lied.
OBAMA LIE #3: "Don't pay attention to those scary stories about how your benefits will be cut...That will never happen on my watch. I will protect Medicare."
THE TRUTH: The Washington Post reports Obama proposes "to squeeze more than $500 billion out of the growth of Medicare over the next decade....[which has] fueled fears that his effort to expand coverage to millions of younger, uninsured Americans will damage elder care. As a result, barely one-third of seniors support a health-care overhaul, several polls found." (Washington Post, 9 Aug 09) Even the Post admits, Obama lied.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN PETITION, AND WE WILL FAX ALL 52 "BLUE-DOG" DEMOCRATS IN THE HOUSE, AND ALL 100 SENATORS, TO OPPOSE OBAMACARE.
OBAMA LIE #4: "If you lose your job or change your job, you will be able to get coverage."
THE TRUTH: Whether working or not, rich or poor, you will be ordered to get mandatory government-run health-care coverage, or pay a fine a $3800 fine per family, under the new Senate plan being railroaded through the finance committee by Max Baucus (D-MT). (New York Times, 9 Sep 09). Obama pretends you're "able" to get coverage, when he knows it's mandatory (with a big tax increase or "fine" penalty). Obama lied. But the biggest of all...
OBAMA LIE #5: "The claim, made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts, but prominent politicians, that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens, such a charge would be laughable if it weren't so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain and simple."
THE TRUTH: Mandatory "end of life" counseling in HR 3200 "shall" include counseling every 5 years to the elderly, giving doctors a monetary incentive to persuade you to sign a "do not resuscitate" (DNR) order to pull the plug on Grandma, just like the Obama administration already pressures all Veterans to sign them. (Confirmed by the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, read extensive details at www.prayinjesusname.org.) And under the British NHS government-run health plan, "Patients with terminal illnesses are being made to die prematurely under an NHS scheme to help end their lives, leading doctors have warned." (The Daily Telegraph, 2 Sep 09). Dr. Ewing Cook just admitted intentionally killing patients who signed DNR authorizations during Hurricane Katrina. "I gave her medicine so I could get rid of her faster...there's no question I hastened her demise." Bottom line: Grandma, don't sign Obama's DNR order, even if your doctor gets a bonus check from the President for talking you into that.
Obama lied at least five times during his speech.
Send Congress Faxes to Oppose Obamacare
http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3403168:4828056525:m:1:110130666:1DD909F416EA1EA4A3DBAA596C706329
menace:
Tell Congress to REJECT Obama's Socialized Health Care
http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3324030:4629635850:m:1:110130666:160539E7DCB0039C5DE1296CCF23C375
Guess Who Rejects The Most Claims?
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2009/10/06/deny-guess-who-has-highest-medical-claim-rejection-rate
menace:
Robert Reich, Clinton’s Secretary of Labor and avid Obama supporter, wants to deny health care to old folks. They’re too expensive. He also told an audience in 2007 that most people will not live longer than their parents. Again, too expensive. He wants to force medical technology corporations to stop developing new life-saving technology.
Reich, of course, supports the so-called “public option,” the government’s take-over of the health care industry. In order to push the Obamacare scam, Reich proposed a march on Washington by the liberals to demand the public option. He wanted to do this on Grandparents Day, September 13.
Reich wanted people to march in favor of a plan that would mandate old people die on a day set aside for old people. You can’t make this stuff up.
Mr. Reich’s pronouncement is yet another confirmation that the government wants to kill old people who are after all — according to our eugenicist rulers — nothing if not useless eaters.
Democrats and liberals went ballistic when Sarah Palin mentioned the fact that the government wants to use the “level of productivity in society” as the basis for determining access to medical care. This Darwinian and Malthusian concept is supported by Dr. Ezekial Emanuel, brother of Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and White House health care policy adviser.
Emanuel does not use the term “death panels” and the term does not appear in the Obamacare bill. That would be political suicide. Instead he argues in favor of “The Complete Lives System,” a system that “produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.”
In 1996, Emanuel said health care should be rationed for those who are not “participating citizens,” that is to say the old, the infirm, and those suffering from irreversible medical conditions.
As a good liberal, Emanuel would like to avoid the perception that he proposes killing old people simply because they are old — that would be “ageist” — and instead argues that they have used up their “life-years” and basically need to get out of the way and stop using up precious medical resources.
Robert Reich reduces the academic gobbledygook of Emanuel’s “Complete Lives System” down to language the average person can understand. In the above video, he spells it out — the government will intervene in medical decisions made by you and your family. Grand daddy is a burden on society and has nothing left to contribute because he no longer works and pays half or more of his income to the government in the form of confiscatory taxes.
The sad and frightening thing is, when Reich told the audience they will have to die, they applauded.
http://www.infowars.com/robert-reich-on-health-care-old-people-have-to-die/
Anti_Illuminati:
Quote from: Anti_Illuminati on October 08, 2009, 01:22:47 AM
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/10/07/congress%E2%80%99-secret-plan-to-pass-obamacare-confirmed/
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message895597/pg1
Leaders in the House and Senate have a plan to pass President Barack Obama’s sweeping health care plan by Thanksgiving without any significant participation by the American public. CNS News has confirmed the details in our September 22nd titled “Passing a Shell of A Bill: Congress’ Secret Plan to Ram Through Health Care Reform.” Nicholas Ballasy reports “a senior aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) told CNSNews.com that it is ‘likely’ that Reid will use H.R. 1586—a bill passed by the House in March to impose a 90-percent tax on bonuses paid to employees of certain bailed-out financial institutions—as a ‘shell’ for enacting the final version of the Senate’s health care bill, which Reid is responsible for crafting.”
This story confirms the four part scenario that would railroad the bill through the Senate using a very unusual closed door procedure to craft the bill with no input from the American people.
The four stage plan to pass Obamacare has been publicly confirmed and is ready to be implemented. The following is a comprehensive update:
Step One: “The Senate Finance Committee will finish work on the marking up of Senator Max Baucus’ (D-MT) conceptual framework for legislation by this Friday.” Progress on this had been stalled and the bill was not passed by the end of last week. Foxnews.com is reporting that the Congressional Budget Office score of the bill will be released later today and a high score may further stall progress on the Committee’s Vapor Bill. Senate Finance Committee’s progress on passing something out of committee – INCOMPLETE.
Step Two: Next, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will take the final product of the Senate Finance Committee and merge it with the product of the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions (HELP) Committee. CNSnews.com has confirmed that “the actual final text of the legislation will be determined by Reid himself, who will consolidate the legislation approved by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee and the still-unapproved legislation from the Senate Finance Committee. Reid will be able to draft and insert textual language that was not expressly approved by either committee.” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will write the final version of Obamacare to be considered in the Senate with no input from the American people. This is an extremely complex procedure that will not be done in public, or in the form of a hearing, or a public conference committee, and only Senator Harry Reid, some other Senators chosen by Reid and Obama Administration officials will be allowed to read the bill before the Senate debate starts. Merger of the bills – IN PROGRESS.
Step Three: Senator Reid will then move to proceed to H.R. 1586, a bill to impose a tax on bonuses received by certain TARP recipients. A senior aid to Senate Majority Leader Ried has confirmed that he will move to proceed to Senate Calendar Number 36, H.R. 1586, or another House passed tax measure, so the Senate can avoid the Constitutional mandate that tax bills originate in the House. Proceed to tax shell of a bill – CONFIRMED.
Step Four: This scenario would most likely be implemented after the Massachusetts state legislature gives Governor Deval Patrick the power to appoint a new Senator and that Senator is seated by the Senate. The Senate swore in new Massachusetts Senator Paul Kirk on September 25th. Change Law of Massachusetts to allow for interim Senator – COMPLETE.
The final step in this plan is for the House to take up Obama care, without amending the legislation, and then sending that bill directly to the President for his signature. Matt Cover at CNSnews.com reports “House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) won’t rule out having the House vote on the Senate health-care bill without making any changes in it, which would allow the bill to go directly to President Barack Obama without having to pass through a House-Senate conference committee and another round of votes in the House and Senate–and a longer period of public scrutiny of what the text of the proposed law actually says.” This scenario is in the process of being implemented and, if successful, it will result in Obamacare being on the President’s desk in time for Thansgiving with minimal participation of the American public.
The San Francisco Examiner published an editorial today that exposed the fact that the American people can’t see the bill. “When then-Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama promised not to sign major legislation until it had been posted on the Internet for public reading at least five days, trusting voters took him at his word. Now they know better. Not only is the actual language of what is likely to become the main legislative vehicle for Obama’s signature health care reform not available on the Internet, it hasn’t been given to members of the key Senate committees or the Congressional Budget Office.” The procedure being used, in addition to the exclusion of the American people from the process, should be of grave concern to all who want to participate in democracy and have a say in Congress’ health care reforms that will touch 1/6th of the American economy.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page