Article Archives by Subject:  Medicine

Obama Lies
My Agenda
Subject: The Ends Justify the Means
From Wikipedia:

The Big Lie is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, about the use of a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously."
"All this was inspired by the principle--which is quite true within itself—that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.

Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Volume I, Chapter X

Most contemporary politicians have learned to engage in the technique of the Big Lie as a routine part of their day-to-day speech. But President Obama is a master practitioner, surpassed by no one. Whether he is promising the voters that his administration would:

or he is:

he does it with a straight face, often accompanied by a wagging finger and condescending glare.

Amidst all of these falsehoods there is a new one that has been bothering me of late. Everyone is talking about Obama's oft repeated lie that if you wanted to keep your current heath insurance, you could. It is then reported that many people with individual policies are now receiving termination notices from their carriers, but that these cancellations amounts to only a small percentage of the insured — typically somewhere between 5-15% of the total. This itself is another Big Lie, intended to deceive the public into believing that this was only a small problem with the law.

However, the truth is that the vast majority of all insured people are having their policies canceled! It is just that the rest of the people get their group insurance through some third-party such as their employer. Nevertheless, every one of those group-based policies is also being canceled and the group administrators have been forced to negotiate new policies in their place. Just because the end users don't observe what is going on behind the scene, doesn't make this any less real.

How could it be otherwise? The new legislation imposes untold numbers of new requirements on the health care industry, and new policies would be required in order to meet the conditions of the law. All of this was perfectly foreseeable from the very first day that this new nationalization of health care started to be discussed. It was crystal clear that this would be the case when Obamacare was passed. And it was known to every human on the planet who had their eyes open, every time Obama guaranteed that it was not true.

Therefore, it is extremely aggravating to see people act surprised that policies are being canceled, or hear them say that it affects only a small percentage of people, or watch them profess to be shocked that Obama lied to them! Of course he lied! He always lies. For Barack Obama, the ends always justify the means. What's more saddening is how few have come to understand what his end game actually is.

Randy Newman wrote a wonderful song (slightly modified here in the pursuit of accuracy) that does a great job of expressing the essence of Obama and his manifest disregard for truth and integrity.

Big Hat, No Cattle   —   By Randy Newman

Since I was a child
I've tried to be what I'm not
I've lied and I've enjoyed it all my life
I lied to my dear mother
to my sisters and my brother
and now I'm lying to my children and my wife
Big Hat, no cattle
Big head, no brain
Big snake, no rattle
I forever remain
big hat, no cattle
I knew from the start
Big boat, no paddle
Big belly, no heart

Can't remember why I do it,
Oh, maybe I can.
An honest man these days is hard to find.
I only know we're living in an unforgiving land.
And a little lie can buy some real big piece of mind.

Oftimes I wondered what might I have become,
Had I but buckled down and really tried.
But when it came down to the wire
I called the country to my side
Stood up straight, threw my head back and I lied, lied, lied

Big hat, no cattle
Big shoes, well you know...
Big horse, no saddle
He goes wherever I go

Big hat, no cattle
Right from the start
Big guns, no battle
Big belly, no heart

When it came down to the wire
I called the country to my side
Stood up straight, threw my head back and I lied, lied, lied
lied, lied, lied

Big hat, no cattle
Big head, no brain
Big snake, no rattle
I forever remain
Big hat, no cattle
I knew from the start
Big boat, no paddle
Big belly, no heart
Big boat, no paddle
Big belly, no heart


Nancy Pelosi
Subject: How to Solve the Housing Crisis - Government Style

Well, take a look at this article in the Spokesman Review titled, Health law's heavy impact" for a review of some of the taxes you will soon be experiencing as a result of that legislation. Of particular note is the new 3.8% tax on real estate transactions. This means that if you buy/sell a $300,000 home, you will pay a tax of $11,400, and if the home goes for $750,000, the tax will be $28,500. And remember, this is on top of all the current real estate taxes that are already being imposed. If you are young and mobile in your career, this is a tax that will hit you every time you relocate.

Or maybe you are older and were thinking of retiring to a new location. Open up your wallet, because all real estate throughout the country will immediately increase in cost by about 4%. Or possibly you are in business and are thinking about expanding your growing practice by moving into a new facility that will cost $30 million. You new tax would then be a whopping $1,140,000. Yes, that ought to make you think twice about that move.

Given our current housing crisis, with an oversupply of homes that is killing the entire construction industry, can you think of a worse idea for addressing these problems than to increase the cost of all homes by a huge amount, pricing more people out of the housing market and further reducing demand. As Cloud Downey also noted, the immediate impact will be to further flood the market with home sales, as owners attempt to sell before the tax kicks in. And reviewing the overall state of the economy, with so many businesses struggling to stay afloat, consider how damaging a new tax of this magnitude will be, making capital investment that much more difficult and retarding any latent recovery.

Is there still a person out there who can state with a straight face, that when it comes to managing the economy and the lives of each of us, that the government is qualified to make intelligent choices that are in the best interest of the citizens? If there is such a person, then my response is the same one Joe Wilson gave to Obama: "You lie!"

[Thanks to Cloud Downey for bringing this article to my attention.]


Shut Up!
Subject: Obama's Full Frontal Attack on Free Speech

Today, in the Wall Street Journal, two articles discuss the immediate effect of the new health care legislation. In ObamaCare Day One, we hear about companies like Caterpillar, which is reporting a first year cost of $100 million or more in order to comply with the new regulations. In another article titled The ObamaCare Writedowns, it is reported that government-mandated accounting rules require corporations to immediately restate earning to reflect the present value of their long-term health care liabilities and taxes. In response to that requirement, today AT&T took a one billion dollar writedown. Other companies reporting health care related losses include: Deere & Co, ($150 million); 3M Corporation ($90 million); AK Steel ($31 million); Valero Energy ($20 million). The consulting firm Towers Watson is estimating that the total for all businesses may reach as high as $14 billion.

What does this mean? It means that the U.S. economy just lost another 14 billion dollars. That's $14 billion that will not be available for capital investment or research. $14 billion that is now unavailable for business expansion and new jobs creation. $14 billion that will never make it into the wallets of workers. That's $14 billion real dollars, created through productive work — not paper money simply run off the government's printing presses.

However, if that were not bad enough, just like kangaroo*, the President and his congressional cohorts are "hopping mad at this sort of talk!" How dare anyone say a bad word about their amazing technicolor gift to us all? Gary Locke, the Commerce Secretary, said that companies having the gaul to report such gigantic costs were being "irresponsible". And Representative Henry Waxman announced that in response, the Democrats are going to haul the heads of these businesses before a House panel and grill them on their statements. This is nothing more than a blatant attempt to silence the CEOs through intimidation. In other words, its an all out attack on their free speech. And it's getting to be routine.

We saw Ken Lewis, CEO of Bank of America, silenced after being made the scapegoat for the Merrill Lynch fiasco. We've seen the automotive executives hauled before Congress, making it clear that they were to quietly comply with the government's nationalization of their industry—or else. Medical and insurance companies where threatened with punishment and placated with bribes to silence their opposition to the health care legislation. And when the medical device makers refused to go along, Congress slapped huge new taxes on them to make sure that everybody else got the point. Just another "teachable moment" for the Obama administration.

The main stream media has become nothing more than a propaganda tool for the administration, self-censoring any troublesome story including Climategate, ACORN, Anita Dunn's Mao comments, Van Jones, to name a few. Then there is Cass Sunstein, Obama's regulatory czar, who, in his book On Rumors, has proposed making internet blogs and hosting sites responsible for the remarks of posters, allowing the government and others to censor and demand deletion of objectionable "false rumors", or else be sued. Congress has threatened the reimposition of the "fairness doctrine" as a means of muting the voice of conservative commentators. And Representative Linda T. Sanchez introduced bill H.R.1966 in the House stating:
    Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

Chilling open ended language like this could be used to silence anyone. Who is to say what qualifies as "substantial emotional distress"? And there is S.733, the Cybersecurity Act, sponsored by John Rockefeller, which anoints the President with the authority to shutdown the entire internet in the event of a "cybersecurity emergency", the definition of which is left entirely to his discretion. Legislation such as this empowers the President with the ability to stop all citizens from effectively communicating with one another with the wave of a hand.

The assault on our free speech is a clear and present danger, with this administration constantly testing the water to determine just what they can get away with. And given how the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act was just snuck through as a rider on the health care legislation, don't put it past this administration to try something similar with other controversial legislation that threatens your other rights.

Stay alert. No one else is looking out for your interests.

* "Kangaroo were hopping mad at this sort of talk. She thought herself far superior in intelligence to the others. She was their leader; their guru. She had the answer."   [Remind you of anyone?]
The Story Of The Hare Who Lost His Spectacles, by Jethro Tull


Comrade Castro
Subject: You Know You're in Good Company When You Get Fidel Castro's Endorsement

Well, I think we can all feel better now knowing that Fidel Castro has given his approval for the passage of ObamaCare. We have certainly moved a big step closer to finally achieving the quality of health care that Cubans receive, and is the envy of the world. To see what your future may hold, take a look at this site or this site. Yes, we really have to thank Michael Moore for his objective reporting, letting us know the truth.

And another measure of just how good the new health care system will be can be seen by the following, as reported in The Wall Street Journal:
    Congressional leaders apparently not only made quid pro quos with congressmen who voted for ObamaCare, but also with congressional staff who crafted the legislation.

    A key loophole is how the bill defines "congressional staff" as "employees employed by the official office of a member of Congress, whether in the district office or in Washington." ...

    But the loophole exempts high-level leadership and committee staffers. For example, staffers who work in Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's Nevada Senate office would be required to join. Those who work under him as Senate Majority Leader would not. In their own cases at least, key staffers obviously were prepared to make sure President Obama kept his promise that those happy with their current coverage can keep it.

Yes, it's a Brave New World.


John Dingell
Subject: What is the Health Care Legislation Really All About?

In a radio interview, discussing the new health care legislation, Michigan Representative John Dingell made the following statement:
"it takes a long time to do the necessary
administrative steps that have to be taken
to put the legislation together


And that, Charlie Brown, is what health care legislation is all about.

Of course, if you're keeping track at home, we've known this all along, as we discussed previously here, among many other posts.

Subject: 20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms

To get a quick overview of how pervasively the new health care legislation will reach into your pockets and exercise control over your life, read the article, 20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms by David Hogberg.

Then get out your wallets and onto your feet and do what you can to fight back against those, whether in Washington or living next door, who have demonstrated a total lack of respect for your constitutional rights and wish to enslave you in service of their desires. These people are not your friends, and they are only just getting started.


Medically Incorrect
Subject: It's Not "Health Care Reform", It's "Government Reform

In a Medically Incorrect video clip at PJTV, Dr. Peter Weiss demonstrates why the average conservative cannot be entrusted to man the battle stations in defense of our individual rights when it comes to most issues, including health care.

Dr. Weiss argues for an alternative to the Democrat's health care legislation by proposing the following:
  • Limiting the Direct-To-Consumer advertising that drug companies are allowed, thereby overriding their First Amendment rights, immediately on the heals of the recent Supreme Court ruling that just reaffirmed them.

  • Force drug companies to sell product directly to the government rather than having it buy on the open market. (It's unclear exactly what this would entail.)

  • Since government is funding the majority of drug research, price controls on resulting drug products is justified in order to eliminate "price gouging" of the taxpayer.

  • Force drug re-importation to be allowed, overriding the drug companies right to conduct business as they see fit.

  • Promote (how?) private, free-market drug research - but only with "safeguards", "limitations" and "rewards".

So, as is often the case in the give-and-take between progressives and conservatives, the battle is not government control vs. free-markets and rights, but simply an argument over exactly what form the government controls will take, with your freedom flushed down the toilet in either case.

I think it is important to get our priorities straight on the health care issue. We need to be telling the conservative Republicans who are opposing the Democrat's health care legislation that we don't expect or want them to propose their own alternative version of health care reform. Government has no business being involved in the health care business at all. What we need and want from the Republicans is "Government Reform". They should be doing one thing, and one thing only, and that is working to repeal every piece of existing legislation that regulates, or otherwise interferes with the free market operation of the insurance, medical and drug industries. By continuing to call this "health care reform", we implicitly cede to the government our consent that it is all right for them to be thinking about health care at all. It's not, and this video clip demonstrates exactly why.

The bills we require do not involve 2,000+ pages of exposition. They only requires a single sentence which identifies an existing piece of offending legislation and retires it. The solution to the problem of excessive medical costs is to get the government completely out of the picture. Stop the government from funding medical research completely, and private industry will perform that function, just as it once did. Eliminate regulations on these industries and free-market competition will expand choices and reduce medical costs, just as it does in every other unregulated industry.

Contact your legislators and let them know we demand "Government Reform". Period.


US Congress
Subject: An Open Letter to Congress on Health Care

I have just read an article in the New York Times which indicates that this weekend, President Obama is planning to send health care legislation to Congress, designed to be attached to a budget bill, and rammed through the Senate using the now widely publicized scam known as "budget reconciliation".

After everything that has been said and written about this issue, I find this action truly unbelievable!

Did Washington not receive the clear message that we the people sent to all of you with the recent election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts? If not, let me repeat it for you once again:

We don't want the house version of the health care legislation. We don't want the senate version of the health care legislation. We don't want the President's version of health care legislation. We don't want the Democrat's version of health care legislation. We don't want the Republican's version of health care legislation.


We don't want the government controlling our lives and we don't want you interfering with the personal medical decision that we choose to make in consultation with our doctors. We don't want to be forced to obtain health insurance under penalty of fines and/or jail. We don't want our health providers and insurance companies to be regulated, forced to act against their own best professional interests, any more than we wish that upon ourselves. We don't want any new taxes. And we certainly don't want another huge financial liability imposed upon productive Americans, who already shoulder the unreasonable burden that you and your fellow legislators have placed there with a $12.4 trillion debt and a shiny new $3.8 trillion budget.

Now, this draconian legislation that will cost trillions of additional dollars, is supposed to be added to a budget bill as though it were just another typical pork-barrel earmark! And this from the President that pledged to reform earmarks and make "his administration the most open and transparent in history." I hope that this is not a process that you are seriously considering supporting. Instead, you should be doing everything within your power to stop this abomination dead in its tracks.

I'm watching, and so are millions of other concerned Americans all across the nation. And each day, with each new insult that emanates from Washington D.C., thousands more join our ranks. Most of us are simple citizens who would much rather be tending to our daily lives, but instead have been drawn onto the political stage by a steady stream of audacious actions so abusive to our individual rights, and so far outside the constitutional scope and powers granted to the federal government, that we are compelled to act. Through the growing Tea Party movement we are organizing, and as was just witnessed in MA, we will produce results.

The choice you face is simple: you must decide what you intend to do in response to our growing numbers and strength. You can commit political suicide by charging ahead, supporting this legislation in the belief that your election to Congress has somehow granted you the right to force your wishes upon the American public against their will. Or you can sit on the sidelines, trying to remain unnoticed as this bill is pushed forward. Unfortunately, that's an old political tactic that no longer works under the new Tea Party reality, and this cowardly approach will have you targeted as well. Or you can stand up and loudly proclaim your opposition to this legislation on constitutional grounds. By taking a vocal, principled stand in service of the rights of every citizen you were elected to represent, you can transform yourself into a hero of the new political movement that is prepared to sweep across the national landscape. Make your choice -- or the choice will be made for you.

C. Jeffery Small


The Christian
Science Monitor
Subject: Too Fat To Fail!

An article by Paul Hsieh in The Christian Science Monitor titled Universal healthcare and the waistline police starts out:
    Imagine a country where the government regularly checks the waistlines of citizens over age 40. Anyone deemed too fat would be required to undergo diet counseling. Those who fail to lose sufficient weight could face further "reeducation" and their communities subject to stiff fines.

    Is this some nightmarish dystopia?

    No, this is contemporary Japan.

    The Japanese government argues that it must regulate citizens' lifestyles because it is paying their health costs.

This is the fate in store for all Americans if we fail to stop the current health care legislation from passing, for if it does, the government will finally have a very powerful tools at its disposal, allowing it to reach into the personal lives of each citizen and control our actions as it sees fit.

Paul concludes:
    Just as universal healthcare will further fuel the nanny state, the nanny state mind-set helps fuel the drive toward universal healthcare. Individuals aren't regarded as competent to decide how to manage their lives and their health. So the government provides "cradle to grave" coverage of their healthcare.

    Nanny state regulations and universal healthcare thus feed a vicious cycle of increasing government control over individuals. Both undermine individual responsibility and habituate citizens to ever-worsening erosions of their individual rights. Both promote dependence on government. Both undermine the virtues of independence and rationality. Both jeopardize the very foundations of a free society.

    The American Founding Fathers who fought and died for our freedoms would be appalled to know their descendants were allowing the government to dictate what they could eat and drink. The Founders correctly understood that the proper role of government is to protect individual rights and otherwise leave men free to live — not tell us how many eggs we should eat.

    If we still value our freedoms, we must reject both the nanny state and universal healthcare. Otherwise, it won't be long before the "Waistline Police" come knocking on our doors.

Read the entire article.

Paul has it exactly right, except that I would challenge him on one important point. By categorizing our government as a "nanny state", he makes the common error of giving the benefit of the doubt to the government by assuming that its motives are all directed in our best interest. Nothing could be further from the truth!

Our president and members of Congress know nothing at all about you and your unique circumstances, and could care less about your personal wellbeing. They have no interest in being you caregiver. That is simply a convenient fiction to conceal their true intent, which is to gain control over your actions and direct your life in service of their agenda. And their agenda is nothing more than raw, naked power. To them, you are merely a natural resource to be mined until your productive vein runs dry. Look at all recent actions taken or proposed by the government and identify the common denominator as it pertains to the American public:
    Warrantless Wiretaps? Control!
    Declaration of Carbon Dioxide as a Pollutant? Control!
    Outlawing Student Loans from Private Institutions? Control!
    TARP Bailouts - with Strings Attached? Control!
    Nationalization of the Housing Loan Industry? Control!
    Nationalization of the Automotive Industry? Control!
    Nationalization of the Financial Industry? Control!
    Nationalization of the Insurance Industry? Control!
    Nationalization of the Medical Industry? Control!
    Nationalization of the Energy Industry? Control!
    Mandatory Community Service for All School Children? Control!
    Proposed Mandatory National Service for All Citizens? Control!

And the list goes on. This is on top of the government having already nationalized the education, utilities and transportation industries, and heavily regulating the agriculture, manufacturing and pharmaceutical sectors, to name but a few. Where once we were a free people in a free country, able to pursue our lives in whatever manner we chose, so long as we didn't violate the rights of others, today our lives are so managed that it is extremely difficult to find some area where an individual may act without first seeking permission, paying a tax, or worrying that some agency might come behind and judge those actions to have been in violation of one of the unfathomable number of regulations that have been enacted.

Don't oppose health care reform because it is bad medicine. Fight it for all you are worth because it is you personal freedom — and the freedom of all of your family members — that is at stake. And that is something worth fighting for!
Barack Obama Barney Frank Nancy Pelosi Christopher Dodd
Do These People Really Have Your Best Interests at Heart?

[Thanks to Cloud Downy for bringing this article to my attention.]


New York Post
Subject: ObamaCare vs. the Constitution

As readers of this blog are aware, I have long argued that the agenda of the current administration is nothing less than an all-out assault on the most fundamental principles of the U.S. Constitution. As one example in support of this position, consider the recent article by Betsy McCaughey in the New York Post, titled, ObamaCare vs. the Constitution, which highlights five specific way that the congressional health care bill "rob you of your constitutional rights." Here is a quick summary of the issues identified:
  1. Section 3403 of the Senate health bill establishes a commission to cut Medicare spending, and proclaims that the law cannot be changed or repealed by future legislators! In this way, the Senate attempts to assign dictatorial powers to its own actions.

  2. There is a $100 million allocation to an unnamed "academic health center" meating certain "qualifications". It turns out that those "qualifications" result in the money going to Chris Dodd's University of Connecticut. This is nothing more than an attempt to slip the provision past the public by outright deception.

  3. The requirement forcing every U.S. citizen to purchase health insurance is a clear violation of the powers allocated to Congress by the Constitution.

  4. The legislation mandates enrollment in an insurance plan that dictates that doctors are only paid if they act as directed by the government, thereby imposing the government directly between the doctor and patient. There is no constitutional authority for the government to intercede in this manner.

  5. The legislation caps private insurance company profit margins below current levels, which is a taking of the property of the business owners and shareholders without just compensation.

It is critically important that we make an understanding of, and adherence to the U.S. Constitution, the cornerstone of all future political activity. Every candidate must be grilled on this, proving that they have a working understanding of the constitutional guarantee for the individual rights of each citizens. They must demonstrate their recognition of the constitutional constraints and limitations placed upon each branch of government. And they must prove that they are dedicated to actively protecting our rights and adhering to those limitations in every one of their political acts. Every piece of congressional legislation, and every action by the executive branch, must be explicitly validated on constitutional authority.

In this way, the citizens of this country can once again assert their proper relationship to their government, and reign in the abuses that have grown over the past one hundred years.


Doctors Vote
Subject: What do doctors think about government control of health care?

If you are a doctor, then I encourage you to visit the Doctors Vote website and complete the short survey. Let everyone know where you stand on the important issue of health care reform legislation, and what impact passage of that legislation will have upon you.


The Declaration
of Independence
Subject: The Second American Revolution: It's Time To Make Your Stand

Today, Ben Nelson, the senator from Nebraska, declared that he is going to support the Senate's health care bill as the 60th member of a Democratic coalition that has no Republican support. As reported in The Huffington Post:
    "The Nevada Democrat [Harry Reid] agreed to a series of concessions on abortion and other issues demanded by Nelson"

Other concessions? What could those be?
    "The Nebraskan [Nelson] also won increased federal funds to cover his state's cost of covering an expanded Medicaid population at a cost that one Democratic official put at $45 million over a decade"

So taxpayers in other states will now also pick up the cost of expanded health care for Nebraska's residents similar to provisions that Harry Reid managed to write into the bill for Nevada citizens. Well, why not? It's all in keeping with the Obama administration's master plan for wealth redistribution. You still have some wealth left, and therefore it obviously needs to be redistributed to others. But is that the only last minute piece of pork added to the bill? Of course not.
    "Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., claimed credit for a last-minute, $10 billion increase in funding for community health centers nationwide"

    "Another provision in Reid's changes provides additional federal funding for hospitals in Montana, North Dakota, Wyoming and the Dakotas, although no cost estimate was available."

    "The revised bill also calls for a .9 percent increase in the Medicare payroll tax on incomes over $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples. Reid's earlier bill had a smaller hike, .5 percent."

    "The bill also taxes high-cost insurance plans"

Read Robert Tracinski's article, You Will Lose Your Private Health Insurance for a concise summary of the true implications and impact of the final legislation that will soon be voted on once the House and Senate bills are reconciled.

With the imminent passage of the health care legislation, it is finally time to take a firm and uncompromising stand. As was stated over 233 years ago in The Declaration of Independence:
    "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, ..."

    [Emphasis added]

Unlike the TARP bailouts, and other incursions into the US economy, which, with stretched-to-the-limit incredulity, might charitably be credited as horribly misguided efforts with underlying good intent, no such claim could possibly be made for the Congressional health care bills. These are nothing more than a naked power-grab, granting to the government a significant increase in the direct control over the personal lives and decisions of every in America, intentionally destroying individual liberty.

It is time to choose a side of the single greatest issue facing America, and declare your allegiance either to tyranny or to freedom.

The time for the Second American Revolution is now at hand. It is up to every freedom-loving person to commit all of their intellectual, physical and financial resources to the cause of liberty. We must retake control of a government which no longer represents us - or else, we must abolish it. As we have seen demonstrated time after time over the past year, the opportunity for reasoned debate with the opposition has long since passed and the moment has arrived to pull out all of the stops and take forceful action on every possible front.

Remember Ayn Rand's observation:
    "Evil is impotent and has no power but that which we let it extort from us"

Those committed to destroying the US Constitution and enslaving all of us into serving their tyrannical ends will only succeed if we stand by and allow them to do so. Recognizing this fact, it is up to us to mount counter efforts. While new opportunities for action are being organized and put into effect all across the country, there are many things that can be done immediately. Here are some suggestions:
  • Step up your efforts to write and phone the White House and all members of Congress. Commit a certain amount of time each week to write new letters and make repeated calls to the most deserving politicians. Don't tell them that you disagree with their policies — tell them that you're mad as hell and you're not going to take it any longer! Let them know in no uncertain terms that the gloves are coming off and that you are going to do everything in your power to dismantle the corrupt machinery of government and take back your constitutionally guaranteed rights to your life, liberty and property. When they are receiving this message from thousands of people all across the country, they are going to get very nervous. Make it your personal mission to make Nancy Pelosi cry. And don't stop with her! Contact information for all congressional members can be found at Congress Merge.

  • Write articles and letters-to-the-editor of your local paper expressing your outrage over the constitutional transgressions being exercised by Congress and the President. Help transition the political dialog in country away from less important issues of specific tax or legislative proposals to the critical issues of constitutional rights. As Nancy Pelosi and other politicians have demonstrated, they are completely unprepared to defend themselves on constitutional grounds. This makes them very vulnerable to attack from this quarter.

  • Get involved with your local Tea Party chapter and help organize local and state protests. Generate as much noise and publicity as possible. Again, the message should now become not one of simple disagreement, but a vocalization of honest outrage and a principled unwillingness to voluntarily comply with the intent of Congress and the President. Become conscientious objectors - unwilling to participate in your own enslavement.

  • Start planning your strategy for the 2010 Tax Day Tea Party on April 15th. Organize family and friends and come up with a creative idea that will generate publicity and convey your personal message to as many people as possible.

  • Make plans to go to Washington DC when the next Tea Party march gets scheduled in 2010. If the press thought that 1.2 million protesters was "a few thousand", let's see what they have to say when we make it 3 million or more!

  • Show your commitment and make a symbolic statement with a Personal Declaration of Independence, by adding your name to the John Galt Pledge, if you have not done so already.

  • Link to this article on your personal blogs and help spread the word that the time for action is upon us.

Working together, we will form an irresistible force that will beat back the destroyers of freedom.

In Liberty,

C. Jeffery Small


Health Care:
It's a Gift
Subject: Why The Republicans Are No Ally In The Fight Against Health Care Legislation

[This is a slightly modified version of an article originally published on November 10, 2009]

After the disastrous vote on the health care bill in the House, I received an email from my Republican, Washington State Representative, Dave Reichert, in which he indicated that he had voted against the bill. He then included the following attachment to his message as his antidote to what the Democrats were offering. This one page synopsis is similar to other Republican proposals I have seen. Here it is:
    Commonsense Reform to Protect and Strengthen Health Care
    by Republican, WA State Representative, Dave Reichert

    I believe we must reform our healthcare system now. Today, millions of Americans realize that health care costs are becoming too expensive. They worry that they will lose their health care coverage or already lack the coverage they need. We must lower costs, reduce the number of uninsured, and increase access and quality at a price our country can afford.

    • Implement comprehensive medical liability reform that will reduce costly, unnecessary defensive medicine practiced by doctors trying to protect themselves from overzealous trial lawyers.

    • Provide Medicare and Medicaid with additional authority and resources to stop waste, fraud, and abuse that costs taxpayers billions of dollars every year.

    • Provide immediate substantial financial assistance, through new refundable and advanceable tax credits, to low-and modest-income Americans.

    • Increase support for pre-and early-retirees, those aged 55 to 64, with low-and modest-incomes.

    • Bring greater fairness to the tax code by extending tax benefits and savings to those who currently do not have employer-provided insurance but purchase health insurance on their own.

    • Focus on individuals and families so Americans can keep health insurance regardless of a change in or loss of a job.

    • Encourages states to use new and existing programs to guarantee all Americans, regardless of pre-existing conditions or past illnesses, have access to affordable coverage.

    • Help employers offer insurance to their workers by reducing their administrative costs through a new small business tax credit.

    • Recognize that not all high school and college graduates are able to find a job that offers health insurance after graduation. By allowing dependents to remain on their parents' health policies up to the age of 25, we stand to reduce the number of uninsured Americans by up to 7 million.

    • Take significant steps to enroll the 13 to 16 million American children and adults who are currently eligible for Medicaid and CHIP but who are not enrolled to ensure these programs serve the populations they were created to help.

    • Promote prevention and wellness by giving employers and insurers greater flexibility to financially reward employees who seek to achieve or maintain a healthy weight, quit smoking, and manage chronic illnesses like diabetes.

    • Develop interoperability standards for health information technology to better coordinate care, reduce medical errors, and reduce health care costs.

    • Reward high-quality care, instead of encouraging health care providers to order more and unnecessary services.

    • Use new and innovative treatment programs to better coordinate care between health care providers, ensuring that those with chronic disease receive the care they need and do not continue to fall through the cracks.

    • Make health care more convenient by eliminating bureaucratic red tape to expand access to Community Health Centers that are so critical to underserved areas, both in large cities and in rural America.

This demonstrates why many, if not most Republicans are not friends of liberty. The ideas being promoted in this document are not a clear alternative to the Democratic proposals, but merely a watered down "me-tooism", which cede every important principle to the Democrats while, for the most part, asserting exactly the same interventionist role for government in the lives of US citizens.

In the loose language presented here — which is typical politician-speak so that the author cannot actually be pinned down to any specific action or outcome — it might be possible to charitably interpret the first point as a plan to rationalize medical malpractice, making the rules more objective, which could have favorable consequences to medical costs. Also, the idea of eliminating the tax laws that preclude individuals from receiving the same benefits for investing in their own health care is a worthy goal. Both ideas are obvious and matters of simple justice. However, beyond that, these proposals are all draconian.

Instead of recognizing that government shouldn't be in the health care business at all, Reichert supports Medicare and CHIP programs and actually wants to expand them. Thus, he fails to comprehend that it is these very programs that are substantially responsible for distorting or destroying the proper functioning of the health care market and creating the very mess that we now find ourselves facing. His solution to the problem is to make the problem worse. He proposes to add 20-23 million additional children to the health care rolls, with no discussion of who is to bear these massive costs. He will increase medical coverage for an unspecified number of "pre- and early-retirees", again with no apparent regard for who will shoulder this burden.

As I mentioned above, while one point seems to imply a loosening of restrictive tax laws in order to make health care fairer for all, there are other sections here where Reichert proposes to wield the tax code as the tool of choice to effect the types of results he wishes to see. How is this any different from what the progressive Democrats are doing? Like a parent attempting to "influence" their child to make a proper choice, he wields the tax code like a carrot and stick, in order to force citizens to take actions that they apparently would otherwise not choose to do of their own free will. Many of the proposals are simple forms of wealth redistribution, with one group of taxpayers being required to pay for the health care of another group. The numbers do not matter, theft is theft, and Reichert is prepared to engage in it just as readily as his counterparts. He demonstrates that he has no awareness or regard for the constitutionally guaranteed right to our own property. As with the Democrats, he sees us citizens as a "natural resource" to be mined or milked to whatever degree he deems necessary in order to support the goals he has decided are best.

As a Republican, is Reichert sympathetic to business interests and does he support a free-market capitalistic economy? Absolutely not! He has no hesitation in proposing to tell insurance companies how they must conduct their business. He will write the terms of the contracts, specifying the age dependents must be covered under their parent's policy; forcing companies to accept all pre-existing medical conditions; detailing how coverage must be allowed to travel with the individual regardless of whether it was being provided contractually through an employer; and so on. He will intervene in some unspecified manner, to impose "interoperability standards" on the industry and "coordinate care between health care providers". He will "reward high-quality care". I'll leave it to your imagination what it means when the government — the repository of force — uses a word like "reward". This is Fascism, with the government making the business decisions while the owners are left to implement the policies and bear the risks associated with running those businesses.

Reichert wants the government to "promote prevention and wellness". But where does he find the constitutional mandate for congress to engage in any such activity? The question is irrelevant because, just like the Democrats, he does not recognize the plain language of the US Constitution, and does not see his actions as a government representative being bound in any significant way by that document. He sees himself free to engage in any activity that he judges to be of interest. He has elevated himself from a defender of the constitutional rights of American citizens, to the role of dictator, making whatever decisions he desires, and then willingly imposing them upon his subjects.

Reichert is not an exception. He is a very typical Republican congressman, and like most others, he is clearly not an ally in the fight to restore our vanishing liberty and individual rights. Just the opposite - he is numbered among the enemy.

It is time to change the nature of the political conversation. In addition to all the other work being done to battle issues such as mandatory national service, government run health care, or cap-and-trade legislation, we must attack the government at its constitutional roots, making it clear to the wider public that congress has 1) no constitutional authority to engage in most of these areas, and 2) our representatives, who are pledged to uphold the constitution and defend the rights of the citizens, are doing just the opposite, and in so doing, deserve to be immediately removed from office.

Challenge your Senators and Representatives on these constitutional matters and determine where they stand. If they are unwilling to act in service of the oath they have taken, then mount a campaign against them on constitutional grounds. I think you will be surprised to discover just how vulnerable they are in this area. It is a flank that they have not had to defend during their careers, and they are unprepared for an assault from this direction.


Michael Ramirez
Subject: The Lighter Side of Pain

A couple of comics that make their point.



Opinion Piece
Subject: We Own You. Get Used to It!

On today's OpEd page, a Wall Street Journal editorial highlights the true goal of ObamaCare, as articulated by one of its supporters, John Cassidy of the New Your Times.

    Confessions of an ObamaCare Backer

    The typical argument for ObamaCare is that it will offer better medical care for everyone and cost less to do it, but occasionally a supporter let's the mask slip and reveals the real political motivation. So let's give credit to John Cassidy, part of the left-wing stable at the New Yorker, who wrote last week on its Web site that "it's important to be clear about what the reform amounts to."

    Mr. Cassidy is more honest than the politicians whose dishonesty he supports. "The U.S. government is making a costly and open-ended commitment," he writes. "Let's not pretend that it isn't a big deal, or that it will be self-financing, or that it will work out exactly as planned. It won't. What is really unfolding, I suspect, is the scenario that many conservatives feared. The Obama Administration . . . is creating a new entitlement program, which, once established, will be virtually impossible to rescind."

    Why are they doing it? Because, according to Mr. Cassidy, ObamaCare serves the twin goals of "making the United States a more equitable country" and furthering the Democrats' "political calculus." In other words, the purpose is to further redistribute income by putting health care further under government control, and in the process making the middle class more dependent on government. As the party of government, Democrats will benefit over the long run.

    This explains why Nancy Pelosi is willing to risk the seats of so many Blue Dog Democrats by forcing such an unpopular bill through Congress on a narrow, partisan vote: You have to break a few eggs to make a permanent welfare state. As Mr. Cassidy concludes, "Putting on my amateur historian's cap, I might even claim that some subterfuge is historically necessary to get great reforms enacted."

    No wonder many Americans are upset. They know they are being lied to about ObamaCare, and they know they are going to be stuck with the bill.

So there you have it. It's OK for the politicians to lie to us, because they own us and operate from a position where they can freely make critical decisions about our lives without regard to our own personal thoughts, beliefs and desires. Truth is reserved for those possessing the right to self-determination, so let there be no illusion that the concepts of the right to one's life, liberty and property have anything at all to do with what is now occurring in this country. We are effectively all slaves of the state and subject to whatever whim it manages to concoct and ram through as legislation. The limitations on allowable government action that are delineated in the US Constitution are being totally ignored by all three branches of our government. We are rapidly becoming a totalitarian state.

Sign the John Galt Pledge and then contact each of your Senators and Representative and let them know, in forceful terms, that you are not asking, but demanding that they adhere to the intent of the US Constitution and expect them to protect and defend your constitutional rights. It is time to let everyone in Washington know that you are mad and have reached the limits of your patience.


Health Care
Subject: Will Members of Congress Use the Health Care Plan That They Vote For?

Members of Congress currently have a gold-plated health care plan for which they pay very little. Louisiana Congressman and physician John Fleming thinks that it is only right that Congress be subject to the same plan that it believes is best for the rest of us. Or as he puts it, he wants to give: "Congress an opportunity to put their money where their mouth is."

In service of that goal, he had put forward House Resolution 615 where:
    "Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that Members who vote in favor of the establishment of a public, federal government run health insurance option are urged to forgo their right to participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) and agree to enroll under that public option."

Click here to see a list of Representatives who currently support this resolution. If your Representative is not on the list, write to them and ask why, telling them you expect their participation. You might also write letters to the editor of your local paper, letting others in your area know that some or all of your State Representatives have not signed up to receive the same health care they promote as good enough for the rest of us.

Let your Senators know that you expect the same from them as well!

You can also visit John Fleming's Website and add your name to a list of citizens that support this resolution.


Brave New World

So what does Nationalized Health Care really hold in store for us?

Here it is, straight from one of Barack Obama's advisors, former Labor Secretary, Robert Reich. As he says, this is the truth, but you don't hear it from your politicians, because, as Jack Nicholson says in A Few Good Men, "You can't handle the truth!".
    What an Honest President Would Say:

You just have to love the students in the audience who actually applaud when Reich says that the government is simply going to let you die once you become too old! Yes, they represent the future! I'm guessing that they watched Logan's Run one too many times and think it must be a swell idea to let the government terminate you when you reach 30.
    You want cost savings? Damn it, I'll give you some cost savings you won't soon forget!

And who knows folks, by then we might be really lucky and 35 might be the new "30". Yes, it certainly is a Brave New World indeed!

Circulate this video to your friends that still say everything is coming up peaches and cream with the health care reform proposals! Or you can link directly to it on this site here.

[Thanks to Roger Kimball at Pajamas Media, for bringing this to our attention.]

Subject: A Rose by Any Other Name ....

With Barack Obama, we live in a kinder, gentler world. For example:
  • We no longer have to struggle with that awful "terrorism" of the ugly Bush years, having replaced it with the much more acceptable "man-made disaster".

  • With terrorism out of the picture, there is no more "war on terror", only benign "overseas contingency operations".

  • His government doesn't use force to "outlaw" business activities. Instead, they gently "reform" them.

  • And remember, you don't have "swine flu", you've just got a mild case of the "H1N1".

So when mandatory national service is introduced, I suspect that it will be called something not quite so crass. I'm expecting that the administration will make us all feel really good about getting to participate in the exciting, new, energy-saving, revenue neutral, field of "open source employment"!

Coming soon to a selective service office near you.

Subject: Oh Where, Oh Where, Did All The Doctors Go?

Here is a very interesting article: South Africa: Doctor brain drain continues.

The article states:
    "The country is losing 17% of its qualifying doctors every year and, in the four years since 2005, nearly 1,000 new doctors did not register to work, according to government figures."

The author then quotes Mike Waters, the shadow minister of health for the official opposition Democratic Alliance as stating:
    "It mirrors the depth of dissatisfaction among doctors over South Africa's public health system."

What is interesting about this is that South Africa seems to have the type of medical system being proposed for the United States. Medical schools are state-run and student tuition is subsidized by the government. In addition to a year of internship, graduates are also required to contribute twelve months of their life to community service at a state-run health institution before being allowed to obtain a license to practice medicine. The majority of the health care system is run by the government, and is available without charge to roughly 80% of the population. And yet, despite this idyllic set-up, there appears to be problems in paradise.

As the article explains:
    "Community service doctors and interns are crucial to the public health system, which suffers a 40% vacancy problem. Newly graduated doctors are expected to 'give back' to the community, and they are often deployed to very remote and under-equipped hospitals where their skills are most needed. Working conditions are often extremely difficult."

    "South Africa employs 18,000 doctors in state-run hospitals — or one doctor for every 3,800 people without medical aid"

Ravick van der Merwe, an industrial relations adviser for the South African Medical Association states:
    "Considering the money they will earn after five years, new doctors might run away even before they enroll for community service. The remuneration that they get is not enough for some to pay back loans that they would have borrowed."

What ideas are being considered to solve this problem? The article states:
    "One way of trying to ease the medical brain drain is to select students who display social responsibility and a commitment to the country and to communities, especially in rural areas."

Well, if I was really ill or injured and required extensive or complicated medical assistance, I know that I would much rather have a doctor who pursued that career out of self-interest, following their thirst for knowledge and love of that type of work. Those are qualities that I can rely upon in a critical situation. I would not be comforted to know that the criteria used to select my doctor was "commitment to the country and to communities." He might be a warm body filling a space in a hospital, but a person's "social conscience" tells me nothing about their commitment to themselves and their work! When my life hangs in the balance, I want the self-motivated, competent doctor making the judgment or holding the knife, not the "nice guy".

The article concludes with the following observation:
    "South Africa has been experiencing a brain drain for decades, undermining the regional economy. Previous studies have shown that 25% of medical graduates have been lost to the US alone. And it is not only doctors who move to greener pastures. Official statistics estimate that between one and 1.6 million people skilled in professions and managerial occupations have left the country since 1994, the year South Africa became a democracy."

As those of you who have read Atlas Shrugged know, this "Brain Drain" phenomenon — or the John Galt effect — was described by Ayn Rand as a completely predictable consequence of the ever tightening government regulation of any profession or industry. If we continue to move in the direction that the Obama administration is leading us, this is one aspect of the future awaiting us.