It was reported in the mainstream media that the "stakeholders," as Mr. Obama so politically correctly labeled the commercial health care industry behind much of the provisions of the efforts toward health care deform waged this past year by various special interests groups, was the most expensive lobbyihg effort to date bar none.
If Americans wish to know really why their health care costs are so high look no further.
Using premium payer dollars to hire huge expensive K Street lawyers and lobbyists is one of them.
Not using those dollars actually for what they were collected for. The actual health care cost of those premium payers. And advertising costs also were off the charts for national and state commercials in order to sell the public on their efforts to increase their "stakes" and wallets once again on Americans' health for their commercial interests.
Whether provided by the government in any socialized plan or mandated by federal statutes, this legislation is by far the largest increase in taxation across the Board for the American public, even exceeding that bogus Cap & Trade tax passed by the House earlier this year for the Wall Street financial sector in order to feed the global and foreign investors most of all - and the global economy and venture capitalists and traders at the expense of the American people once again.
Many of whom now are jobless and homeless due to the world economic socialism agendas of those meeting in Pitttburgh for that G-20 conference, and diametrically opposed to the "intent" of our founders in this country in order to retain America's sovereignty from foreign influence, either politically or economically.
I just wonder how many lives could have been saved with those sums which were paid to those lobbyists, many of whom make five figure salaries and who are not "lawyers" really at all, but merely contract labor employees for these huge now global and national associations and concerns.
Corporate socialism and government in bed together for both of their "corporate" interests at the expense of the American people was actually what the War of '76 was all about, after all.
Not simply taxation without a voice, but foreign dictates for economic purposes. The East India Company was the target of that Boston Tea Party, after all, for a reason.
It appears that instead of "progress" this country's economic policies under both the Democratic and Republican leadership for the last several decades has been more one of regression.
And with Congress now with a less than 15% approval rating, and Mr. Obama's approval rating now beginning to tank, the "dumbing down" of Americans through the reprogramming that is now undertaken in our nation's schools now with this agenda to our youth, especially at the university level, hasn't had wide spread effect our political leaders apparently expected, since in practice its negative impact is now being felt throughout the nation with the continuing decline of the U.S. economy in order to stablize the "global" and on behalf of the foreign and global interests and whose interests are clearly the focus now of Wall Street and Capitol Hill at the cost of the American public and people who actually are the major contributors and provide the bulk of the revenue for their very livelihoods.
Not the individual American investors, or those premium payers subsidizing and funding their global economies, as now the "protected class" of the European bankers who own controlling interests in America's entire economy through ownership of the Wilson created Federal Reserve.
And the natives are clearly getting quite restless.
The true American natives, that is.
By birth, or by allegiance, are now watching their country being sold down the river by the global socialists to foreign interests in order to facilitate what is no more than global communism on a massive scale.
With these now global corporations who are now dictating provisions through their "favored status" on policies throughout the world on now even life and death issues.
Nationalizing health care then leads to government people policing and control.
Government control then leads to each countries policies and provisions in such matters being also dictated to by the WHO and U.N. resolutions for global socialism since this organization has gone way beyond simply as arbiter and forum for trade agreements and the like, to now resolutions directed toward redistribution of the world's population, and population control itself.
And getting a foot in the door with respect to health care in this nation certainly brings this country much closer to the goal of globalism and global dictates on health care as a part of their efforts in order to facilitate their population control mandates, dictates and resolutions throughout the world.
And appears to be more and more dangerous to each and every country's sovereignty and their citizens' chosen forms of government until the people themselves decide to amend or change it, while violently or non-violently as has historically been the case, than any threat of nuclear war by any rogue Middle Eastern nation wishing to expand their land holdings and religious doctrine. It would appear that even those rogue nations would see that their survival, unless that nation is totally self-sufficient, depends on fair and balanced trade with other nations.
China's one child per family laws in its controversial provisions has had heartbreaking consequences and are actually creating an almost one gender society in its focus, and selective abortions in the process based purely on gender in our now "high tech" and the science based focuses of these political organizations more and more.
So when opening your mail after receiving that Notice of Payment Due on your insurance premiums, America, at both the "corporate" and "individual" level, please remember that advertsing and lobbying costs actually are becoming two of the highest expenditures today for most of these global organizations.
And, of course, their executive compensation packages and fringe benefits for those global and national meetings with key legislators and their fellow corporate socialists.
With this now much touted "science based" technology promoted by particularly this Administration, wouldn't you think that global conference calls via satellite would be much cheaper and save both the taxpayers, and the general public funding their perks and careers, and boost the entire world's economy then in the process if they practiced more what they also preach?
Energy and fiscal conservation?
And those sums are coming from you, the rate payers, for both the salaries of those lobbyists, and also the profits for their global investors, which have also now become the priority in their corporate focuses and bottom lines - not the provision of health care to those rate payers as the shared pools they originally were intended to be.
And in this country due to the "publicly" funded service organizations really in which they are now even heavily investing those rate payers dollars more and more in high risk other financial sector investments, clearly cries out at this point, post AIG, for "regulation" of their practices and profit distributions at the federal and state level in the United States per our intended form of government as provided in our Constitution.
Not with our politicians becoming clearly more and more, simply another employee actually of them, and many of their progressively "foreign" edicts, dictates and business practices.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Obama Meets With Iraq's Al Maliki: Holds To Bush Timetable For 2010-2011 Troop Withdrawals
For Any and All American Conserve-atives:
The AP reported today that in a meeting with Iraq's president, Nouri al-Maliki, Mr. Obama reiterated the terms of the agreement reached in the last 100 days of the Bush Administration for American troop withdrawals beginning in August of next year.
Although this agreement got little press with Americans diverted by the U.S. elections and appointments of cabinet members in the new Obama Administration, this meeting and the AP's report appeared to be nothing more than merely an affirmation of Mr. Obama to the Bush agenda and timetable for troop withdrawals which was quietly executed in his last 100 days in office.
Interestingly, of course, and just to show how truly political this matter also is, it calls for complete withdrawal by the end of 2011, just in time for the next presidential election cycle.
Watch for Mr. Obama and the Democratic wing of the Global Socialist Party to then to use this to take credit for Mr. Obama having "lived up to his campaign promise" to bring our trooops home and end the war.
While actually continuing to engage in it for the entire length of his first term in office, per those Bush agreements and accords.
Recently also, complications have arisen in the closing down of Guantanamo according to Mr. Obama's prior promises also along those lines. His Administration is now stating just how complicated this is going to be.
Although, of course, we have several maximum security prison facilities if need be in the United States in order to house any and all detainees with prima facie connections to the attacks in New York by the claimed responsible individuals, the Taliban, if need be.
One off the coast of California that hasn't been used in decades, but is quite secure and for little cost would provide adequate security for such foreign detainees.
Although, of course, Ms. Feinstein has a problem using a maximum security prison such as Alcatraz for the actual purpose for which it was paid for and provided by the U.S. taxpayers.
For the housing of violent criminals that needed maximum security detention while awaiting their trials if denied bail due to the severeity of their charged crimes, or upon conviction.
Imagine that, a California legislator protesting using a U.S. taxpayer funded facility (and not a part of California) in order to actually house foreign prisoners.
And due to its location also the best and most economical security facility for the American people security-wise also due to its off shore location.
It does appear that the Bush timetables and agendas continue under Mr. Obama, and the "changes" which are becoming more and more clear with each and every new announcement out of Washington and the White House now controlled press seems to simply have been a change in the mouthpiece, but not the overall agendas.
Stimulating Iraq's economy also was a topic for the pow wow between Mr. Obama and Mr. al Maliki due to the fact that Iraq's economy and infrastructure have been totally wiped out due to the "war," although the U.S. is pumping literally billions of our worthless now dollars here into Iraq in order to now rebuild the infrastructure that was destroyed during the invasion and capture of Saddam Hussein now over three years ago.
Mr. al Maliki also mentioned his wish to stimulate international and foreign investment into Iraq in order to pump up its lagging economy.
Maybe he ought to take a history lesson into what is now going on in the U.S. with respect to its economy if his country also is entertaining "going global" in any respect.
Americans now are in the bread lines and homeless due to America's "globalized" economy, and now eating the debts for both this war on Iraq's (and Israel's primarily also) behalf, and also the foreign investors due to the international British bankers manipulation of the U.S. currency during this war that has depressed it to the point where the U.S. dollar is now at almost its lowest point ever.
While, of course, it was Great Britain that entered into that earlier "accord" creating essentially the nation of Israel even prior to World War II, an agreement between the bankers and a British Lord signed prior to World War I, actually. So America truly is under 'sovereign' British rule at this point fundamentally once again due to the U.S. back in 1913 breaching our Constitution and "privatiziing" and affording foreign investment into our most fundamental area and one of Congress's primary duties - regulation and printing of our domestic currency.
We don't even have silver dollars or silver quarters in circulation anymore due to that violation, and have had progressive depressions and recessions thereafter every since due to having a fiat, rather than full faith and credit exchange based currency system now in place.
And the British and foreign investors are now buying up our nuclear power plants and infrastructure, and even the stately homes now in New Orleans, thus under now more foreign control than this country was back in 1776 when the founders fought our first war to break free from a global government, and global control by the British.
In fact, the people in this country by and large are worse off economically and personally, than those founders were in 1776 with respect to "unalienable" rights violations such as have occurred since that fateful day in September over eight years ago.
Be careful what you wish for, Mr. al Maliki.
Diversification and foreign investment is not always postive, but can and many times is regressive and simply a change in dictators. And increase, not decrease, civil unrest due to foreign interests determing national and governmental policies.
Economic dictators, but dictators all the same.
The continuing civil unrest between the various religious factions also was discussed.
And it is unclear if it is and has been the intention of the U.S. to assist the Iraqi government and people why the suggestion that the country not be divided into states and more mirror a "republican" form of government rather than a pure democracy has not been pursued - which is actually more along the lines of the form of government the U.S. formerly had also.
Not a democracy, since our founders felt that democracies were once again nothing more than "gang rule" and ended in successive civil wars in order to change the "ruling" party, and ended up in the end destroying the countries in the process due to the costs of those continuing wars in both blood and treasure.
Nor maintaining foreign alliances past the point of the immediate need in defense of a sovereign nation and securing its country and its borders.
Which appears should at least now, three years later, be attainable without direct U.S. involvement at this point.
Especially with the U.S. economy now continuing to tank in the process, while there again were more U.S. casualties this past year than there have been Iraqi military casualties, meaning that for the skirmishes that still remain, it is clear that the U.S. military is still doing most of the fighting.
But I guess the AP story at least was a good public relations tool in order to once again promise the American people that this war, entered into under false intelligence to begin with which was fully eventually admitted by the prior Administration, "someday" might end.
I just hope that it does end before a good 3/4's the American people are homeless and jobless, rather than it appears the 1/3 that have been so far affected.
Or another mother receives another visit from Pentagon protcol with the sad news that her son has become now the latest victim.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5js_Znl58WrrbnNO-nAMzPmi4QG4AD9BEVBE00
The AP reported today that in a meeting with Iraq's president, Nouri al-Maliki, Mr. Obama reiterated the terms of the agreement reached in the last 100 days of the Bush Administration for American troop withdrawals beginning in August of next year.
Although this agreement got little press with Americans diverted by the U.S. elections and appointments of cabinet members in the new Obama Administration, this meeting and the AP's report appeared to be nothing more than merely an affirmation of Mr. Obama to the Bush agenda and timetable for troop withdrawals which was quietly executed in his last 100 days in office.
Interestingly, of course, and just to show how truly political this matter also is, it calls for complete withdrawal by the end of 2011, just in time for the next presidential election cycle.
Watch for Mr. Obama and the Democratic wing of the Global Socialist Party to then to use this to take credit for Mr. Obama having "lived up to his campaign promise" to bring our trooops home and end the war.
While actually continuing to engage in it for the entire length of his first term in office, per those Bush agreements and accords.
Recently also, complications have arisen in the closing down of Guantanamo according to Mr. Obama's prior promises also along those lines. His Administration is now stating just how complicated this is going to be.
Although, of course, we have several maximum security prison facilities if need be in the United States in order to house any and all detainees with prima facie connections to the attacks in New York by the claimed responsible individuals, the Taliban, if need be.
One off the coast of California that hasn't been used in decades, but is quite secure and for little cost would provide adequate security for such foreign detainees.
Although, of course, Ms. Feinstein has a problem using a maximum security prison such as Alcatraz for the actual purpose for which it was paid for and provided by the U.S. taxpayers.
For the housing of violent criminals that needed maximum security detention while awaiting their trials if denied bail due to the severeity of their charged crimes, or upon conviction.
Imagine that, a California legislator protesting using a U.S. taxpayer funded facility (and not a part of California) in order to actually house foreign prisoners.
And due to its location also the best and most economical security facility for the American people security-wise also due to its off shore location.
It does appear that the Bush timetables and agendas continue under Mr. Obama, and the "changes" which are becoming more and more clear with each and every new announcement out of Washington and the White House now controlled press seems to simply have been a change in the mouthpiece, but not the overall agendas.
Stimulating Iraq's economy also was a topic for the pow wow between Mr. Obama and Mr. al Maliki due to the fact that Iraq's economy and infrastructure have been totally wiped out due to the "war," although the U.S. is pumping literally billions of our worthless now dollars here into Iraq in order to now rebuild the infrastructure that was destroyed during the invasion and capture of Saddam Hussein now over three years ago.
Mr. al Maliki also mentioned his wish to stimulate international and foreign investment into Iraq in order to pump up its lagging economy.
Maybe he ought to take a history lesson into what is now going on in the U.S. with respect to its economy if his country also is entertaining "going global" in any respect.
Americans now are in the bread lines and homeless due to America's "globalized" economy, and now eating the debts for both this war on Iraq's (and Israel's primarily also) behalf, and also the foreign investors due to the international British bankers manipulation of the U.S. currency during this war that has depressed it to the point where the U.S. dollar is now at almost its lowest point ever.
While, of course, it was Great Britain that entered into that earlier "accord" creating essentially the nation of Israel even prior to World War II, an agreement between the bankers and a British Lord signed prior to World War I, actually. So America truly is under 'sovereign' British rule at this point fundamentally once again due to the U.S. back in 1913 breaching our Constitution and "privatiziing" and affording foreign investment into our most fundamental area and one of Congress's primary duties - regulation and printing of our domestic currency.
We don't even have silver dollars or silver quarters in circulation anymore due to that violation, and have had progressive depressions and recessions thereafter every since due to having a fiat, rather than full faith and credit exchange based currency system now in place.
And the British and foreign investors are now buying up our nuclear power plants and infrastructure, and even the stately homes now in New Orleans, thus under now more foreign control than this country was back in 1776 when the founders fought our first war to break free from a global government, and global control by the British.
In fact, the people in this country by and large are worse off economically and personally, than those founders were in 1776 with respect to "unalienable" rights violations such as have occurred since that fateful day in September over eight years ago.
Be careful what you wish for, Mr. al Maliki.
Diversification and foreign investment is not always postive, but can and many times is regressive and simply a change in dictators. And increase, not decrease, civil unrest due to foreign interests determing national and governmental policies.
Economic dictators, but dictators all the same.
The continuing civil unrest between the various religious factions also was discussed.
And it is unclear if it is and has been the intention of the U.S. to assist the Iraqi government and people why the suggestion that the country not be divided into states and more mirror a "republican" form of government rather than a pure democracy has not been pursued - which is actually more along the lines of the form of government the U.S. formerly had also.
Not a democracy, since our founders felt that democracies were once again nothing more than "gang rule" and ended in successive civil wars in order to change the "ruling" party, and ended up in the end destroying the countries in the process due to the costs of those continuing wars in both blood and treasure.
Nor maintaining foreign alliances past the point of the immediate need in defense of a sovereign nation and securing its country and its borders.
Which appears should at least now, three years later, be attainable without direct U.S. involvement at this point.
Especially with the U.S. economy now continuing to tank in the process, while there again were more U.S. casualties this past year than there have been Iraqi military casualties, meaning that for the skirmishes that still remain, it is clear that the U.S. military is still doing most of the fighting.
But I guess the AP story at least was a good public relations tool in order to once again promise the American people that this war, entered into under false intelligence to begin with which was fully eventually admitted by the prior Administration, "someday" might end.
I just hope that it does end before a good 3/4's the American people are homeless and jobless, rather than it appears the 1/3 that have been so far affected.
Or another mother receives another visit from Pentagon protcol with the sad news that her son has become now the latest victim.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5js_Znl58WrrbnNO-nAMzPmi4QG4AD9BEVBE00
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Obama To Visit Post-Katrina New Orleans
It was announced by the AP that globe trotting Barack Obama is scheduled to make a domestic spin from the East to West Coast (for a black tie fundraiser in San Francisco, home to the bulk of the Global Socialists within one of the mainstream parties) via New Orleans in order to do a post-Katrina checkup.
As one who has family that was evacuated for both Katrina and Gustav, and a survivor myself of Gustav while there for an extended stay last year due to a family members illness and then subsequent surgery (although my 14 year old car is another story), it would appear that much could also be done to help the struggling Louisiana economy post-Katrina in providing new jobs for some of those displaced and still homeless.
Louisiana, of course, has seen a huge migration of the illegal immigrant population, most of which are being hired by the government contractors for the reconstruction.
Recently, the New Orleans City Council and its state legislators have been busy attempting also to protect them from some of those same government contractors. Some of which apparently have been withholding payment for their work even with those great discounts in taxation they receive for hiring foreigners as opposed to Americans.
With corporate America other than those that determine those salaries, the executives and Boards of Directors, even cheap foreign labor is not cheap enough to max out those profits on the repairs.
Of course, many have also flooded in from Texas and other nearby states in the construction industry. Many of which informed me while I was in Katrina ravaged East New Orleans and the Chalmette area were being paid $300 per day for clearing the debris. After getting all their mandated shots, of course.
The security detail checkpoint that I had to go through in order to get to a nearby hotel I stayed in (whose elevator still had no electricity that visit, almost three years later, nor did the local corner gas station store) was actually there in order to protect the heavy equipment from vandalism or theft.
Not those living or staying in the area at all.
This area, of course, suffered much of the damage due to a nearby levee which broke the day after the storm.
My sister's inlaws returned to their home in Chalmette four weeks later when the power was restored and found the water line at the 10 foot level in their home, which then had to be totally destroyed and rebuilt. They were fortunate. They had flood insurance.
Many did not, and were and still are being given the run around by the insurers even though a great deal of the damage is clearly Katrina related. Many lost their roofs which resulted in total destruction even before the levees broke.
Obama has promised and highlighted his commitment to pump a great deal of money into the area in order to rebuild the infrastructure that was destroyed. But if some of those government contractors are now withholding payment for some of their illegal workforce, I just wonder what other corners they are cutting in the repairs themselves.
Louisiana is notorious, after all, for having some of the worst streets and roads due to the fact that much of the taxes that are collected are pumped also into the tourism industry rather than infrastructure needs.
And the beautiful homes in the French Quarter, America, did survive since they were so well constructed over 200 years ago. And built, of course, on the highest ground available.
However, many of those owners had to end up placing those homes also on the market due to the astronomical increases then in insurance for all those living in or near any of those levees, like within 200 miles from many of the homeowners' reports. The entire state actually is "high risk" due to those two storms within less than five years.
There is also a new edict from recent reports of some of the homeowners that the state has enacted a law that requires that those that owned homes that were affected by the storms MUST rebuild within a certain amount of time, or lose their land to the state.
And, of course, new building standards for flood prone now areas. There are now additional costs of construction that are required so that homes are now, in some case, mandated to be built on concrete pilings 10 feet above the ground.
Except, of course, for those that are being subsized with federal funding, or those that are being built with private non-profit funding for those displaced low income families. Which simply means if another should occur, they or their posterity will again be homeless.
How's that for "property rights?"
Seizing now the land of some of the victims who certainly may not be able to rebuild with the cost now of insurance to rebuild on those tracts of land. Which law, of course, depresses the price those owners can expect even from selling the land, or using it for some other purpose such as merely as security for any other purchased property.
Many of whom were also in the lower income brackets to begin with, and thus have little savings for down payments on new homes in the area, or any other state for that matter. And now without even the wealth they had built up in the land itself to use as a factor in negotiating for a new or replacement home post-Katrina.
Which is why Louisiana does have one of the lowest income levels per capita at this point with the aftershocks of Katrina still reverberating, Brad Pitt's efforts notwithstanding, since even those low cost homes being built still require the banker's due and upfront costs for financing.
Most of those still standing homes in the Quarter which are on the market are being sold and marketed to the British and listed with Sotheby's, not local realtors or real estate companies.
I ran into several while walking through the Garden District last spring. Their money is now at a higher exchange rate, and it does appear that the British are buying up a great deal of America's assets, including its internet and television stations, and now even those stately old Louisiana homes.
It's gotten to the point that as an American, and refugee from Arizona due to the foreign invasion which has occurred there, I do feel like a stranger in a strange land.
My own country.
I hope Mr. Obama isn't just using this visit once again to push his globalism agenda, although will find a more favorable audience now that there are so many foreigners now who have taken the place of the Americans who were forced to flee during Katrina.
His scouters and advisors might have warned him. Maybe he should hold two townhalls at this point. One in English. The other in Spanish.
Just to make sure that all "stakeholders" are well informed and reassured that the "rebuilding" efforts go as planned.
Except that part of his speech that was released also included the fact that part of his mission is to advise those townhall attendees that Washington will soon be easing funds so that residents can become self-sufficient.
Maybe he needs to speak with the insurers about that.
Or create some new jobs by inspecting the government contractors labor force, and travel through the French Quarter and Garden District and speak with the new owners, the British.
Before he heads off on Air Force One for the San Francisco black tie event.
As one who has family that was evacuated for both Katrina and Gustav, and a survivor myself of Gustav while there for an extended stay last year due to a family members illness and then subsequent surgery (although my 14 year old car is another story), it would appear that much could also be done to help the struggling Louisiana economy post-Katrina in providing new jobs for some of those displaced and still homeless.
Louisiana, of course, has seen a huge migration of the illegal immigrant population, most of which are being hired by the government contractors for the reconstruction.
Recently, the New Orleans City Council and its state legislators have been busy attempting also to protect them from some of those same government contractors. Some of which apparently have been withholding payment for their work even with those great discounts in taxation they receive for hiring foreigners as opposed to Americans.
With corporate America other than those that determine those salaries, the executives and Boards of Directors, even cheap foreign labor is not cheap enough to max out those profits on the repairs.
Of course, many have also flooded in from Texas and other nearby states in the construction industry. Many of which informed me while I was in Katrina ravaged East New Orleans and the Chalmette area were being paid $300 per day for clearing the debris. After getting all their mandated shots, of course.
The security detail checkpoint that I had to go through in order to get to a nearby hotel I stayed in (whose elevator still had no electricity that visit, almost three years later, nor did the local corner gas station store) was actually there in order to protect the heavy equipment from vandalism or theft.
Not those living or staying in the area at all.
This area, of course, suffered much of the damage due to a nearby levee which broke the day after the storm.
My sister's inlaws returned to their home in Chalmette four weeks later when the power was restored and found the water line at the 10 foot level in their home, which then had to be totally destroyed and rebuilt. They were fortunate. They had flood insurance.
Many did not, and were and still are being given the run around by the insurers even though a great deal of the damage is clearly Katrina related. Many lost their roofs which resulted in total destruction even before the levees broke.
Obama has promised and highlighted his commitment to pump a great deal of money into the area in order to rebuild the infrastructure that was destroyed. But if some of those government contractors are now withholding payment for some of their illegal workforce, I just wonder what other corners they are cutting in the repairs themselves.
Louisiana is notorious, after all, for having some of the worst streets and roads due to the fact that much of the taxes that are collected are pumped also into the tourism industry rather than infrastructure needs.
And the beautiful homes in the French Quarter, America, did survive since they were so well constructed over 200 years ago. And built, of course, on the highest ground available.
However, many of those owners had to end up placing those homes also on the market due to the astronomical increases then in insurance for all those living in or near any of those levees, like within 200 miles from many of the homeowners' reports. The entire state actually is "high risk" due to those two storms within less than five years.
There is also a new edict from recent reports of some of the homeowners that the state has enacted a law that requires that those that owned homes that were affected by the storms MUST rebuild within a certain amount of time, or lose their land to the state.
And, of course, new building standards for flood prone now areas. There are now additional costs of construction that are required so that homes are now, in some case, mandated to be built on concrete pilings 10 feet above the ground.
Except, of course, for those that are being subsized with federal funding, or those that are being built with private non-profit funding for those displaced low income families. Which simply means if another should occur, they or their posterity will again be homeless.
How's that for "property rights?"
Seizing now the land of some of the victims who certainly may not be able to rebuild with the cost now of insurance to rebuild on those tracts of land. Which law, of course, depresses the price those owners can expect even from selling the land, or using it for some other purpose such as merely as security for any other purchased property.
Many of whom were also in the lower income brackets to begin with, and thus have little savings for down payments on new homes in the area, or any other state for that matter. And now without even the wealth they had built up in the land itself to use as a factor in negotiating for a new or replacement home post-Katrina.
Which is why Louisiana does have one of the lowest income levels per capita at this point with the aftershocks of Katrina still reverberating, Brad Pitt's efforts notwithstanding, since even those low cost homes being built still require the banker's due and upfront costs for financing.
Most of those still standing homes in the Quarter which are on the market are being sold and marketed to the British and listed with Sotheby's, not local realtors or real estate companies.
I ran into several while walking through the Garden District last spring. Their money is now at a higher exchange rate, and it does appear that the British are buying up a great deal of America's assets, including its internet and television stations, and now even those stately old Louisiana homes.
It's gotten to the point that as an American, and refugee from Arizona due to the foreign invasion which has occurred there, I do feel like a stranger in a strange land.
My own country.
I hope Mr. Obama isn't just using this visit once again to push his globalism agenda, although will find a more favorable audience now that there are so many foreigners now who have taken the place of the Americans who were forced to flee during Katrina.
His scouters and advisors might have warned him. Maybe he should hold two townhalls at this point. One in English. The other in Spanish.
Just to make sure that all "stakeholders" are well informed and reassured that the "rebuilding" efforts go as planned.
Except that part of his speech that was released also included the fact that part of his mission is to advise those townhall attendees that Washington will soon be easing funds so that residents can become self-sufficient.
Maybe he needs to speak with the insurers about that.
Or create some new jobs by inspecting the government contractors labor force, and travel through the French Quarter and Garden District and speak with the new owners, the British.
Before he heads off on Air Force One for the San Francisco black tie event.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Georgia Judge Places Politics Above The Law: Constitution and Res Ipsa Loquitur Trashed In The Process
A Georgia federal district court judge, Clay Land, in United States District Court once again turned down a valid challenge by a U.S. citizen with respect to the eligibillity challenges which have been undertaken by several different groups previously calling for production of Barack Obama's birth certificate as confirmation of his lawful natural born citizen status per the express terms of the U.S. Constitution with respect to any individual holding the highest office under it.
It appears that this particular judge no longer holds the common law, and codified law of the United States of "Res Ipsa Loquitur" (the thing as it speaks ) with respect to Constitutional interpretation.
And ignoring such a clear legal duty and provision with respect to the judiciary to make a clear and judicious review of such documentation for both legitimacy and legality is clearly in order here. Especially since this nation is still involved in a "global" war on terror, and now domestic spying program post 9/11.
Of course, while our own borders still remain unsecured, and the Bush Administration then also afforded over 43 countries free pass Visa waivers with 48 hour turnaround security checks prior to his leaving office.
I think most individuals would agree, that such a provision was made for obvious reasons by the founders.
So that no other allegiance or loyalty to any other country, or their interests, would precede the president's duties and obligations to this country and its citizens in the carrying out of his official duties and functions. Especially as Commander in Chief of the military.
And this particular case was brought by a soldier who owes allegiance to both this country and its Commander in Chief while on active duty.
And considering Mr. Obama's rather unusual upbringing, much of which was clearly outside the United States which he fully admits, and as a lawyer himself would appear would see the clear need for such provision.
Since political parties themselves were also not at all included as "legal" parties to the Constitution at the outset. Since those federalists and anti-federalists actually settled their differences upon the ratification process, and agreement and later enactment of Patrick Henry's Bill of Rights in order to protect the "people" from abuses of both their federal and state government with respect to the "unalienable" rights stated thereunder.
The judge clearly showed his bias, and actually disdain for the Constitution in his further comments, calling such requests and measures from LEGAL U.S. citizens in this country, "frivolous."
And yet the federal government under the stimulus enacted legislation calls for the creation of a National Health Care Database containing all Americans very private medical records through their now obvious "state actors," the health insurance industry and their associated organizations ala the East India Tea Company and their "favored status" with the British sovereign at the time of the original revolution?
And are continuing on legislation with respect to this health care deform which is and has been clearly disputed as outside their also legal authority, and Constitutional duties and functions other than to regulate those industries more significantly in order to reduce those costs, since it has been the costs, not the availability, that has been the major problem for most of those that still remain uninsured.
Or denials in honoring most of the representations of many of those agents which sold them to the American public now progressively, in even renegotiating and changing the provisions unilaterally in many instances without any notice, or negotiation of the insureds paying those horrendous premiums.
While closed door meetings were held with the industries on these measures, and it appears will also be so convoluted again with hundreds of pages of legalese involved in order to further give the lawyers in this country and the ACLU another stimulus at the public's expense, the federal courts are now denying proof of the clear eligibility of a publicly paid employee that is facilitating now "fining" citizens in order to once again increase Washington's bottom lines and the insurer's and their stockholder's profit margins and capital gains?
The judge also stated that such a matter was not a "duty" of the court, and went so far as to state that if he so ordered proof, that this would open the door in the event a potential candidate lied about his age in order to gain office.
This just goes to show why Washington said that political parties in and of themselves could destroy this nation from within, if foreign interests didn't do so from without. And it appears that both the political parties and their "foreign" interests are doing just that "progressively."
And since this off-the-wall ruling that flies in the face of all manner of law and the hundreds years precedent of res ipsa loquitor that precedes it with respect to Constitutional interpretation (which few judges have followed also in the past which also has lead to where we are today, an "unrepresentative" government on every level), I wonder if the district court judge involved just so happened to go to Harvard also.
Which apparently is also either teaching more and more British based "precedents" in this country as law, or is also even at those six figure per semester tuition rates, another of our failing schools.
I bet this one comes up when or if Arnold Schwartenegger decides to take a run for the roses.
But as with our liberally cluesless media, if that is the case and another such movement should occur, I doubt that those individuals will be called "birthers," as has been the spin placed by the Obama worshippers come hell or high water (and hell is looking pretty good to some of us at this point after these first eight months in the levels of back door taxation and property thefts of the citizenry are concerned for Mr. Obama's global agendas ala Bush).
They will simply be called Americans.
And any judge that would in any such event so rule as Mr. Land has in this case, Benedict Arnold.
My only problem with this entire matter is that insofar as my beliefs, Mr. Obama clearly does not fulfill the "intent" of the founders also with respect to the entire provision, and the background from which it came and reasons therefor. And why this particular case was brought in that federal district is beyond me, when it is not really one of the most Constitution honoring jurisdictions to begin with historically in some of their renderings in the past, along the lines of the 9th Circuit in wacko California, so liberal that it also doesn't recognize the Constitution in any manner whatsoever as of late.
And due to the hijacking of our entire government by two mainstream political parties at this juncture without any also Constitutional basis in fact, not "duly elected" per the judges also stated reasons for his refusal in that the "people had chosen" the president (right, and just what were the choices, your honor, since the two political parties have an inside track on the entire process and accept even campaign donations and/or sponsorship from foreigners at this point, and were illegally elected even to Congress in the first place,
having accepted "foreign" campaign donations and sponsorship and thus not "representatives" of the citizeny of their respective districts in any manner whatsoever and thus in violation and "pretenders" in violation of the entire basis for the election of candidates for the representatives government written within the clear terms of the Constitution itself.
Not at all "representatives" solely of the districts in which the were elected and not national and global lobbying organizations, or even foreign countries lobbyists at this point and their interests).
But just look at what the alternatives are in any event also.
Joe Biden, with Nancy Pelosi second in line?
Hell doesn't even begin to describe that pairing, and the additional havoc they would pile on top of the already crushing burden on the middle and lower income classes and "average" Americans.
And the other branch doesn't clearly know the meaning of the term "conservative" at this point, but simply another branch of the Global Socialist Party but with different and in some instances in vary degrees, even overlapping global corporate benefactors, that's all.
Hail Britainnia. It appears that Congress and those on the Hill are selecting more and more "British trained" globally focused "global socialist" also judges for high federal office in order to protect also their job security, and power trip moves.
Such as those educated at Harvard, Oxford, Stanford, and those East Coast "ivy league" schools whose law school programs clearly have been teaching the British style of government with the "government as sovereign" mindset.
And appears clearly are not at all teaching the "intent" of those founders behind much of the provisions of both the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution itself. Nor clear distinctions between the "limits" of and their obligations with respect to their function and their true powers and duties.
And this one was clearly their function and duty, without any "rights of refusal" whatsoever included within the document which actually provides for Mr. Land's lofty salary, and that of his staff.
It appears that this particular judge no longer holds the common law, and codified law of the United States of "Res Ipsa Loquitur" (the thing as it speaks ) with respect to Constitutional interpretation.
And ignoring such a clear legal duty and provision with respect to the judiciary to make a clear and judicious review of such documentation for both legitimacy and legality is clearly in order here. Especially since this nation is still involved in a "global" war on terror, and now domestic spying program post 9/11.
Of course, while our own borders still remain unsecured, and the Bush Administration then also afforded over 43 countries free pass Visa waivers with 48 hour turnaround security checks prior to his leaving office.
I think most individuals would agree, that such a provision was made for obvious reasons by the founders.
So that no other allegiance or loyalty to any other country, or their interests, would precede the president's duties and obligations to this country and its citizens in the carrying out of his official duties and functions. Especially as Commander in Chief of the military.
And this particular case was brought by a soldier who owes allegiance to both this country and its Commander in Chief while on active duty.
And considering Mr. Obama's rather unusual upbringing, much of which was clearly outside the United States which he fully admits, and as a lawyer himself would appear would see the clear need for such provision.
Since political parties themselves were also not at all included as "legal" parties to the Constitution at the outset. Since those federalists and anti-federalists actually settled their differences upon the ratification process, and agreement and later enactment of Patrick Henry's Bill of Rights in order to protect the "people" from abuses of both their federal and state government with respect to the "unalienable" rights stated thereunder.
The judge clearly showed his bias, and actually disdain for the Constitution in his further comments, calling such requests and measures from LEGAL U.S. citizens in this country, "frivolous."
And yet the federal government under the stimulus enacted legislation calls for the creation of a National Health Care Database containing all Americans very private medical records through their now obvious "state actors," the health insurance industry and their associated organizations ala the East India Tea Company and their "favored status" with the British sovereign at the time of the original revolution?
And are continuing on legislation with respect to this health care deform which is and has been clearly disputed as outside their also legal authority, and Constitutional duties and functions other than to regulate those industries more significantly in order to reduce those costs, since it has been the costs, not the availability, that has been the major problem for most of those that still remain uninsured.
Or denials in honoring most of the representations of many of those agents which sold them to the American public now progressively, in even renegotiating and changing the provisions unilaterally in many instances without any notice, or negotiation of the insureds paying those horrendous premiums.
While closed door meetings were held with the industries on these measures, and it appears will also be so convoluted again with hundreds of pages of legalese involved in order to further give the lawyers in this country and the ACLU another stimulus at the public's expense, the federal courts are now denying proof of the clear eligibility of a publicly paid employee that is facilitating now "fining" citizens in order to once again increase Washington's bottom lines and the insurer's and their stockholder's profit margins and capital gains?
The judge also stated that such a matter was not a "duty" of the court, and went so far as to state that if he so ordered proof, that this would open the door in the event a potential candidate lied about his age in order to gain office.
This just goes to show why Washington said that political parties in and of themselves could destroy this nation from within, if foreign interests didn't do so from without. And it appears that both the political parties and their "foreign" interests are doing just that "progressively."
And since this off-the-wall ruling that flies in the face of all manner of law and the hundreds years precedent of res ipsa loquitor that precedes it with respect to Constitutional interpretation (which few judges have followed also in the past which also has lead to where we are today, an "unrepresentative" government on every level), I wonder if the district court judge involved just so happened to go to Harvard also.
Which apparently is also either teaching more and more British based "precedents" in this country as law, or is also even at those six figure per semester tuition rates, another of our failing schools.
I bet this one comes up when or if Arnold Schwartenegger decides to take a run for the roses.
But as with our liberally cluesless media, if that is the case and another such movement should occur, I doubt that those individuals will be called "birthers," as has been the spin placed by the Obama worshippers come hell or high water (and hell is looking pretty good to some of us at this point after these first eight months in the levels of back door taxation and property thefts of the citizenry are concerned for Mr. Obama's global agendas ala Bush).
They will simply be called Americans.
And any judge that would in any such event so rule as Mr. Land has in this case, Benedict Arnold.
My only problem with this entire matter is that insofar as my beliefs, Mr. Obama clearly does not fulfill the "intent" of the founders also with respect to the entire provision, and the background from which it came and reasons therefor. And why this particular case was brought in that federal district is beyond me, when it is not really one of the most Constitution honoring jurisdictions to begin with historically in some of their renderings in the past, along the lines of the 9th Circuit in wacko California, so liberal that it also doesn't recognize the Constitution in any manner whatsoever as of late.
And due to the hijacking of our entire government by two mainstream political parties at this juncture without any also Constitutional basis in fact, not "duly elected" per the judges also stated reasons for his refusal in that the "people had chosen" the president (right, and just what were the choices, your honor, since the two political parties have an inside track on the entire process and accept even campaign donations and/or sponsorship from foreigners at this point, and were illegally elected even to Congress in the first place,
having accepted "foreign" campaign donations and sponsorship and thus not "representatives" of the citizeny of their respective districts in any manner whatsoever and thus in violation and "pretenders" in violation of the entire basis for the election of candidates for the representatives government written within the clear terms of the Constitution itself.
Not at all "representatives" solely of the districts in which the were elected and not national and global lobbying organizations, or even foreign countries lobbyists at this point and their interests).
But just look at what the alternatives are in any event also.
Joe Biden, with Nancy Pelosi second in line?
Hell doesn't even begin to describe that pairing, and the additional havoc they would pile on top of the already crushing burden on the middle and lower income classes and "average" Americans.
And the other branch doesn't clearly know the meaning of the term "conservative" at this point, but simply another branch of the Global Socialist Party but with different and in some instances in vary degrees, even overlapping global corporate benefactors, that's all.
Hail Britainnia. It appears that Congress and those on the Hill are selecting more and more "British trained" globally focused "global socialist" also judges for high federal office in order to protect also their job security, and power trip moves.
Such as those educated at Harvard, Oxford, Stanford, and those East Coast "ivy league" schools whose law school programs clearly have been teaching the British style of government with the "government as sovereign" mindset.
And appears clearly are not at all teaching the "intent" of those founders behind much of the provisions of both the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution itself. Nor clear distinctions between the "limits" of and their obligations with respect to their function and their true powers and duties.
And this one was clearly their function and duty, without any "rights of refusal" whatsoever included within the document which actually provides for Mr. Land's lofty salary, and that of his staff.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Health Care Industry Terrorists Using Media To Threaten Americans
It was announced in the AP that the insurance industry lobbyists, who were key players in Washington over the summer in closed door meetings with Barack Obama and the Senate Finance Committee with respect to Obama's health care deform measures that have been progressively coming off the Hill, that the new revisions dropping the amount of penalties for Americans not carrying insurance coverage would result in higher costs (in the thousands in some respects) for other Americans for their existing coverage.
It appears that terrorism upon the United States public at this point isn't simply restricted to Middle Eastern sects, but politicans and corporate lobbyists as their standard operating procedures in order to forment more and more unconstitutional legislation and violations.
Such as Cap & Trade.
Now we have the health care insurance industry terrorists flooding the media waves.
I have news for those corporate lawyers who represented those industries (who are not lawyers at all, since if they were they would see the entire unconstitutional focus of this legislation for what it is), fining Americans ANY amount for lack of coverage is unconstitutional and a "taking" of American's property without their consent for a "product," and a privilege and immunity given to their industry at the cost of the citizenry in general.
Especially since most of those citizens have been funding catastrophic care coverage at the state levels already for literally decades.
And also due to the fact that in those figures that the industry uses, they are also factoring in huge profit margins for their corporate shareholders at the public's expense, and also their diversified portfolios which transfer much of those premiums into some of their riskier investments, such as real estate at the present time, invested in much of the West and Southwest and other areas of the country.
Where many of those insurers are also based who have seen some of those profits dwindle due to the home foreclosure and mortage scams of their also financial branches and arms, the banking industy in which they are also heavily invested.
Just where are these "projections" coming from?
And there lies the rub. The health insurace industry can use such maneuvers because there is absolutly no regulation or accountability of those huge mega national and now global concerns to their rate-payers, from which they do get the bulk of their profits. Not their shareholders. Their rate-payers.
To do their jobs, this is where Washington should be placing its focus. Regulation of those industries. Not affording them, with the now government press agency, the AP, to threaten and terrorize Americans through the media in order to continue their spins and propaganda and thus also create these factions of those that are insured at the present time, against those that are and have been unable to afford their high priced policies for literally decades due to the lack of regulation and accountabilty of them.
Or who ended up using their services, but became increasingly dissatisfied with their products.
Since many of those that are not covered prefer to remain self-insured and not have to deal with the bureaucracy and red tape and hassles in making a claim. Not to mention those that object on religious grounds still to invasive medical procedures being fined if they do not meet the criteria and "approved" standards of any Washington based edicts for their coverage. Such as the Christian Scientists have against many medical treatments.
It is not Washington's job to guarantee the insurers bottom lines, but as a corporate financial industry and product, allow also those that are not living up to those policies which have been sold, to be removed from the market place and fail.
Which is not what occurred with AIG, and much of their failure also had to do with spins, since while the American branch of that huge global health insurer may have been struggling, it was struggling due to the bad business practices of their London Mayfair office from all accounts.
Which was heavily invested in high risk ventures with much of those British policy holder premiums, which is rather strange since Great Britian has a socialized health care system.
So just what type of policies was AIG selling in Great Britain to begin with that caused their eventual financial meltdown?
As has been the case from the outset, it appears that the entire focus of Washington with respect to true health care reform could use a 180 turn in rather than listening and seeking the advice and consulting with the "stakeholders" (i.e., predators on the American public), it should be instead holding those unregulated huge national and global sharks to the fire in explaining just why, after all the years of the bull markets in this country, it is now hiking rates for their policyholders, rather than reducing them.
And maybe due to that huge AIG bailout for the British that the American public is now being forced to eat, and in which Timothy Geithner recently stated that it has been difficult to track just where most of those billions have gone over than 60 billion now to other foreign banks and interests, they could pay off that debt by providing free coverage to all Americans for the next twenty years in safisfaction.
http://enews.earthlink.net/article/top?guid=20091012/4ad2b7d0_3421_13345200910121659508200
It appears that terrorism upon the United States public at this point isn't simply restricted to Middle Eastern sects, but politicans and corporate lobbyists as their standard operating procedures in order to forment more and more unconstitutional legislation and violations.
Such as Cap & Trade.
Now we have the health care insurance industry terrorists flooding the media waves.
I have news for those corporate lawyers who represented those industries (who are not lawyers at all, since if they were they would see the entire unconstitutional focus of this legislation for what it is), fining Americans ANY amount for lack of coverage is unconstitutional and a "taking" of American's property without their consent for a "product," and a privilege and immunity given to their industry at the cost of the citizenry in general.
Especially since most of those citizens have been funding catastrophic care coverage at the state levels already for literally decades.
And also due to the fact that in those figures that the industry uses, they are also factoring in huge profit margins for their corporate shareholders at the public's expense, and also their diversified portfolios which transfer much of those premiums into some of their riskier investments, such as real estate at the present time, invested in much of the West and Southwest and other areas of the country.
Where many of those insurers are also based who have seen some of those profits dwindle due to the home foreclosure and mortage scams of their also financial branches and arms, the banking industy in which they are also heavily invested.
Just where are these "projections" coming from?
And there lies the rub. The health insurace industry can use such maneuvers because there is absolutly no regulation or accountability of those huge mega national and now global concerns to their rate-payers, from which they do get the bulk of their profits. Not their shareholders. Their rate-payers.
To do their jobs, this is where Washington should be placing its focus. Regulation of those industries. Not affording them, with the now government press agency, the AP, to threaten and terrorize Americans through the media in order to continue their spins and propaganda and thus also create these factions of those that are insured at the present time, against those that are and have been unable to afford their high priced policies for literally decades due to the lack of regulation and accountabilty of them.
Or who ended up using their services, but became increasingly dissatisfied with their products.
Since many of those that are not covered prefer to remain self-insured and not have to deal with the bureaucracy and red tape and hassles in making a claim. Not to mention those that object on religious grounds still to invasive medical procedures being fined if they do not meet the criteria and "approved" standards of any Washington based edicts for their coverage. Such as the Christian Scientists have against many medical treatments.
It is not Washington's job to guarantee the insurers bottom lines, but as a corporate financial industry and product, allow also those that are not living up to those policies which have been sold, to be removed from the market place and fail.
Which is not what occurred with AIG, and much of their failure also had to do with spins, since while the American branch of that huge global health insurer may have been struggling, it was struggling due to the bad business practices of their London Mayfair office from all accounts.
Which was heavily invested in high risk ventures with much of those British policy holder premiums, which is rather strange since Great Britian has a socialized health care system.
So just what type of policies was AIG selling in Great Britain to begin with that caused their eventual financial meltdown?
As has been the case from the outset, it appears that the entire focus of Washington with respect to true health care reform could use a 180 turn in rather than listening and seeking the advice and consulting with the "stakeholders" (i.e., predators on the American public), it should be instead holding those unregulated huge national and global sharks to the fire in explaining just why, after all the years of the bull markets in this country, it is now hiking rates for their policyholders, rather than reducing them.
And maybe due to that huge AIG bailout for the British that the American public is now being forced to eat, and in which Timothy Geithner recently stated that it has been difficult to track just where most of those billions have gone over than 60 billion now to other foreign banks and interests, they could pay off that debt by providing free coverage to all Americans for the next twenty years in safisfaction.
http://enews.earthlink.net/article/top?guid=20091012/4ad2b7d0_3421_13345200910121659508200
Friday, October 9, 2009
Global Socialist Barack Obama Receives Nobel Peace Prize
(For Any And All Conserve-ative Americans)
With all the brouhaha and ballyhoo that has been the buzz on the mainstream and citizen journalism sites of the recent announcement that Barack Obama has been awarded a Nobel "peace" prize for his work in his less than one year in office to many Americans such as myself such a move comes as absolutely no surprise from this politically focused international group.
After all, global socialism is part and parcel of the entire focus of such awards, and world government control of the masses under U.N., World Bank, WHO and other internationally funded and facilitated groups outside of the sovereignty of all nations on the planet its primary and fundamentally its purpose.
What is truly surprising is the fundamental hypocricy of such a position, in that the U.S. is now is engaged in facilitating supposed "peace" through war in the Middle East on behalf of Israel most of all in our continued presence there, and also "global" corporate interests outsoucing both American jobs and industry for their cheap labor needs in the Middle East due to currency fluctuations and the world government agendas which have progressively been at work here through the globalists (mislabeled either Republican or Democrat at this point) esconced there.
But then again, the prize for the award (approximately 1.4 million) is also funded by those same European banking cartel members who were responsible for the creation of Israel in the wake of World War I under the British Balfour Doctrine.
So it appears that the "surprise" of this announcement has to do with just exactly how desperate now those "powers that be" are to now continue facilitating their agendas of world government control by pulling out all the stops.
The list of all the last U.S. presidential recipients of this award reads like a "who's who" of the European banking control and Council on Foreign Relations members which is the U.S. spinoff of their political agendas.
Woodrow Wilson (who created the Federal Reserve "shell" of a a national bank which is owned by the London Rothchild banking family primarily - and the 16th Amendment and "income" tax on Americans in order to profit off of this country and its people and reinstitute British rule in the process), Theodore Roosevelt (another globalist) and Jimmy Carter (an also member of the Council on Foreign Relations responsible for the temporary halt of tensions with respect to Israel, but for which came at a huge cost once again in U.S. involvement now progressively).
Mr. Obama's is facing huge declining ratings at home due to the U.S.'s continued involved in wars now for decades on behalf of Israel and the zionist elements living within this country post World War II, whose agendas are actually diametrically opposed to what this country's roots and founders were all about.
Freedom of religion, and freedom from religious prosecution.
A nation's whose primary tenants would not support the continued involvement in a country whose primary focus is in creating and maintaining a purely Zionist state, not one in which religious differences and practices are given a whole lot of weight at all, other than by mere gesture from most of the reports.
Christians and Muslims are marginalized within the Israeli government, and their interests are and have been progressively abridged since post World War II.
In fact, there are many of the Jewish faith within Israel itself that have been marginalized due to their positions that zionism is not biblical doctrine with respect to the Jewish faith at all.
And with a war still raging unconstitutionally in this country, which was founded on non-interventionism and freedom of religion, and also nationalism and not globalism in the slightest - since we did fight a war to break free from global foreign interests and controls which were compromising this country's safety and security, and had progressively made those founders homeless and jobless in the process, this award smacks of a "bribe" for the international community's agenda once again.
To continue risking American lives, jobs and security for Europe's safety and security most of all. Especially Britain, who entered into this agreement in the first place, but has progressively shifted its wars and costs, and the security of our nation in the process progressively since World War II. That continued unholy "alliance" with Britain facilitated by FDR and Churchill has had a monstrous cost to Americans ever since.
And it appears others in the international community can also see through the political scope of this award. Since the gasps were heard throughout the room when the award was announced, from all reports.
So it does appear that some unseen force and powers that be are behind this "globally focused" organization had a hand in the outcome for political reasons.
Most likely those picking up the tab. Those British bankers, after all, who value Israel more for its real estate potential and tourism, it would appear, than anything else. And tourism is suffering in that region right now due to these continuing conflicts and interventionist policies on behalf of Israel.
This "zionist state" was Britain's creation, after all, not the United States since that Balfour Doctrine precedes World War II by literally decades.
Who appear desperate now that the United States citizens are waking up more and more to who is truly pulling the strings also of our government officials, and this sacrifice of the American people and their safety, security and livelihoods for the global agendas with respect to Israel and the Middle East in order to facilitate total global economic control for their "welfare," and the privileged few that are the elitists that have been involved in this agenda since that Wilson era.
With all the brouhaha and ballyhoo that has been the buzz on the mainstream and citizen journalism sites of the recent announcement that Barack Obama has been awarded a Nobel "peace" prize for his work in his less than one year in office to many Americans such as myself such a move comes as absolutely no surprise from this politically focused international group.
After all, global socialism is part and parcel of the entire focus of such awards, and world government control of the masses under U.N., World Bank, WHO and other internationally funded and facilitated groups outside of the sovereignty of all nations on the planet its primary and fundamentally its purpose.
What is truly surprising is the fundamental hypocricy of such a position, in that the U.S. is now is engaged in facilitating supposed "peace" through war in the Middle East on behalf of Israel most of all in our continued presence there, and also "global" corporate interests outsoucing both American jobs and industry for their cheap labor needs in the Middle East due to currency fluctuations and the world government agendas which have progressively been at work here through the globalists (mislabeled either Republican or Democrat at this point) esconced there.
But then again, the prize for the award (approximately 1.4 million) is also funded by those same European banking cartel members who were responsible for the creation of Israel in the wake of World War I under the British Balfour Doctrine.
So it appears that the "surprise" of this announcement has to do with just exactly how desperate now those "powers that be" are to now continue facilitating their agendas of world government control by pulling out all the stops.
The list of all the last U.S. presidential recipients of this award reads like a "who's who" of the European banking control and Council on Foreign Relations members which is the U.S. spinoff of their political agendas.
Woodrow Wilson (who created the Federal Reserve "shell" of a a national bank which is owned by the London Rothchild banking family primarily - and the 16th Amendment and "income" tax on Americans in order to profit off of this country and its people and reinstitute British rule in the process), Theodore Roosevelt (another globalist) and Jimmy Carter (an also member of the Council on Foreign Relations responsible for the temporary halt of tensions with respect to Israel, but for which came at a huge cost once again in U.S. involvement now progressively).
Mr. Obama's is facing huge declining ratings at home due to the U.S.'s continued involved in wars now for decades on behalf of Israel and the zionist elements living within this country post World War II, whose agendas are actually diametrically opposed to what this country's roots and founders were all about.
Freedom of religion, and freedom from religious prosecution.
A nation's whose primary tenants would not support the continued involvement in a country whose primary focus is in creating and maintaining a purely Zionist state, not one in which religious differences and practices are given a whole lot of weight at all, other than by mere gesture from most of the reports.
Christians and Muslims are marginalized within the Israeli government, and their interests are and have been progressively abridged since post World War II.
In fact, there are many of the Jewish faith within Israel itself that have been marginalized due to their positions that zionism is not biblical doctrine with respect to the Jewish faith at all.
And with a war still raging unconstitutionally in this country, which was founded on non-interventionism and freedom of religion, and also nationalism and not globalism in the slightest - since we did fight a war to break free from global foreign interests and controls which were compromising this country's safety and security, and had progressively made those founders homeless and jobless in the process, this award smacks of a "bribe" for the international community's agenda once again.
To continue risking American lives, jobs and security for Europe's safety and security most of all. Especially Britain, who entered into this agreement in the first place, but has progressively shifted its wars and costs, and the security of our nation in the process progressively since World War II. That continued unholy "alliance" with Britain facilitated by FDR and Churchill has had a monstrous cost to Americans ever since.
And it appears others in the international community can also see through the political scope of this award. Since the gasps were heard throughout the room when the award was announced, from all reports.
So it does appear that some unseen force and powers that be are behind this "globally focused" organization had a hand in the outcome for political reasons.
Most likely those picking up the tab. Those British bankers, after all, who value Israel more for its real estate potential and tourism, it would appear, than anything else. And tourism is suffering in that region right now due to these continuing conflicts and interventionist policies on behalf of Israel.
This "zionist state" was Britain's creation, after all, not the United States since that Balfour Doctrine precedes World War II by literally decades.
Who appear desperate now that the United States citizens are waking up more and more to who is truly pulling the strings also of our government officials, and this sacrifice of the American people and their safety, security and livelihoods for the global agendas with respect to Israel and the Middle East in order to facilitate total global economic control for their "welfare," and the privileged few that are the elitists that have been involved in this agenda since that Wilson era.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Global Socialist Bob Dole States Unequivocally That Health Care Reform Will Pass
As published by the liberally focused Huffington Post, fellow liberal globalist Bob Dole, former Senate majority leader during the Clinton Administration, chastized members of Congress publicly, mainly in his own "corporate" party, for fighting the unconstitutionally focused health care reform measures that have been offered up so far for mostly industry profit and "welfare," by stating that all those opposed at this point "should get on with it."
It appears the globalists and socialists within the two mainstream parties are pulling no punches in getting their agenda sold and pressuring those that also realize that the entire nature and manner in which this "deform" is being approached is from an industry standpoint, and not a Bill of Rights or citizen focus at all.
And Mr. Dole is from Kansas also, a state with a huge amount of investment in the health care industry as the Midwest is also the home of many of those big national insurers, and home base for many of the health care corporate networks now spreading throughout the country.
Mr. Dole is also, of course, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations which is focused on world government socialism of both the United States government and economy under U.N. and European Central Bank control.
His voice appears a little tainted by his own partisanship and true political affiliations, and of course is collecting his citizen paid pension plan while encouraging a bill that is focused on mandatory laws for the benefit of the health care and Wall Street financial sector once again, simply another unaccountable tax actually which is no solution at all in reducing the costs of health care so that those that can't get coverage that mostly own small businesses (since the uninsured poor do get benefits at the state level throughout the nation due to taxes levied at the state level for such coverage) can do so.
Or confont those health care providers on their excessive costs and high profit margins at the general public's expense for their Wall Street investors and their high risk divestitures which have progressively occurred. Such as those entered into by AIG with American premium payers dollars for that London based insurer.
And just wonder how much he has invested in health care stocks?
Better watch out "misrepresentatives," and America - Mr. Dole has spoken and is chastizing his children for their disobedience to the global agenda here.
It appears the globalists and socialists within the two mainstream parties are pulling no punches in getting their agenda sold and pressuring those that also realize that the entire nature and manner in which this "deform" is being approached is from an industry standpoint, and not a Bill of Rights or citizen focus at all.
And Mr. Dole is from Kansas also, a state with a huge amount of investment in the health care industry as the Midwest is also the home of many of those big national insurers, and home base for many of the health care corporate networks now spreading throughout the country.
Mr. Dole is also, of course, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations which is focused on world government socialism of both the United States government and economy under U.N. and European Central Bank control.
His voice appears a little tainted by his own partisanship and true political affiliations, and of course is collecting his citizen paid pension plan while encouraging a bill that is focused on mandatory laws for the benefit of the health care and Wall Street financial sector once again, simply another unaccountable tax actually which is no solution at all in reducing the costs of health care so that those that can't get coverage that mostly own small businesses (since the uninsured poor do get benefits at the state level throughout the nation due to taxes levied at the state level for such coverage) can do so.
Or confont those health care providers on their excessive costs and high profit margins at the general public's expense for their Wall Street investors and their high risk divestitures which have progressively occurred. Such as those entered into by AIG with American premium payers dollars for that London based insurer.
And just wonder how much he has invested in health care stocks?
Better watch out "misrepresentatives," and America - Mr. Dole has spoken and is chastizing his children for their disobedience to the global agenda here.
Monday, October 5, 2009
Obama Paints Rosy Picture For AMA Profiteers Of Share Of Health Care Pie
The AP press corp for the White House reported today that Mr. Obama had a meeting in the Rose Garden with 1,000 representatives of the AMA (all wearing their standard issue lab coats) in order to sell the newer versions of ObamaCare once again to the American public.
Although directing his comments to the doctors who were attending, by playing up to their own egos in stating that those present were the ones that "knew the system" the best, and as such, experts on the problems. All wearing their lab coats for this highly produced and staged event.
Rather than the American public that are dependent on that industry and many of whom the victims of these industries, including many of those members of the AMA and their outrageous fees, costs, and overbillings that also have resulted in this progressive "problem."
A profession that also refuses to support legislation at either the state or federal level requiring at least disclosure of fees or costs prior to treatment, or at least ballpark estimates, even on elective procedures in many instances, or various procedures in which more than one course of treatment is available.
The doctors, of course, brought up abusive malpractice suits as their major complaint. But that also has been the fault of the legal profession, Mr. Obama's own, who use "deep pocket" logic and whose advertising now and ambulance chasing has become so routine on prime time television that the practice of law and medicine now have almost a symbiotic and similar reputation with the public. Not to be trusted, by and large, along with those insurers that they both also use as their income streams at the public's expense.
The new plan being now touted as "moderate" and has the backing of one of the doctor members of Congress on the Republican Global Socialist side of the aisle has made one concession, and even the illustrious profiteer of profiteers at the public's expense, New York Mayor Bloomberg put in his two cents in support. Although the only moderation appears to be is in the concession to reduce the mandatory fine amounts to Americans for lack of compliance with Washington's edicts for the health care industry at ther expense once again, but also the amount of Americans that would be covered under any such plan.
Which fines, of course, are then also always subject to modification at any time in the future, or whim of the next senator seeking re-election for future campaign donations from the health care insurance industries. Until they are on par similar to the threats for littering in the "cruel and unusual" then punishment that will be inflicted for an American simply asserting their Constitutional rights which Washington continues to ignore for their own "corporate" gain.
Since there is also still no regulatory control over those insurers, nor any teeth in the provisions with respect to health care providers in their denials of coverage, or practices in then raising rates exceeding the cost of living routinely without explanation, or hiking rates astronomically after any claim is made.
And while the number of Americans then anticipated will be able to then obtain coverage under these new provisions is less than prior measures, those receiving existing Medicare benefits will see those benefits then reduced in the process.
Which also did not make those doctor's happy, since the rest of the public has been actually subsidizing Medicare patients through higher costs and charges.
Which is what the doctors never also state. That those lower benefit patients care costs are subsidized in order to meet their corporate Boards of Directors bottom lines since health care was 'corporatized" under Richard Nixon in the HMO, health care network concept which has affected quality of care tremendously and made hospital visits and health care nothing more now than another assembly line similar to GM, with complex procedures scheduled one right after another.
Which is why those doctors are now facing more of those "abusive" medical malpractice claims. Fast food medicine will tend to lead also to more mistakes, as fatigue sets in on some of those new and older doctors after back to back surgeries. Or drive through mastectomies, which are also becoming more common.
This situation and "deform" is getting more and more laughable as it "progresses."
What's more clear than "unconstitutional," Mr. Obama, and not a federal function in the slightest.
Most of the states have this covered due in various amounts and measures at the discretion of the state citizens, and a little more thus accountable to them than Washington will ever be, that much is more than clear at the elitism running rampant on the Hill with respect to the actual citizens, and not the commercial industries those "misrepresentatives" actually represent. You know, the ones that are supposed to be "regulated" not "catered to" at the expense of the public.
Or did you, due to fatigue yourself, miss Constitution 101 class at Havard?
Although directing his comments to the doctors who were attending, by playing up to their own egos in stating that those present were the ones that "knew the system" the best, and as such, experts on the problems. All wearing their lab coats for this highly produced and staged event.
Rather than the American public that are dependent on that industry and many of whom the victims of these industries, including many of those members of the AMA and their outrageous fees, costs, and overbillings that also have resulted in this progressive "problem."
A profession that also refuses to support legislation at either the state or federal level requiring at least disclosure of fees or costs prior to treatment, or at least ballpark estimates, even on elective procedures in many instances, or various procedures in which more than one course of treatment is available.
The doctors, of course, brought up abusive malpractice suits as their major complaint. But that also has been the fault of the legal profession, Mr. Obama's own, who use "deep pocket" logic and whose advertising now and ambulance chasing has become so routine on prime time television that the practice of law and medicine now have almost a symbiotic and similar reputation with the public. Not to be trusted, by and large, along with those insurers that they both also use as their income streams at the public's expense.
The new plan being now touted as "moderate" and has the backing of one of the doctor members of Congress on the Republican Global Socialist side of the aisle has made one concession, and even the illustrious profiteer of profiteers at the public's expense, New York Mayor Bloomberg put in his two cents in support. Although the only moderation appears to be is in the concession to reduce the mandatory fine amounts to Americans for lack of compliance with Washington's edicts for the health care industry at ther expense once again, but also the amount of Americans that would be covered under any such plan.
Which fines, of course, are then also always subject to modification at any time in the future, or whim of the next senator seeking re-election for future campaign donations from the health care insurance industries. Until they are on par similar to the threats for littering in the "cruel and unusual" then punishment that will be inflicted for an American simply asserting their Constitutional rights which Washington continues to ignore for their own "corporate" gain.
Since there is also still no regulatory control over those insurers, nor any teeth in the provisions with respect to health care providers in their denials of coverage, or practices in then raising rates exceeding the cost of living routinely without explanation, or hiking rates astronomically after any claim is made.
And while the number of Americans then anticipated will be able to then obtain coverage under these new provisions is less than prior measures, those receiving existing Medicare benefits will see those benefits then reduced in the process.
Which also did not make those doctor's happy, since the rest of the public has been actually subsidizing Medicare patients through higher costs and charges.
Which is what the doctors never also state. That those lower benefit patients care costs are subsidized in order to meet their corporate Boards of Directors bottom lines since health care was 'corporatized" under Richard Nixon in the HMO, health care network concept which has affected quality of care tremendously and made hospital visits and health care nothing more now than another assembly line similar to GM, with complex procedures scheduled one right after another.
Which is why those doctors are now facing more of those "abusive" medical malpractice claims. Fast food medicine will tend to lead also to more mistakes, as fatigue sets in on some of those new and older doctors after back to back surgeries. Or drive through mastectomies, which are also becoming more common.
This situation and "deform" is getting more and more laughable as it "progresses."
What's more clear than "unconstitutional," Mr. Obama, and not a federal function in the slightest.
Most of the states have this covered due in various amounts and measures at the discretion of the state citizens, and a little more thus accountable to them than Washington will ever be, that much is more than clear at the elitism running rampant on the Hill with respect to the actual citizens, and not the commercial industries those "misrepresentatives" actually represent. You know, the ones that are supposed to be "regulated" not "catered to" at the expense of the public.
Or did you, due to fatigue yourself, miss Constitution 101 class at Havard?
Friday, October 2, 2009
Obama Facebook Scare: Favored Washington Industry's Political Spin?
It was reported earlier this week that the Secret Service is investigating a poll that was published by a third party provider on a FaceBook website account that apparently was seeking public opinion with respect to, it appears, Mr. Obama's sinking approval ratings and his health care reform push capitalizing on the public's rather widespread discontent of both the focus, and the provisions.
So far, most of the measures which Washington has come up with consist of either benefiting those insurers once again in either taxing Americans for catastropic coverage with Big Brother in bed with those industries even more so than simply campaign donations, or alternately fining Americans if they do not buy health care coverage according to their income levels through Big Brother IRS once again, which is also industry focused as another merely "corporate welfare" act and nothing more than feeding those national and global mega-financial sector industries at the public's expense.
Using threats and terrorism, and the states once again as their accomplises in what has been now recently released, since there will be federal funding withheld in other areas then if the state's also do not cowtow to Big Daddy in Washington's edicts, such as the withholding of federal funding to coerce the states to pass those low level DUI laws which now include "cruel and unsual punishment" to say the least.
With each new "Act" coming out of Washington victimizing Americans through their wallets, is it no wonder our jails are so full and a drain on the public purse at this point, since 95% of those incarcerated are misdemeanor offenders treated at this point like hardened criminals in many. And with those "right wing extremists" and making political positions not in accordance with the current Administration now criminal matters, at last count Congress only had a 15% approval rating.
Which means obviously under those "extremist" memorandums, 85% of the American public are actually "criminals" that should be on the "watch" list. If that doesn't go to show how out of control and illegal more and more actions in Washington have become, criminalizing 85% of the American people means we are dealing with the clinical definition of sociopaths that don't change course, but simply bulldoze right ahead whether those that are actually paying their salaries have 'consented" to this abuse, or not.
The insurers have really cleaned up on that DUI low level offense "law" also in astronomical insurance rates now for a first time offender throughout the nation, and Washington is more and more handing the banks and insurers the earnings of all Americans which in turn then adds to the welfare roles with these regressive global socialists' legislation.
As it is now abundately clear, to the American people.
Why doing their Constitutional job and function does not occur to Washington, who instead consults with the "stakeholders" (industries) when writing more and more legislation affecting the average Americans on a fundemental level such as health care, immigration, border security, etc., I haven't a clue. Instead of the document that even provides for their lofty positions there on the Hil. Since without it, they would be one of those without blue ribbon policies of their own which is being paid for by those they are now seeking to fine.
Since, of course, they voted themselves that "privilege" and benefit without the public's consent, when Constitutionally all Congressional members and the President and judiciary are entitled to is 'a compensation" for their services. Not fringe benefits. And for what was supposed to be in the beginning merely a part-time job, actually. That's why they did make it extremely difficult to pass further legislation taking super-majority votes. And limited through their enumerated powers just what areas were within federal authority, and with the 9th and 10th, what wasn't.
And this really isn't in any way, shape or form by any "liberal" interpretation even - having a right to life is a little different than having a right to affordable treatment and that is why commerce was to be regulated, after all, especially commerce directly linked as a public service, and was no more than a shared risk pool at its inception, investing those premiums in government bond securities. The federal civil service program and those benefits of those on the Hill need to be pared down to that which is given to the "average" American - as public servants, not lords or ladies of the English court.
Capitalism was meant for products, not necessarily services, at all unless they were freely negotiated and entered into with the input of both parties for their benefit. And all health care policies today are boilerplate with these conglomerates dictating both the terms, and the standardized language. And facing an insurer in court nowadays takes about a six figure income.
The welfare for these insurers has been astounding in recent years. Those now sitting in jail on the low level DUIs are facing now insurance costs off the charts on single offenses. And those in the border states who are now in "high risk" categories for property and auto insurance, so that the tourism and resort industries (and lawyers, morticians, drug counselors, etc.) profits don't suffer.
Truly unbelieveable. While Washington tries to soothe now the American public throwing out crumbs that will legislate that insurers cannot deny pre-existing conditions, or charger higher premiums for them, since there are no controls on just what they charge at the present time and there are no fines or oversight if they should use increasing premiums as a backdoor method of dropping high risk individuals, just what has this new "alternative" announced today now accomplished?
The "teeth" on enforcement is directed once again at the public in those fine provisions, not the insurers or health care networks. These insurers are incorporated at the state level, so just how is this going to change accountability for the providers with this federal legislation in any manner whatsoever?
Corporate socialism and welfare, actually, and now it is not simply American corporate socialism, but as with AIG, global socialism now to boot.
It's the East India Tea Company all over again.
Rather than Congress, of course, protecting the American public from these commercial concerns as the commerce they are, and no longer private shared pools but actually huge now national and global "public" financial sector conglomerates.
Maybe instead using those funds promised to Bill Gates for the National Health Care Database, a fundamental violation of American's privacy rights, to rather set up a national complaint and reporting system on the health care provider networks, doctors, and insurers. Affording then the states to also regain some of their power and strip those abusive commercial interests of their state licenses or corporate charters if found repeatedly grossly negligent might be a start to getting to the root of what has actually occurred. Corporate greed and unlawful diversification.
And no accountability to either their shareholders, or the American public for their practices, salaries, and reinvestitures.
You know, following the Constitution just might make insurance affordable once again. Especially at this point after AIG (a London based company, mind you).
Even after that Constitutional violation in bailing out a global insurer whose domicile is actually not even in the U.S., the root of what lead to it, lack of adequate regulation over these monopolies and megaconglomerates in their practices to those funding those corporations, the shareholders and the premium payers, has even been addressed.
These are public corporations, not private ones at all. And instead, Washington consults THEM on this legislation, rather than doing their "legal" and "lawful" jobs?
Insurance actually is the only product which Americans fund in advance, but are then "fined " already by those insurers if they make a claim, or are blacklisted on the internal industry's database through their underwriter's network. It appears the insurers only want to insure healthy individuals, drivers who never are unlucky enough to have an accident while driving now on congested streets in most metro areas due to our piss poor dollar the the Chamber's "see America" campaigns, and those that don't happen to live within about 500 miles of the southern borders.
Yet Americans are extorted and forced already to buy both homeowners and auto insurance, while Washington gets a share also of those profits for their next campaigns. Which monies aren't from those insurers at all, but the premium payers they are not going to double tax in essence once again. For their campaigns, and for the U.S. Treasury's now debt due to London based AIG.
.The intended focus on public opinion that became the headline though included a choice with a question focused using the choice of the president's death if any of these measures should pass as one of the options.
FaceBook is, of course, primarily used by the under 30 crowd and politicians now who are heavily invested in the telecom industries or supported by them as a social networking site and public personal website.
FaceBook, of course, immediately stopped the practice of allowing such opinion polls from third party providers due to a purported contact from the Secret Service investigating the matter.
With what has "progressively" occurred in this country, something about the timing of this also smells a bit like Limburger cheese to me, and will be interesting to see if there is any further information published on the supposed perpetrator, who may or may not have been a government employee for all the information apparently that was on the site in which the opinion poll was published.
And purposely planted in order to create another media promoted terrorism scare by the Washigton global socialist liberals.
And whether this highly publicized incident (it was carried even on the local news stations as a "coming up" feature) was another terrorism tactic in order to also continue to threaten and silence the masses in this counry, or intimidate other websites from publishing those instant result polls which are used on many politically focused sites at the present time.
Mr. Obama is and was, after all, heavily supported by the telecom industry, and which is also reaping billions for their venture capitalists in California and Silicon Valley during this continuing war, the now domestic spying program, and also in the "free trade" agreements with Mexico at the ports of entry (while, of course, the major portion of the border used by the coyotes, drug cartel members, and auto theft rings still, even eight years after 9/11, remains virtually unsecured).
Or whether it was some actual citizen who was using his freedom of speech at this outrage, without knowledge that threatening the life of the president is not at all the same as threatening the life of your next door neighbor if you find his dog in your yard tearing up your rosebushes, or beating up your spouse, daughter or son.
This type of case the police actually do investigate and prosecute, even if it may have been in jest, or merely a kid who isn't aware that politicians sense of humor is pretty much gone.
As is that of most of the governed, apparently, since this poll actually did have a somewhat legitimate focus as to the degree of discontent over the issue it apparently was intended to address, and by the news reports since there were more than FaceBook polls involved with respect to the prior Administration and the continuing Iraq war in threats such as these by even legitimate news writers in satirical articles taking just such positions.
And at this point it does go without saying that due to the progressive now Constitutional abridgements that have continued to occur, those founding fathers would have been calling for the duel at dawn, and Ben Franklin and Thomas Paine would be hard at work at the presses.
And the spins now are running so wide, deep, and overlapping at this point, one does have to wonder whether this again, is fiction or fact, that it was a citizen without political connections to either political party agendas, or at this point, both's.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2009959020_apusobamathreat.html?syndication=rss
So far, most of the measures which Washington has come up with consist of either benefiting those insurers once again in either taxing Americans for catastropic coverage with Big Brother in bed with those industries even more so than simply campaign donations, or alternately fining Americans if they do not buy health care coverage according to their income levels through Big Brother IRS once again, which is also industry focused as another merely "corporate welfare" act and nothing more than feeding those national and global mega-financial sector industries at the public's expense.
Using threats and terrorism, and the states once again as their accomplises in what has been now recently released, since there will be federal funding withheld in other areas then if the state's also do not cowtow to Big Daddy in Washington's edicts, such as the withholding of federal funding to coerce the states to pass those low level DUI laws which now include "cruel and unsual punishment" to say the least.
With each new "Act" coming out of Washington victimizing Americans through their wallets, is it no wonder our jails are so full and a drain on the public purse at this point, since 95% of those incarcerated are misdemeanor offenders treated at this point like hardened criminals in many. And with those "right wing extremists" and making political positions not in accordance with the current Administration now criminal matters, at last count Congress only had a 15% approval rating.
Which means obviously under those "extremist" memorandums, 85% of the American public are actually "criminals" that should be on the "watch" list. If that doesn't go to show how out of control and illegal more and more actions in Washington have become, criminalizing 85% of the American people means we are dealing with the clinical definition of sociopaths that don't change course, but simply bulldoze right ahead whether those that are actually paying their salaries have 'consented" to this abuse, or not.
The insurers have really cleaned up on that DUI low level offense "law" also in astronomical insurance rates now for a first time offender throughout the nation, and Washington is more and more handing the banks and insurers the earnings of all Americans which in turn then adds to the welfare roles with these regressive global socialists' legislation.
As it is now abundately clear, to the American people.
Why doing their Constitutional job and function does not occur to Washington, who instead consults with the "stakeholders" (industries) when writing more and more legislation affecting the average Americans on a fundemental level such as health care, immigration, border security, etc., I haven't a clue. Instead of the document that even provides for their lofty positions there on the Hil. Since without it, they would be one of those without blue ribbon policies of their own which is being paid for by those they are now seeking to fine.
Since, of course, they voted themselves that "privilege" and benefit without the public's consent, when Constitutionally all Congressional members and the President and judiciary are entitled to is 'a compensation" for their services. Not fringe benefits. And for what was supposed to be in the beginning merely a part-time job, actually. That's why they did make it extremely difficult to pass further legislation taking super-majority votes. And limited through their enumerated powers just what areas were within federal authority, and with the 9th and 10th, what wasn't.
And this really isn't in any way, shape or form by any "liberal" interpretation even - having a right to life is a little different than having a right to affordable treatment and that is why commerce was to be regulated, after all, especially commerce directly linked as a public service, and was no more than a shared risk pool at its inception, investing those premiums in government bond securities. The federal civil service program and those benefits of those on the Hill need to be pared down to that which is given to the "average" American - as public servants, not lords or ladies of the English court.
Capitalism was meant for products, not necessarily services, at all unless they were freely negotiated and entered into with the input of both parties for their benefit. And all health care policies today are boilerplate with these conglomerates dictating both the terms, and the standardized language. And facing an insurer in court nowadays takes about a six figure income.
The welfare for these insurers has been astounding in recent years. Those now sitting in jail on the low level DUIs are facing now insurance costs off the charts on single offenses. And those in the border states who are now in "high risk" categories for property and auto insurance, so that the tourism and resort industries (and lawyers, morticians, drug counselors, etc.) profits don't suffer.
Truly unbelieveable. While Washington tries to soothe now the American public throwing out crumbs that will legislate that insurers cannot deny pre-existing conditions, or charger higher premiums for them, since there are no controls on just what they charge at the present time and there are no fines or oversight if they should use increasing premiums as a backdoor method of dropping high risk individuals, just what has this new "alternative" announced today now accomplished?
The "teeth" on enforcement is directed once again at the public in those fine provisions, not the insurers or health care networks. These insurers are incorporated at the state level, so just how is this going to change accountability for the providers with this federal legislation in any manner whatsoever?
Corporate socialism and welfare, actually, and now it is not simply American corporate socialism, but as with AIG, global socialism now to boot.
It's the East India Tea Company all over again.
Rather than Congress, of course, protecting the American public from these commercial concerns as the commerce they are, and no longer private shared pools but actually huge now national and global "public" financial sector conglomerates.
Maybe instead using those funds promised to Bill Gates for the National Health Care Database, a fundamental violation of American's privacy rights, to rather set up a national complaint and reporting system on the health care provider networks, doctors, and insurers. Affording then the states to also regain some of their power and strip those abusive commercial interests of their state licenses or corporate charters if found repeatedly grossly negligent might be a start to getting to the root of what has actually occurred. Corporate greed and unlawful diversification.
And no accountability to either their shareholders, or the American public for their practices, salaries, and reinvestitures.
You know, following the Constitution just might make insurance affordable once again. Especially at this point after AIG (a London based company, mind you).
Even after that Constitutional violation in bailing out a global insurer whose domicile is actually not even in the U.S., the root of what lead to it, lack of adequate regulation over these monopolies and megaconglomerates in their practices to those funding those corporations, the shareholders and the premium payers, has even been addressed.
These are public corporations, not private ones at all. And instead, Washington consults THEM on this legislation, rather than doing their "legal" and "lawful" jobs?
Insurance actually is the only product which Americans fund in advance, but are then "fined " already by those insurers if they make a claim, or are blacklisted on the internal industry's database through their underwriter's network. It appears the insurers only want to insure healthy individuals, drivers who never are unlucky enough to have an accident while driving now on congested streets in most metro areas due to our piss poor dollar the the Chamber's "see America" campaigns, and those that don't happen to live within about 500 miles of the southern borders.
Yet Americans are extorted and forced already to buy both homeowners and auto insurance, while Washington gets a share also of those profits for their next campaigns. Which monies aren't from those insurers at all, but the premium payers they are not going to double tax in essence once again. For their campaigns, and for the U.S. Treasury's now debt due to London based AIG.
.The intended focus on public opinion that became the headline though included a choice with a question focused using the choice of the president's death if any of these measures should pass as one of the options.
FaceBook is, of course, primarily used by the under 30 crowd and politicians now who are heavily invested in the telecom industries or supported by them as a social networking site and public personal website.
FaceBook, of course, immediately stopped the practice of allowing such opinion polls from third party providers due to a purported contact from the Secret Service investigating the matter.
With what has "progressively" occurred in this country, something about the timing of this also smells a bit like Limburger cheese to me, and will be interesting to see if there is any further information published on the supposed perpetrator, who may or may not have been a government employee for all the information apparently that was on the site in which the opinion poll was published.
And purposely planted in order to create another media promoted terrorism scare by the Washigton global socialist liberals.
And whether this highly publicized incident (it was carried even on the local news stations as a "coming up" feature) was another terrorism tactic in order to also continue to threaten and silence the masses in this counry, or intimidate other websites from publishing those instant result polls which are used on many politically focused sites at the present time.
Mr. Obama is and was, after all, heavily supported by the telecom industry, and which is also reaping billions for their venture capitalists in California and Silicon Valley during this continuing war, the now domestic spying program, and also in the "free trade" agreements with Mexico at the ports of entry (while, of course, the major portion of the border used by the coyotes, drug cartel members, and auto theft rings still, even eight years after 9/11, remains virtually unsecured).
Or whether it was some actual citizen who was using his freedom of speech at this outrage, without knowledge that threatening the life of the president is not at all the same as threatening the life of your next door neighbor if you find his dog in your yard tearing up your rosebushes, or beating up your spouse, daughter or son.
This type of case the police actually do investigate and prosecute, even if it may have been in jest, or merely a kid who isn't aware that politicians sense of humor is pretty much gone.
As is that of most of the governed, apparently, since this poll actually did have a somewhat legitimate focus as to the degree of discontent over the issue it apparently was intended to address, and by the news reports since there were more than FaceBook polls involved with respect to the prior Administration and the continuing Iraq war in threats such as these by even legitimate news writers in satirical articles taking just such positions.
And at this point it does go without saying that due to the progressive now Constitutional abridgements that have continued to occur, those founding fathers would have been calling for the duel at dawn, and Ben Franklin and Thomas Paine would be hard at work at the presses.
And the spins now are running so wide, deep, and overlapping at this point, one does have to wonder whether this again, is fiction or fact, that it was a citizen without political connections to either political party agendas, or at this point, both's.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2009959020_apusobamathreat.html?syndication=rss
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
