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