ObamaCare: The White Elephant Is Still In The Room

There has been much publicized in the mainstream media this weekend about the upcoming Supreme Court review of the controversial (and much contested) bill passed by the Obama Administration during the first year of his four year term in office.

Nothing much has changed.

The white elephant is still in the room...the United States Constitution.

This legislation not only flies in the face of that historic document and beacon of freedom in America.

It desecrates it.

Somehow, I find it rather odd that this legislation was passed at all. It also seems so very strange that it would be a black, "Constitutional" lawyer who would be behind this legislation, and his party "of the people."

Almost seems like it was ordained that way before the election was even held.

What better way to attempt to fool and re-educate the public that this bill will be one which the people will benefit, by a party supposedly known to be more representative of the people, than the Republicans - the party of corporate America.

Just who will benefit from this legislation....hmmm...

The medical community. The insurance and financial sector. The lawyers. The politicians.

The big four.

Who will be the victims?

The American public.

I listened today while some of those "political analysts" spoke of just how difficult this review would be, and how both sides can see it going either way. Using every tool in their arsenal in order to back up the positive merits of this legislation.

Which, way back when, was presented to the public with a carrot and stick.

The carrot? No insurer can refuse to insure those with pre-existing conditions (no mention of any governmental regulation on just how MUCH those insurers then can charge individuals seeking insurance after a death sentence diagnosis, or chronic illness, or on the level of profits and money those insurers will be making hand over fist if Washington can shore up the "search and seizure" portions of the bill which enforcement of that individual mandate will involve).

Many of the Democrats and Republicans keep citing the "commerce clause" as being the fundamental linchpin in whether or not this legislation will eventually be deemed Constitutional.

Using past "judge made case law" as their argument as precedence.

I've got news for those media pundits, lawyers and others who continue to murky those waters.

The Commerce clause as it was written was intended to protect the individual Americans FROM the corporate, and protect state funded industries from "foreign" (outside the U.S.) or domestic (outside the state) undue competitition across state lines.

Meaning, it is the clause that gives Washington the power to "regulate" those insurance companies, huge medical clinics, and health care networks.

Problem is, due to all the monies Washington has poured into the "tech" industry, including medical technology, unfortunately the mindset seems to be that it is now the American people that will need to pay the piper for Washington's past largesse.

Since so many Americans are living longer (although those actuarial tables have changed little the past three decades) or due to the fact that there will be a larger aging public with the baby boomers, than there was with the World War II generation (if we all don't die from starvation, or homelessness first).

The Commerce clause gives Washington the power to "mandate" that Americans (individually) must purchase health insurance OR ELSE?

Hardly.

The insurance sector is also simply another branch of Wall Street and the financial sector. And many of those national insurance companies are not even domiciled in the United States, those "free trade" agreements have become so generous to foreign countries the past thirty years.

I see that individual mandate as one included in order to gradually phase out Medicare over time and turn the entire "life and death" decisions over to insurance companies (foreign or domestic).

Without having to give any of those monies the boomers, especially, have paid into that program over the years since 1964.

Another banner year in legislation.

While then also raising the Social Security age at the same time in order to marginalize as many of the boomers under those programs as possible.

My question, though, is this...

How in the world does Washington believe or expect that Americans, especially those over 40, who are now homeless AND jobless (due to the mortgage mess, and tax credits now given for hiring younger workers to those national corporations) will be able to afford to buy health insurance, no matter what the price.

When their unemployment is running out, and the job market shrinking (except those jobs which would be created by passing this legislation in the public sector (enforcement) and private sector (a few insurance agents, since most of those "cut rate" programs will be "buy online," without involvement of a human, I assure you).

Just how can Washington justify this legislation, given that in many states throughout the nation those older workers contributed to both the building, and budgets of those hospitals through their property taxes, and the tuition for those doctors through also those same property taxes at local universities?

Except, of course, for all those foreign doctors who are being trained in U.S. medical schools from India and South America, for lower wages for those corporate health care networks.

Will Washington be putting all those homeless and jobless Americans who do not or cannot comply with the mandate in the privatized state or federal jails, in order to at least make their revolt beneficial to another corporate campaign donor.

The White Elephant lives on...still.

If this law is upheld by some legal slight of hand by those black robed arbiters of Constitutional understanding (using case law, rather than intent, as their standard) - do Americans who have contributed to Medicare since 1964 get their money back so that they can pay those cut rate premiums? Or the Social Security that won't be collected by all those boomers who are not wealthy enough after this past ten year economic tsunami given to their next of kin as suvivor's benefits?

I hope that is also deliberated this week.

The "taking" of the cash for fraudulent purposes, without refund.

Health Care Deform: Taxpayers Already Fund Elective Abortions

With all the smoke and mirorrs occurring in this horrendously unconstitutional Health Care Deform of the Obama Administration, it has not ceased to amaze me the propaganda and political spins that are occurring as this abridgement of the founders government once again is being hashed out behind closed doors.

Republicans and Democrats are posturing and using this as a political tool for future election purposes, apparently, in basically taking exception to any federal funding that may occur that would fund abortions in this country under this legislation.

I've got news for you, America, the political manure is getting deeper and deeper, with the media actually buying into this also, apparently.

Planned Parenthood, at its inception back in the 1970's, was incorporated as an "educational" foundation which primarily provided birth control for those that could not afford it when the Pill was finally approved by the FDA and available to the public.

The costs at that time for those monthly prescriptions was more than most lower income, or younger Americans could afford (about $30.00 per month back in the 1970's, or $1.00 per pill), and was the original focus of this "non-profit" organization - providing birth control to lower income females in this country and "education" in family planning for young familes.

That is not the case any longer. Planned Parenthood is supported by many corporation organizations at this point, although its "legal" status as an education foundation has not changed insofar as the IRS is concerned or now its expansion also into providing low cost abortions as part of its family planning focus.

And with an "educational" focus, does qualify for federal grant monies for its programs and funding. And no longer simply provides for low cost birth control but has expanded also into providing low cost abortions through its affilated doctors.

So my quesiton is, whether this bill is worded insofar as precluding federal monies under this Health Care Deform being provided for abortions, are the grants that are also handed out like candy by the federal govenment to many health care institutions and even corporate medical practices also going to be regulated at this point so that there isn't now a double whammy on the American taxpayers?

In other words, now having to pay out hundreds of dollars per month to provide for their own health care needs, but also then continuing to subsidize through their taxes these large corporate medical practices, hospitals and foundations such as Planned Parenthood in the process in the federal grant monies that add to our deficit and result then in those inflationary taxes for just about everything?

It would seem to me that this legislation is nothing more than an additional tax, if that is not the case.

And what about all the taxation that Americans have been paying at the state level for provision of health care for those that cannot afford it, is that also going to be refunded along with those taxes paid and that were levied in prior years in order to build many of the county hospitals throughout the country?

It seems to me that Americans have been paying for their health care already, in funding all those county hospitals throughout the nation and grant monies for research and development, and even doctor's salaries at most of the teaching hospitals.

Are those taxes and costs going to be refunded, rather than "penalizing" Americans for not having health insurance, when they have already paid at the state level for now even the health care of foreigners in this country, not to mention their own?

This such legislation would not even be an issue if the state governments, way back when, had not also desecrated the founders government in the backdoor passage of the 16th, 17th and Federal Reserve Act under Wilson, thus upsetting the balance of power they so carefully crafted in order to avoid just such taxation, invasions of privacy, and enforced tyranny as this measure appears to be.

In this economy, and with the costs of health care right now so high due to past legislation tying the hands of the states with respect to the insurers operating within their state borders, and lack of any true regulation over those huge health care networks and providers also at the federal level, yet receiving untold billions in federal grant monies for research and even building costs at the public's expense, it appears Washington's arrogance knows no bounds and this measure with its still included fines for noncompliance upon the citizenry, another measure that guarantees more people will actually be on welfare than already are.

With so many also now working below their former income levels in the middle class and losing their businesses right and left, the public has spoken about the taxation levels that already exist in this country at the present time at all levels of government.

And since the public is providing the health care coverage for all government employees without having any leftover income in order to buy their own, this type of in your face legislation is exactly why the standard of living for a good majority of Americans, while taking in more and more foreigners and refugees due to serial wars, is approaching Third World status more and more each and every day.

Most of these hospitals and huge medical co-ops and practices are already publicly funded through many state residents income, property and other taxation that have also increased in leaps and bounds.

In fact, most states throughout the nation, even after the huge amounts they received in that cure-all stimulus, went to upgrading governmental offices and buying new toys, rather than provision of those governmental services for which the entire tax system in this country was intended to provide - and have been beating the drums for increasing state taxes also in one form or another.

Huge taxes were recently levied on cigarettes throughout the country, and a great deal of those taxes actually go to fund provision of health care benefits for children and the indigent at the state levels.

Will all those taxes and costs be refunded for the boomers especially, the ones who have carried the load for both the World War II generation, and the next generation, both publicly and privately in ever increasing taxation at all governmental levels, and in the cost of most durable goods and services which has progressively occurred since World War II?

Tis the Season: Beware of Parking Lot Predators

With the holiday season upon us with everyone rushing to and fro from one retail outlet to another, and especially with the insurance focus of this latest disaster of a bill feeding the health care industry and lobbyists (mostly lawyers) once again due to the length of the bill, and actually no real accountability measures in it for those supposed "regulatory" measures included in it, maybe some reminders of what "mandatory" insurance has wrecked (pun intended) since it was enacted also over heavy objections of the public years ago in creating a "job stimulus" for lawyers.

Recently, someone related a story to me of an incident that happened to them regarding a rear end collusion, and I had a similar situation occur to me also.

Apparently, what is going on is that there are many "employees" of the scores of personal injury lawyers in this country who set up victims of parking lot mishaps (on private property), and then use the "hit and run" laws in order to then make claims on the "victims" of their scams through their employer lawyers for accident claims - especially during the holiday season when so many are pre-occupied.

As one who worked in the legal profession, I do know that most insurance companies will not litigate claims such as these due to the expense involved and time and staff constraints, and usually will offer a settlement on the accident as a "nuisance" claim, no matter how many prior accidents the claimed "victim" has been involved in even in one year with almost identical circumstances prior to that time.

Now this does happen to the best of drivers really a great deal due to our hurried lifestyles now, and also especially during the holidays (and especially due to the many distractions now of cell phones, kids, the shear number of errands most of us run now in the course of a week, etc).

These are a little different though as most occur in retail parking lots with an abundance of cars anyway, and the claim goes on the record of the stooge, and their insurance then goes up, creating additional profits then for the insurance company for the next three years. Times that times the amount of accidents, and that is quite a profit for both the disreputable personal injury lawyers, their "employees," and also the insurance company - all at the true victims expense.

Usually picking an older vehicle maybe with a few dings on it to begin with, in order to bulk up their "case,"

And since so many are distracted and in a hurry now, few or absolutely no witnesses to what actually occurred.

So as a safety and budgetary precaution from two such victims (and this occurs much more in large or midsize metro areas), look twice before you back out in this holiday rush these last two days.

Because the next "victim" of one of the "job stimuluses" created by the mandatory insurance laws could be you.

Most insurance industry experts will tell you that accidents such as these go up during the holidays. In fact, due to distraction and rushing, this week is by far the greatest job stimulus for the health care and insurance industries - which is maybe why those "economic" forecasts are up for this upcoming quarter also.

And have those laws truly reduced the amount of local expenditures needed for judges, juries and the like?

Absolutely not, because at least with jury trials on those property damage claims, even for minor damages, formerly in small claims courts the costs were low, and then appeals for the major accidents or bodily injury claims were also reduced since no judge can re-examine any fact matter placed before a jury.

Interestingly enough also, these same personal injury lawyers in quite a few states now are allowed and do also own several "corporate" chiropractic clinics then, where they send their "clients" and then inflate those bills also which are billed for those claims from their "employee" doctors.

Or use their employee doctors then as expert witnesses then on personal injury cases at lowered rates without that "fact matter" being placed before juries - that many of those experts are actually employees of the lawyers involved in some of these cases now and not "independent" medical witnesses at all as also had been the case year ago in selection of experts for personal injury civil trials.

And due to most court rules in most states throughout the country, those predatory lawyers and their employees also know (as does the insurance industry lawyer also) that in any court proceeding, serial fender bender histories over the course of even a year with paid out damage awards granted and determined by the insurers, not by juries, are not allowed to be used as an evidence against these individuals.

Of course, the "stooge's" lawyers then can bring in their witnesses for rebuttal, but of course then the costs of those claims go up for that stooge and his insurance company, while the costs of the employee client's doctors are really no skin off the noses of those disreputable personal injury lawyers at all, as also actual employees of the "corporate" lawyers due to their practices true "ownership."

I suffered an injury upon a move up north, and had a flare up of the injury and went to seek a chiropractor in order to treat it, and was denied treatment at one of such clinics since I hadn't been referred to it by one of their "partner" personal injury lawyers, and did not treat the public, but only upon those referrals.

So this is also why your auto insurance rates are off the charts, and the same obviously will occur with a 2,000 page bill full of legalese, with no "teeth" on the industries whatsoever in accountability - while the IRS is busy collecting those fines on the small business owners, those denied insurance and self-employed mainly for which this bill does absolutely nothing to address in any truly accountable fashion.

Of course, actually this is a mere drop in the bucket really for the insurers after all, although no less of a "crime" and why there are more insurance lawyers also now than all of the European nations combined - just look at how many and how expensive all those lobbyists were for this new health care deform, and the campaigning that went on - and all with your premium dollars.

Using your dollars then in order to lobby for legislation to get even more is what is occurring, and selling their policies now not through marketing but through legislation in addition to lobbying to also reduce their risks and losses at both the state and federal levels such as the now "criminal" victimless low level DUIs at the level they are at this point in time - cough medicine or a puff on an inhaler will brand you as "under the influence."

What a racket.

So when Obama uses the mandatory insurance laws (which actually are not at all similar in any respect to this travesty of health care legislation and its "mandatory" unconstitutional also focus on the citizens, rather than the industry), just think now at 2,000 pages how bogged up our courts will become once again - and how this will in the end raise, not lower, both the taxes, and personal expenses and budgets of all Americans.

And quite possibly, create another job stimulus for the criminal element.

The Saturday Massacre: Washington Political Incorrrectness and Treason Continues

As the most massive taxation and violation of the Constitution that has occurred since the Wilson treason privatizing the printing of our currency and in effect again handing over the United States back to the British under the Wilson administration that started this downhill slide of America into global corporate socialism was sent to the floor, the mainstream and citizen bloggers that are paid for the spins by some of these industries have been hard at work also trying to make light of the amount of unrest now existing in this country, and outrage of the citizens over these continued industry favoring bills that are bankupting and making more and more homeless throughout the nation such as occurred on Saturday.

Most of the global socialists publications that were screaming for George Bush's resignation and impeachment in continuing the unconstitutional war in Iraq have become suddenly silent in the fact of our continued war under Obama.

Perhaps it is nothing more than another of their politically correct problems when it comes to liberalism from one of a supposedly minority race or religion in this country, as opposed to white Anglo-Saxon Protestants that have become more and more marginalized that take issue with these continued "communistic" policies and agendas.

And the fact that every state throughout the nation now has a form of health care for the truly indigent and those in need due to circumstances beyond their control. And since it is and was the cost of health care keeping many from purchasing these plans, just how is this new legislation going to help anyone except the insurance industry itself I haven't a clue.

It did not at all address the problem, but shifted the burden for the provision of health care upon the public using Washington then as the fall guy for denied claims and is the biggest piece of industry favoring legislation to come down the pike since Nixon and Bush's corporatization of health care that has progressively occurred turning American's health into a global industry now marketed on the New York and Chinese stock exchanges.

No regulation of these industries really was included in the bill, from all reports. And just where was that bastion of civil rights and civil liberties, the ACLU, while all this was going on?

In fact, isn't legislation such as this the most fundamental violation of the "search and seizure" and property rights provisions of our Constitution ever, since at least Wilson and FDR's stated "temporary" solution for the Federal Reserve/British/European banker initiated ramifications of that first depression after World War I?

Interesting once again that the incident in Fort Hood conveniently occurred just as this measure was set for a weekend, mind you, vote. At the outrage of the public.

And this incident at Fort Hood smacks once again as a diversionary tactic.

Just why would a war protester have enlisted in the Army to begin with, even a claimed psychiatrist?

Actually, especially as a psychiatrist?

And war protestors do tend to be pacifists in nature, which is why they are war protestors. And placing this Middle Eastern doctors on a military base in Texas - which also was and is also Bush country and smacks of politics once again in that the border states and West, unlike the blue nosed Northeast, does tend to have the majority of Middle Eastern and Mexican foreigners (and illegals) since the climates do tend to be nearer to that of their former home countries itself - and also far from Washington and its games and political seclusion from the real world.

And since the Middle East situation has been escalating actually since World War II, just why is it that the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization office continues to approve applications then in this country for people from some of these countries to the U.S. given that we are now engaged in a war in the Middle East for which there is much government created hostilities through the terrorism campaigns that have gone on with the media as their agents since 9/11 also on the American people?

Like those "have a plan" ads they run on television now for the profits of their "co-conspirators" the Fox, GE and other "globally" listed mass media networks - many owned actually by avowed zionists or in the case of Fox itself, the British - who actually were responsible for that Balfour Doctrine which was then violated by the British baniker and zionists then progressively since Israel's creation prior to World War I even.

Since the original terms of that agreement did not call for any Palestinian or Christian displacements at all - and that did not happen so there are many in the Middle East that are wary and do not trust the zionists living in both this country, Britian and the Middle East and appears have some basis for that distrust historically.

And that is fact, not opinion.

So just how many more homeless and jobless does Washington intend to create again under this clueless Admiistraton - lead by once again the Global Socialist Party per Ms. Snowe, Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Obama.

And that vote count was truly unbelievable - since that was also politcal and is clealy evident from the votes since what is occurring is that the Administrations are changing but not the agendas whatsoever.

Simply a change in which party is going to play the role of the "heavy" and gain a few seats for their "corporate" memberships, while continuing to trash our Constitution and the founding father's vision right and left such as was done this Saturday and in order to bulk up their own stock portfolios in the process seems to be the agenda here.

Not what kind of country in so doing they will leave their children and grandchildren, but then after all they will be dead and will have a nice little obituary written by that same local media highlighting their "public" disservice careers.

The Pelosis, Snowes and Obamas of this world truly are seeking the world's stage and approval, not their fellow Americans - which was evident by the Saturday vote and spins that have occurred with this legislation in conjunction with their corporate sponsors.

The health care industry, and mainstream media.

After all also, without such crimes as 9/11 and the Fort Hood incident - if there truly was world peace, after all - just what would those cable news stations have to report on, and where would they gain their profits? I mean, wasn't that also the focus of that digital cable bill, since so many Americans choose not to "pay" for such propaganda and terrorism anymore since it is now clear that our media and government officials have a symbiotic relationships in not calling both parties on their true political agendas, World Government economic and political communism actually.

Congratulations, misrepresentatives. You've done Benedict Arnold proud, that's for sure.

And I do believe that treason on the Constitution itself is the highest crime, higher than capital murder in this country even such as represented was committed by this doctor, if that is what truly occurred at this point, at Fort Hood - again a multiple American victim crime which again has occurred just as more and more of the American people are speaking up about their outrage at these continued Washington social communists now that are in office, with Obama's approval ratings plummeting by the day.

Since it is clear that the only change which has now occurred has been the mouthpiece, and not the global communism agendas ala George Bush and the 110th.

As another 60's voice stated: It appears that the "second verse, is clearly same as the first."

ObamaCare: Leading America Further Into Regressive World Government?

For Any And All Conserve-ative Americans:

As so much has been left out of the mainstream media coverage on this abysmal health care deform concocted in Washington and led at this point by Max Baucus (D-MT), it is evident that the ownership of our news sources in this country have also been "globalized" with the British and world government corporate interests, that much has been clear.

Montana does, after all, border Canada.

And the bulk of the state legislatures that are supporting also this legislation have also selfish concerns in mind. Due, of course, to the unlawful passage of the 16th amendment that was also concocted behind closed doors and, contrary to the 9th Amendment itself, never placed before the people with respect to a tax (whether direct or indirect) on the fruits of the labor.

A type of tax, actually, that the founders had warned would leave their posterity homeless. And such has been the case in many instances since that time (1913) and during the Great Depression (manipulated by the Federal Reserve, which is no more than a European central bank branch out of London) now in possession of our true wealth, the gold, as security for all those debt notes in circulation.

Flooding the market with those notes of course, then depresses our currency which then in turn also makes U.S. corporations and even public utility companies (such as Palo Verde Nuclear Power Plant in Arizona servicing Arizona and parts of California) an attractive investment opportunity. Or a natural disaster and hurricane such as Katrina, or wildfires such as are now suspiciously occurring quite regularly in California more so than at any other time.

Many would say that is due to "global warming."

As one whose father was involved with the home builders and the lumber industry, I would say it is to reduce the amount of available timber in this country for, again, British (Canadian) import and trade agreements since lumber and timber is one of Canada's primary exports to this country.

But also during all of this debate, not a word has been spoken about the fact that absent Medicare and Medicaid benefits, which do cover most citizens at least for catastrophic care in their retirement years, every state in the nation now has such coverage. And it is a major expenditure due to the fact that Washington has also passed legislation affording such coverage for emergency treatments to non-U.S. citizens. And not simply foreign tourists or those working here for on-the-job injuries.

But the deliberate hirers also for the outsourced labor from Mexico, and also those here on work and student visas and other temporary arrangements. In fact, this provision instituted around twenty years ago (another backroom measure) is what has been the draw for so many of the poor Mexican citzens in the border towns, since Mexico also is one of those socialized countries where a great deal of its wealth is concentrated in Mexico City and some of the states there with the greatest populations.

Sort of like how California and parts of Texas received border fencing back in the 90's securing areas around San Diego and El Paso, while Arizona which has the largest open border by far received merely vehicle spikes for those areas which were at that time used by many of the coyotes and big time drug smugglers.

Which, of course, has changed as the terrain has in almost twenty years, since the maps printed in Mexico are revised annually.

The state legislatures which are mostly behind this just so happen to be those New England states, and border states.

The locally passed initiatives denying benefits to illegals such as has occurred in Arizona the past several years due to that state's residents contniued victimization on this issue in countless ways, has also caused those legislators grief from the federally funded illegal immigrant groups which have sprung up headed by lawyers mostly who receive their legal fees also paid by the U.S. taxpayers for any and all "civil rights" violations they bring in the U.S. courts now on behalf of illegals, whether defensive actions or now even afforded access to the courts to prosecute Americans on foreigners behalf for any manner of charges, some legitimate but many which are not. Such as the drug dealer reported suing this country in the Ramos and Compean case for the buckshot actually he received for crossing as a known drug trafficker, from all reports.

So the illegal immigrant gravy train runs wide and deep in this country for a great many in the legal profession especially, as it does for those other corporate interests who profit off those annual work and student visas.

In fact, I visited Mt. Ruthmore a few years ago and was quite surprised at the number of students from the Soviet Union that work in the ice cream store there at the park. I happen to speak with one of them who informed me that they pay immigration attorneys and/or their schools a stipend amounting to about $2,000 U.S. dollars per student per year in order to spend the summer in the U.S. working at some of our national parks and tourist attractions, facilitated through U.S. immigration lawyers.

No U.S. high school or college students were employed in the store during the summer as it was in previous generations, strictly foreigners the day I visited. And lived three and four to a room at a local hotel, which costs were subtracted then from their wages.

On the return trip from a visit to the East Coast for personal reasons also a few years back, I traveled through Williamsburg, Virginia and stayed at an inexpensive hotel there overnight since I had some car trouble on the way. The hotel, as with many of the independently owned hotels in the area, was owned by a U.S. limited liability corporation that employed also Russian students during the peak summer holiday season, and also informed me that there were many lawyers who advertised in their countries for such work visas. She also was living with three others at the hotel, and whose accomodations were also deducted from her pay, but indicated that circumstances right now in Russia are not so good, since all power lies with Moscow under their "democracy."

Although the next day as I resumed my travels I had to laugh when recalling our conversation.

Since I'm sure she knows less than most of those in this country at this point it would appear.

All power does not reside with Moscow (or Washington, for that matter, all appearances now to the contrary in our now out of control Congress and successive Administrations).

All power really lies with the bankers, as with our Federal Reserve. They do, after all, fund the campaigns and the wars for all but a very, very few countries. And both sides, since bankers have really no country loyalty other than as an investment for profit.

And they are, for the most part, British.

Health Care Deform: No Coverage? Fines Again Proposed

In several media sources today it was announced that a "draft" of some changes on the proposed health care reform legislation was "leaked" to the AP media stating that the liberal and moderate Congressional members in both the Republican and Democratic parties have now scrapped the proposed public health care "option" and instead have now included a new provision that would mandate fines for Americans up to an amount of $3,800 for those that do not carry their own health care coverage.

Since the cost of health care coverage at its now industry set rates are more than most Americans can pay of those that remain uninsured in this country (which this Administration has pegged at over 50 million, without any statistical or factual data supporting this number, many of which are actually covered under state plans due to their lower income levels or inability to get coverage by state laws already at taxpayer costs), this "solution" really is quite laughable at this point the lengths that this Congress is going in order to shove what is not at all a "reform" of health care at all.

Simply another illusion and Act of Congress that is meant more to feed the financial and insurance sector most of all.

Included within the article was a proposal by Max Baucus (D-Mt) that was pegged a compromise measure, which included the fines and legislation that would mandate that health care providers were precluded from turning anyone down for insurance, although could charge higher rates and fees for smokers or older Americans.

Although if history is any indication, I can see that those exceptions in the not so distant future will be the subject of literally decades of "revisions" on just which Americans can be charged higher rates and premiums until it eventually includes all Americans.

In short, nothing more than a corporate welfare scheme as it has always been in order to gain additional taxpayer revenue that Washington can use for discretionary expenditures, while the same time feeding the banking and financial sector once again at the American public's expense.

Nowhere in this legislation is there any accountability, fines or regulation of those health care providers insofar as their honoring those politicies, or for refusing treatments. The fines are directed at the American public and citizens instead.

Mr. Baucus indicated that this provision in the legislation would be similar to mandatory auto insurance which all Americans must carry by state laws throughout the nation at the present time.

Although, of course, I beg to differ.

Not simply because the amount of coverage and also amounts of such fines are determined at the state level, which means that such needs are regionally determined by also a lot more regulation and accountability over some of those insurers in the different states, but also the very reason such also unconstitutional legislation was passed in the first place.

The reason that there were mandatory insurance laws for auto insurance and the focus of those laws are on liability only.

And the stated reasons were due to the fact that such legislation would end up saving taxpayers the costs of providing for the salaries of more judges to hear those property claims and losses through the courts.

And was also fundamentally unconstitutional to begin with in "mandating" the purchase of a product in order to drive a vehicle in this country, since there are no such provisions over foreign drivers in any manner whatsoever.

Especially those that come from Mexico, or even Europe where they drive on the other side of the road, and as this country has had more and more foreigners granted visas and as tourists, have impacted many larger metropolitan areas tremendously in property damages to American citizens.

Some states have realized these unconstitutional laws for what they are and do have provisions for bond coverage, or provision of bank statements to satisfy the minimum liabiity coverages mandated by state laws.

But still are in no way "lawful" due to the fact that now in this "globalization" that Washington has embarked on progressively, global tourtists are exempted from this law and have created thus higher rates now for U.S. citizen drivers in order to cover also those claims and losses.

And at the present time, every state in the country now has some type of catastrophic health care for those that are either indigent or cannot obtain coverage due to pre-existing conditions.

So this "reform" is nothing more than another move to centralize more and more authority, and more and more power in Washington now over American's future health care needs, and their very lives.

And with many now jobless and homeless due to Washington's now progressive "global socialism" agendas under both Republican and Democratic Administrations within the past twenty years in order to feed big business industries such as the health care and banking sectors, if you don't have a home at this point, and your credit has been ruined in the process, how are you going to afford health care - much less then be fined for not being in compliance with this "law."

Is Mr. Obama aware that the insurance industry also uses their own internal "credit reporting" insofar as rates charged already with respect to both property and auto insurance?

Are Americans lives and health care now going to be "rated" according to their "tables" for the amount of those premiums also without any regulation or oversight insofar as what goes in those reports?

I don't see anywhere in the enumerated poweres of Congress where mandatory taxation with respect to purchasing a product, or any single payer public plan is included within the Constitution.

In fact, the taxation already which is now inflicted is unlawful for those sums at the present time which are withheld and sent to Washington technically, as is the continuation of Social Security in its present form since it was meant merely to provide for those that, upon the inability to work in their chosen field due to medical conditions or afflications, or orphans, widows or children of those who lose a parent or primary wage earner were provided a subsistence for their survival needs.

Now we are contemplating taxation and fining the citizens for not purchasing a product and for which the costs are unaffordable, by merely addressing the symptom without even doing a cursory evaluation and backtracking in order to identify what actually lead to this problem to begin with.

Lack of regulation over these "corporate" commercial interests, that have progressively increased their profit margins and their shareholder dividends at the expense of their premium payers, for the most part.

And doctor fees which are now out of sight due to both the costs of professional liability insurance in high risk fields, and also the costs in getting those educations at state and public universities that are now charging tuitions that are not even close to the CPI nor bear any relevance to the actual costs of that training in any manner whatsoever due to negligence on the part of state governments.

In which some of these universities could subsist on the revenue collected from their football and sports programs alone.

The crackpots in Washington just passed one of the largest taxes ever in that Cap & Trade scam, and now are contemplating fining homeless and jobless Americans for not having health care coverage?

And those homeless and jobless, after all, are providing theirs. In spades.

I have a heads up for Congress and Mr. Obama at this point:

End the War in the Middle East, and maybe we won't have so many future Americans that will also be without health care and needing publicly provided care since last month saw the highest number of casualties in eight years in that war, and pass legislation that the AIG debt that is owed to this country by that London based global insurer can be satisfied in increments.

By providing free catastrophic health care to all Americans for the next twenty years.

And fine them a million per denial of claim.

Since they do, after all, have credit worthy and profitable subsidiaries in over 23 different countries other than that London Mayfair office whose practices impacted the U.S. offices due to Washington's globalism agendas.

They are, after all, in the health care business.

And we are now already paying for it.

ObamaCare: No More Than Federal Actuary Tax and Power Move?

In all the discussions and propaganda that was spun by the federal mouthpieces at those townhalls, it amazed me also the choice and spins that were done by the mainstream media outlets and networks on what can only be described at its most basic level as another move by Washington to centralize more and more power in DC than at the state levels, in inflicting what is nothing more than a "Federal Actuary Tax" and not providing and performing its regulatory functions over commerce, but taking over health care delivery and provision in this country for almost all citizens, especially those past the age of 55 or 60.

Since most average Americans due to the rate increaes that occur as you age and are more "at risk" of developing medical problems or difficulties due to actuarial tables and common sense are unable to afford private coverage, unless independently wealthy or employed by one of those service sector providers.

Thus, nothing more really than a Federal Actuary Tax at its most fundamental, since at the present time there is catastrophic care and provision for children, the indigent, handicapped, and those with chronic conditions provided by every state in this union.

Although, of course, there is dual taxation on the costs for those programs in all but the five states for which there is no personal income tax at the state level. Although those states have chosen to provide those sums in other ways and through other taxation. Mostly what are known as "sin" taxes on alcohol and cigarettes. Which is also a little known motivation also behind those that are now behind legalizing marijuana throughout the nation.

It is simply another way to open a market for the pharmaceutical industry for their "branding" and packaging costs, and also means to gain more state and federal taxation in the process in the form of those "sin" taxes.

Not a word has been spoken about whether or not state taxes will be reduced for those sums now collected which fund these programs. So, all appearances to the contrary, it would appear the state legislatures are also publicly supporting those that are opposed to this heinous legislation on the one hand, while privately most serving on those legislatures are the biggest proponents of this legiation in some for or another.

So that the states then also benefit in the additional source of accountable revenue they would then have access to for their NGOs and discretionary expenditures.

And, of course, those that do admit to having such a motivation also, point to the added police, fire protection or school revenue which would be available. Which, of course, historically such moves to transfer unconstitutionally authority for state issues and matters have not gone into funding those state public services at all, merely also their "sovereign subject" political campaign backers and special interest groups.

And Washington and this Administration and Congress are taking it one step further even than that. Placing themselves in the position then of administrators on a federal concocted "preferred provider list" also in order to pay back national and global interests at the cost of those small insurers and groups that provide plans at the state level. Again attempting to centralize more power in DC, and less at the state level and small businesses and emerging companies in the health care provision sector.

Which is why Mayo is now nationwide at this point, and these "health care networks" are also spreading throughout the country at a rapid pace.

And if these industries have such massive profits that they are able to afford K Street lobbyists for their industries to begin with, isn't that a clue that the costs that are being now charged for health care provision bear absolutely no relevance at all to "reasonable" profit or the true costs of delivery of those services?

What is needed is regulation of the plans which are sold, and corporate interests who have been using their profit margins in order to gain more and more access to the American people's wallets using their own physical health and existence in order to profit for the industry greed and corporate self-interests.

And more would go into public health careers also if the amounts of tuition charged at our state and public universities also bore relevance to the true costs of those educations, since most of those colleges are funded with property tax revenues and other taxes - and as such, the children of those that are funding that university are now being charged close to what private universities in the past charged for higher education.

This solution, as the "rescue" of the banks due to that manipulated crisis, auto industry "takeover" and Washington joint venture, and foreclosure "remedy" which was nothing more than feeding the Federal Reserve bank branches as "agents" to negotiate those foreign investors debts and flip American homeowners properties for bank additional gain and profit, is another convenient excuse for Washington to use the American citizens health corporate gain.

And "create" more taxpayer paid government jobs in the process in order to create more debt for the Federal Reserve and Wall Street financial sector's also eventual profit.

In inflicting on the now many homeless, after that "Cap and Trade" scam in order to also feed a new Wall Street "gambling" venture for the venture capitalists in this country, now a Federal Actuary Tax and nothing really more.

And the federal and state collusion in the negligence and hands off approach to major corporate industries for their welfare is simply now coming home to roost. But the "quick fix" again in this instance, will simply lead to higher costs, and more loss of American life in the process deemed "expendable" by the new Obama created position, "God," in charge of yet another independent regulatory agency unaccountable to Congress, by and large, in any manner whatsoever.

Like the IRS, but even much more dangeous as a true public safety threat. And another extra-Constitutional power move in federalism, rather than the founders original form of government as framed within our Constitution, Constitutional Republicanism.

I would like to know who is overseeing Harvard's Law School curriculum and most others now in this country, the British?

Commercial Stakeholders Wrote ObamaCare, Remember?

To Any And All Constitutional Conservative Americans:

This week while all the mass media attention has been now focused on the death of the liberal Ted Kennedy and his "contributions" to American politics, much is being used also with respect to his fight for "health care reform" printed by the mainstream media.

What? And Why?

Massachusetts is one state that already has a socialized "comprehensive" health care program which was enacted under Mitt Romney, another liberal, so at a loss why now there is all this focus on Kennedy's fight for health care reform when, as a federal legislator, his true constituency and concerns had already been addressed at the state level in providing such care for those who are unable to get insurance, or for catastrophic needs.

As has every single state in the union now such health care plans, funded by state taxation at varying levels and accountable then much more at a local level as intended by the founders for such legislation as this.

This legislation does appear nothing more at this point than a "Health Care Actuary Tax" and another move to centralize more power in Washington, than at the state level per Constitutional intent. Congress's main duties in domestic matters are limited, after all, to regulation of commercial interests at the public's expense, not consulting with the commercial interests ("stakeholders" in the now politically correct redefinition) for their benefit and welfare at the public's expense.

The new buzzword now being used for political correctness in more and more legislation for the commercial special interests lobbying for more and more share of the public's purse in government welfare appears to be "stakeholders."

Stakeholders are being consulted on the border issue now also by Ms. Napolitano's office. And just who are these "stakeholders" that are being consulted? Certainly not the victims or their families who have been robbed of their lives and property progressively during the past twenty years since the first Reagan amnesty passed also without addressing the open borders situation or criminal "hoppers", but the big businesses and commercial interests actually profiting off of the open borders.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce members, and gadget industries of Silicon Valley most of all. And, of course, the illegal immigrant focused special interest groups like LaRaza.

Whose only real apparent interest stepped up when some of those state level employer sanctions laws were being placed on ballots in the Southwest due to the American citizen initiatives initiated by many of the literally thousands of victims of illegal immigrant crimes over the past two decades, which concerned them greatly as a threat to many also Latino businesses which also hire them or could be penalized. Or apparently some of that motivation I'm sure can be traced to simply wishing to get some of their relatives off the couch and into homes of their own.

Since without those borders being secured, those illegals would be dumb to take Uncle Sam up on such an offer.

To do so most likely would result in losing those "jobs Americans don't want in construction, manufacturing, agriculture and technology now to next month's new crop of illegals or even a number of those bulk foreigner work visa imports, and that new cheap housing they were able to qualify for in the process due to the depression in the market which has been manipulated this past four years in order for them to qualify, relieving them then of their savings for those junk fees and heavy front end costs for the "creative" loans which are still being sold since the true cause of what occurred has not been addressed in the slighest by either this or the last Administration.

Simply American taxpayer money and more debt incurred for the Fed bankers and to pump up those banks stocks on Wall Street and in order to use those banks as the government's agents to "buy down" those foreign investor debts at the American people's and those homeowners expense and flip those properties to potentially you new non-English speaking patsies.

Nothing more than a massive governmental Ponzie scheme, as it were.

So when you hear the term "stakeholder" used by the federal government with respect to upcoming legislation, substitute the words "taxpayer welfare recipient" and "government joint venture co-conspirator and state actor" instead.

In order to be truly "politically correct."

ObamaCare: The Snake In The Grass Rears Its Ugly Head

In listening to Barack Obama's Western "Sell ObamaCare" tour, as a child of the 1950's and 1960's, the only impression that I had listening to a small fraction of his hard sell spiel in the various Western states on this ludicrous legislation in its current form is to that of the old Al Wilson song, "The Snake" ("Take me in, tender woman....take me in for goodness sake").

Since the lyrics are copyrighted but are on the internet for "educational purposes," I'll leave it to the reader to do that research on their own.

The most egregious portion of this legislation actually is one that has not been brought up in any significant manner whatsoever during the public townhalls that Congressional members have been conducting across the nation in order to also propagandize the entire unconstitutional focus of this legislation and Washington power move.

And according to the 9th Amendment, would appear to undertake such an action at all would take a formal amendment of the Constitution, with the "consent of the governed," given voice and vote as not at all within the parameters of Washington's enumerated powers even in light of the abridgements which resulted in both Franklin's New Deal with respect to Social Security, and many other power moves since then in violation of it.

Social Security, after all, was original presented to the public as a "temporary" measure due to World War II, and also was to provide for orphans, widows, children and the affirmed most of all from that war. And ease this country back also from the stock market crash and depression which preceded it after World War I.

And there were at that time lids on eligibility as understanding that those that had profited then from those wars, should help pay the costs in both blood and treasure that were the result as a Godly nation. Of course, those wars too were manipulated for bank profits also most of all and debts from World War I actually also lead to World War II.

Right now there does exist in all 50 states already catastrophic coverage for all citizens who are either unable to afford private health care coverage, or are uninsurable for any reason. So in effect all this is really is another method in order to centralize more and more power in Washington, and less and less local accountability to state citizens in the process and gain more revenue for the states for discretionary purposes - along with the corporate entities that will also profit.

Within the stimulus and tied into this legislation is the establishment of a National Health Care Database using Bill Gate's technology and college grant monies to students in order to input all Americans health records into a "Big Brother" database.

If you think straightening out your credit report is next to impossible when it is inaccurate or there has been any "identity theft," just imagine the potential for error or mistaken identity on a national database of your personal medical information. Or that such a database in the future could be used against you for future unrelated reasons.

You think this is Obama's definition of "scare tactics?"

If history serves and never more so than in recent history, the "rights" of the public and citizens under our Bill of Rights is not at all recognized by either the legislative officials at federal or state levels even, nor the judiciary. Rather, the new buzzwords in order to deny or disparage those rights have been "in the interests of public safety" or "state interests."

In other words, the "corporate" not "individual" rights at all.

Just imagine how those corporate lobbyists will eventually gain access to those records under progressive legislation in order to deny employment to those with chronic (although not work related) health conditions such as AIDs, HIV, asthma, heart murmur, previous cancer treatments, addiction counseling, etc.

Just imagine how lawyers special interest groups, one of the most active group of lobbyists bar none for their welfare, can then also eventually gain access to those records without warrants or subpoenas for civil or criminal actions.

Just where is the supposed largest "civil rights" organization, the ACLU right now? Probably helping the lawyers write this 1,000 for their eventual "corporate" welfare. I wonder how much the taxpayers costs will increase now also in order to handle all these potential civil rights abridgement cases once that behemoth database and its bugs start to rear their ugly head in denied coverages, loss of life, etc.

Those costs are nowhere in the economic projections that I can determine.

What Mr. Obama is clearly asking is the American people to deny history.

What happened when so many Americans were the victims of the abusive practices of the IRS in their out of control pursuit of Americans for past due taxes, even for sums that were not taxes at all but simply agency determined interest or penalties?

Washington merely created another "agency" called the Taxpayer Advocacy Office that is nothing more than another branch of the federal government and also a benefactor of tax collection. It did not provide adequate oversight or regulation of the IRS in any manner whatsoever, even though there is much debate to this day about the 16th Amendment and how it was ratified "without the consent of the governed" for taxation of the people's income and diametrically opposed to the founder's intent for taxation in this nation.

Skirting around in providing that these extra taxes would be technically indirect taxation through corporate employers doesn't erase the inherent Constitutional violation such legislation entails. It is not within the original parameters of the Constitution, and is a seizure of wages (property) for governmental purposes most of all at its most basic level transferring the fruits of their labor back to Washington's "sovereign" governmental contractors and "approved" providers. And violative of the Bill of Rights with respect to even religious provisions for many, not to mention "search and seizure" of personal and private records by federal personnel without any recourse for misuse or access with respect to that federal database.

What did Washington do after all the complaints of citizens on the practices of collection agencies and the credit reporting bureaus in their unregulated practices?

Simply provide legislation that allows citizens to file a two sentence "dispute" of items contained in the report, which are sent to the reporting agency for their "version," which for all intents and purposes was no solution at all. Especially against the agencies which rebundled debts and continued to attempt to collect even on satisfied principal balances attempting to then gain more sums each time those debts were resold for their own profit.

Obama is attempting to actually reassure a younger generation that does not remember that Washington's word with respect to legislation such as ObamaCare and a host of others has been about as trustworthy as The Snake's.

Case in point: the foreclosure "rescue" which already has proved it was more for the banks and lenders, than the defrauded homeowners who are being stalled while collecting all those bogus fees included in those contracts and even more for the services of mortgage advisors and "new" appraisals, prior to carrying out those eventual foreclosures in order for the banks and realtors to get most of those properties on the cheap in order to flip for their profits.

So next time the Snake charmers come to your town, or Mr. Obama makes another of his folksy speeches, our younger generation might remember the addage that was the battle call of their parents generation upon which Mr. Wilson's song actually was based and had political ramifications for many.

The "Don't Trust Anyone Over 35 Mantra" was directly related to politicians and politicos during that era of the first true pre-emptive war. It might be expanded to now include politicians that use scare and terrorism tactics themselves in order to forment their political agendas.

The history in this country which has brought us to where we are now with respect to health care provision, is like the story of The Snake, proves that "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

It has been "progressive" power moves and Constitutional violations that have created this "crisis," after all.

Silly woman.

What's Not Being Disclosed On Obamacare

Interesting in all the debates now on the mainstream media that some rather pertinent facts and observations have also been kept from the public in all the brouhaha surrounding Obama's and Congress's plans for health care reform.

At the present time, there is already a socialized health care program for seniors at the federal level called Medicare. At the state levels there is also now health care plans that are funded for the indigent, those that have been denied coverage due to pre-existing conditions, dependent children of the working poor, and even illegal immigrants for emergency care services (which are used to visit hospital emergency rooms for cases of the flu, and result in six hour waits for lawful Americans in many hospitals now throughout the country).

In effect, we already have health care insurance and provision for all Americans at some level or another. There is also self-insurance for the wealthy, and those that choose to self-insure for regular doctor visits but simply carry catastrophic care.

Right now, all of these programs are funded by the citizens at either the federal or state levels, with the states then required to provide matching sums with respect to some of these programs (except the one for the illegals, which is picked up at the federal level, which is why so many of those local initiatives denying such services to the illegals are really quite ludicrous since those services and costs are federal laws, not local, and the health care industry know that).

It appears what this truly is is simply another way to centralize more and more power in Washington, increase our federal deficit then in the process for the benefit of the European bankers that rape the American people for their services in printing our currency, and Wall Street once again for the health care sector.

And, of course, the politicians for their future careers.

What also has been left unsaid is that the costs for these programs will now come out of every American's paychecks through their corporate employers, and as with social security, leaves the door open then for future legislation then involving "matching sums" from those employers for those benefits.

And the fact is, since the federal government cannot mandate that health care providers accept lower cost insurance or a government plan for any patients that they treat, can result in paying for years into this program and then when needing care not be able to find a health care provider that accepts these plans. Right now due to the low payment levels involved, there are many providers that do not accept new Medicare patients.

And while many of them do accept new patients for childbirth, most OB-GYNs won't accept them for surgical reasons otherwise. Since to do so would mean they have "committed" to that patients future care and then cannot deny them treatment when the costs of their treatment or specific needs outweighs the amounts the state or local plans are willing to pay.

Ethically, once a doctor accepts you as a patient, he cannot deny then future treatment. Thus, why so many doctors have now posted signs indicating that they will not accept future Medicare patients.

So you may be paying for this "universal" plan in taxation, yet then be unable to use it for your elder care needs when you may truly need it if there are not enough doctors in your local community that are willing to take on new patients.

And since the next generation of Americans is far fewer than the previous baby boomer generation was, this scenario has more basis in fact, than fiction.

So continue to believe the spins, America, but what the government wants in this legislation is merely to centralize more of the power in Washington, and more access to the fruits of your labor through their corporate "state actor" entities, since special interests wrote this legislation, after all, and that is who both Congress and Mr. Obama have been hard at work consulting.

Hoping that the older generation doesn't connnect that the AARP is the largest provider of supplemental plans, and speaks for the industries and trade groups that market through them, not at advocates for seniors at all. Nor does the AMA speak for most doctors either, simply their own also supplemental plans and trade groups. Nor the unions, just in order to get more for the corporate health care provider under their banner who also sell "supplemental" plans to their members. And with the government as the primary provider in these instances and then fall guy for denied treatment without any recourse for Big Daddy's refusal other than petitioning the very entity that refused the treatment to begin with, a great way for those supplemental carriers who give kickbacks to those organizations a way to reap massive revenue without ever having to pay out on any claims.

That's why the "corporate" interests have been meeting with Congress all summer behind those closed doors.

Just to make sure their "interests" and wallets were covered. Not yours.

The High Cost Of Health Care: From Then To Now

For Any And All Conserve-ative Constitutionalists:


With all the hard sell both the Democrat and Republican Global Socialists on the Hill have been doing and will continue to do this month before they "readdress" Obama's call for health care reform and using it as public forums for re-elections in their "versions" and the revisions they personally have either included or attempted to place in this heinous Big Daddy government again legislation, maybe it might be worthwhile to take a stroll down memory lane to see how we got from affordable health care now to the astronomical rise which has occurred, along with our progressively declining infant survival rates.

First, global and national insurers formed a union of insurance providers and started meeting supposedly in order to increase the quality of health care in the United States. During those meetings, however, they also began standardizing health care coverages and price fixing the policies which were offered to the public.

Initially simply businesses that existed as a "shared pool" for the premium payers, they instead became megacorporations and took on a "business model" mindset in that profit, and profit alone, was their driving force. They then hired lobbyists with their extra premium monies from their policyholders, and began lobbying the federal and state legislatures throughout the country in order to gain more profit at the policyholder's expense.

The politicians, of course after being wined and dined, complied. Instead of regulating those large now "commercial" corporporation, they began to write more and more industry favoring laws which then also afforded these large global and national insurers to invest those premiums in high risk stocks and investments, and then to also to conglomerate and branch out into other areas of the financial sector such as also owning banks, real esate companies, and other forms of commerce.

Hence Prudential Insurance also owned Prudential-Bache Securities, and Prudential Real Estate. All with the policyholder's premiums and then individual shareholders as their main sources of investment capital. Thus, the insurers used the premium payers premiums actually against them in order to gain more.

Congress then passed an Act attempting to negate the provisions of the Commerce Clause with respect to insurance companies forbidding any and all states from effectively also regulating the insurers who were incorporated within their state borders. Although, of course, this was also not within their Constitutional authority to so do, as the federal government actually was intended to work for the states and people and accountable to them, not as their sovereign ruler as it were dictating extra-Constitutional authority at the state level then also affecting the rights of the people, not corporate interests, in the process. An amendment, of course, would be needed for such a "privilege or immunity" with respect to regulation of this now commercial industry being exempt by the feds for any nationwide or global insurer. And could not ban in any event the states from regulating any that were incorporated within their own state borders with respect to policies sold to state citizens as "intrastate" and not "interstate" commerce.

Then, the Trial Lawyers Association progressively also started its own lobbying efforts at the state level in order to remove and rewrite the civil codes under the common law in the states which then removed the "lid" on punitive damages for medical malpractice claims which had been in effect since the Magna Carta and under the British common law at a maximum of three times the amount of the actual damages in any negligence claims on the part of doctors. Doctor's malpractice insurance rates then skyrocketed and went off the charts. Many in high risk fields simply left the practice of medicine, such as obstetrics, or went into other areas where their insurance was more affordable.

Due then to inflation and spiraling costs of college tuition which bore no relevance whatsoever to the cost of living, the cost to train new doctors made most of those who graduated paupers and bankrupt before they even graduated, much less were able then to pay the costs for setting up their private practices. Many ended up filing bankruptcy, and then working for othe physicians as lab assistants or hospitals until their bankruptcy records were cleared and the were able to qualify for loans.

Then, Richard Nixon during his last term of office, also succumbed to more lobbying pressure and afforded the health care providers to "unionize" also in order to spread their risk and costs since the costs of malpractice insurance then continued to climb with each and every outrageous punitive damage award that then came down the pike. Now there are HMOs and health care networks which involve seeing multiple doctors many times in order to simply get a diagnosis, or even your average physical. Boards of Directors of these huge networks then were evaluating and determining patient care rather than the physicians themselves. Factory line operations then became the norm, as did the 24 hour childbirth or mastectomy.

Doctors were "fined" huge sums, but due to the fact that their medical licenses are issued by the states but for which there is also little regulation or procedural statutes addressing consistently negligent doctors for removal of their licenses, many of these awards became even greater still upon successives suits and claims.

Of course, the lawyers got the bulk of the "extra" awards over the compensatory losses, rather than the one third that was also provided under common law for contingency awards. And started factoring in profit margins for their costs for the expert witnesses also needed in such claims for lawyer profit.

So there you have it. The history of the high cost of health care in this country, and why we now are where we are with respect to both the decline in quality of care, and exhorbitant increases in cost.

And Obama and this Congress have been busy little bees this past few months colluding with the very same industries and associations which are responsible now for where we are today due to their huge profits and campaign lobbying efforts. Instead of backing up, and closing the door, and reviewing all the industry favoring statutes and laws which have progressively occurred in their failures to truly regulate commerce and these huge commecial corporations at both the state and federal levels in order to protect the citizens who actually have provided the profits which afforded them this unconstitutional leverage from the wolves. THEY are not their constituents. They are industry.

Somehow, it appears the name and provisions of of this bill as is being reported and presented as any true reform under the title, "The Affordable Health Care Act," smacks of the same mockery and betrayal of the American people on behalf of "foreign" interests and commerce that the "Patriot Act" consisted of.

Obama and Congress's Non-Universale Health Care Plan: Are States Ceding Powers?

What is now being presented in "politically correct" terms as is being reported on the universal health care plans now being "hatched" in Washington is nothing more than using "politically correct" corporate logic and analogy to justify a plan under which the Nazi's operated.

Evaluate life on a cost/benefit ratio, and genetic superiority by subjective criteria. And that criteria will be some lackey in Washington trained as an actuary according to the health care provider (since this will be a huge government contract, I would imagine that it will be Warren Buffett and AIG, the global insurer "bailed out" on the backs of the American people that get the contract, in another public/private partnership to "stimulate" the global economy and as payback for Mr. Buffett's campaign support of a great many of those on the Hill over the years no matter which party "officially" was in office, since he has expressed interest in expanding his empire to global investment as recently as two to three years ago).

And Buffett is a zero population growth guy (although has three children of his own, so zero growth must not apply to those who consider themselves as genetically superior and apparently own businesses that provide fundamental "life" costs and owe their very livelihoods to the public as now more a financial services company than a solely publicly funded "product" which it is).

What is needed is regulation over the health care industry, which was actually circumvented under Nixon who allowed medicine to be corporatized with that HMO concept. Which has resulted in Boards of Directors, rather than doctors, now determining levels of treatment. And the "caps" placed back on punitive damages for medical malpractice awards that stood at the treble levels under the common law throughout our nations history until the TLA went across the country getting those lids removed for their own "welfare."

Not getting into bed with the unions and insurers, or taking over health care which is determined then by the "distant ruler." And also evaluating just why it is that the costs to train new doctors has far exceeded the cost of living and bears no relevance at all to the actual costs.....since the taxpayers themselves fund those universities in which they are trained.

This is a nightmare, and all those that think this is a solution, you are talking Orwell here now.

Not to mention that even at its most basic level, the entire socializing of our health care is actually not at all a governmental function under our existing law, the U.S. Constitution.

What is needed is what the founders provided. Strict regulation of those national and global insurers, and also better oversight of doctors independent of the AMA, and also breaking up those "monopolies" and health care networks that are using business models now in order to evaluate health care provision, and incompetent and morally challenged doctors who are supplementing their practices and services for governmental cut rate costs by upping their charges on the insureds and those who they profile CAN afford the higher costs.

Some of their support staff know how to work those health insurance forms to the max, and are actually given bonuses if they reach certain quotas set by these health care networks and mega doctor's practices.

Neither business models, nor governmental actuaries have any moral fibre or background. And if anything this is not an "industry" at all, it is a basic service that is a need at one time or another for all Americans.

So the lax oversight of this industry and favoritism for the health care leeches such as the unions and providers is what has lead to this. And Nixon's crap with the HMO concept, and over-inflated costs to train new doctors for the banker's profit margins which makes most of them bankrupt before they even begin their practices.

But I think what is being missed by most Americans is that whether or not to provide or "socialize" health care really is a state issue, not a federal one at all. That is why the local governments were to be the most powerful, not the federal government for such matters as public education, and health costs.

And that the states are voluntarily ceding their power to the federal government, all representations in the 10th Amendment movement to the contrary. Because then the states don't have to come up with those "matching sums" and then have more of the public purse to spend on unaccountable and pork projects for their campaign backers.

So I think the true picture here is being obscured by both Congress and the media reports. Because right now the feds are already providing health care for the underinsured and less fortunate, and also now even "illegal" and non-Americans. This "universal" health care that Obama is proposing is nothing more than putting another party, the federal government, now DIRECTLY involved in determining care, rather than the state.

And Americans will have no recourse then other than suing the federal government if denied coverage, and there is a federal statute that provides only for the reimbursement for the actual demonstrated losses, not punitive damages or even the costs or bringing the suit itself. This entire plan will remove actually any and all accountability for health care provision from insurers and also the medical community. Which is why, also all "public faces" to the contrary, the medical community and insurers are also behind it.

That way the insurers can also sell those "supplemental plans" at ridiculous rates, but then fail to pay on them and blame the federal government (the primary insurer) for the denial of also their provision if the federal government denies the coverage.

The truth is actually much more Machiavellian than what is being portrayed. And the headlines so far really tell it all. It is "cut rate" and loss/benefit care, and it appears the boomer generation is one which the federal government would like to get rid of at the earliest opportunity. And also those that are not productive, and each successive generation thereafter.

Until pretty soon, the life expectancy in this country will eventually equal the birth rate survival and be less than third world countries.

I just love that NO ONE ever thinks to examine just why in most of these areas we now are where we are with respect to health care, and our economy. No one examines our history to see how veering from the Constitution and Constitutional intent, has brought us to where we are.

And I disagree on the economy. The reason things haven't "picked up" is because the market is speaking, and by that I mean the American people. Who would buy a home today with the way those loans are written, since the terms of the loans which also created this disaster have not been addressed or changed in some of their usurous terms and rates?

Nothing has changed, Obama is simply attempting to entice the new home buyers and refinancing in order to trap another generation in the boom and bust cycle -which is the fault of the unregulated and uncontrolled Federal Reserve and its policies.

No one is buying into the stock market, because Obama and Congress proved that when push comes to shove, it is the unions and foreign investors that are protected, not the individual American investor.

Do you really think these lessons have not been lost on most educated or aware Americans? And how many that have lost their homes now can qualify for new ones, what with the lack of regulation also over the credit reporting services?

These guys are in their own bubble. The market is speaking, and so are the Americans. We aren't buying your products because you are all a bunch of scam artists.

The people have spoken.

The Downside To Government Provided Health Care: Not Just More Taxes

Last week Barack Obama called leaders of the insurance industry, pharmaceutical companies and labor organizations for a pow-wow regarding one of his fundamental quests as stated during his campaign: health care reform.

Although these three industries are not in any way directly tied to patient care and delivery, it appears Mr. Obama is playing diplomat with this issue and appeaser with these industry leeches in order that they don't lose a piece of their pie under any anticipated governmental program.

Under Obama's plan, it is estimated that approximately 119 million Americans would shift from private insurance to the governmental plan, putting America on the path toward a completely government run socialized health care system. This, of course, would not sit well with the private insurance carriers who would stand to not only lose business, but their very shirts and the jobs of many who are currently hawking those policies to private businesses and individuals.

The pharmaceutical industry, of course, is quite concerned because under any government plan generics and other effective lower cost drugs (think penicillin and cheaper antibiotics) on which there isn't as much profit would most likely be the preferred and "authorized" treatment with Uncle Sam picking up the tab.

Many of those drug company representatives peddling their "new and improved" wares to doctors would also lose their jobs in the process, and a few of those free bonus trips, and the physicans and health care providers a few holiday gifts.

The unions earned their seat at the appeasement table due to the fact that any government plan would impact Big Labor and their own health care plans which have their administrative mark ups also built in which would, most likely, be negotiated away during the next collective bargaining session.

Mr. Obama during his campaigns assured the American people that the governmental plan he was proposing would simply be an "alternate," with Americans then able to make a choice between the government plan or retaining their own private carriers.

What was left unsaid, however, is that most private insurance is not bought by individuals in this country, but by their Big Business employers. Employers who have shareholders to answer to, and are now facing economic woes of their own throughout many major industries due to this Washington precipitated economic meltdown.

Just how long do you think those employers will keep those group plans once the government plan undercuts them?

What also was left unsaid is that the Obama plan also intends to parent America's children and youth, and mandate that parents must insure their children and themselves, and also feed Washington in providing fines and fees for non-compliance.

In other words, another non-consensual tax in the making that, if Medicare and Medicaid are any indication, will be used for other "discretionary" purposes and be an unaccountable bottomless pit of taxation.

I look for this scenario to go one of two ways:

(1) Mr. Obama will continue in his role as appeaser to all with the exception of Joe Citizen, and will attempt to placate the union bosses and fat cat pharmaceutical executives and insurers by cutting back his legislation to be a bare bones "emergency treatment" policy, with the intent not to totally "socialize" health care in this country but afford Americans then to visit their local insurance agent and sign up for supplemental coverage.

Sort of like Plan A or B supplements for the seniors, only privately obtained. And those supplemental plans will be also subject to increasing costs based upon claims as with the plans now offered, with the government plan as "primary," which will not kick in unless and until you have used the government benefits first, with the insurance industry then able to use the government as the scapegoat for denied treatments.

(2) Or Mr. Obama and Congress in the fine print of the bill will enter into public/private partnerships with the major insurance carriers in this country, and Big Labor privileges of adding in their profit and cut into the government contracts to the amounts which will be required to be withheld from employee/union member paychecks as "administration" fees, with the pharmaceutical industry perhaps being afforded longer patent rights for new medications retroactively and sums for promised grants for future research costs, especially since the embryonic stem cell bill now has been accorded them for their future profits also.

(NOTE: the patent for the original outrageously expensive drugs for AIDS which are used by and large still today expire in 2017, since litigation over ownership rights for the drugs began almost immediately after its "discovery" and have extended the patents on them already an additional 10 years since the patents don't begin until ownership is established, with two companies now sharing those profits since the case was subsequently settled in the early 90's).

The lives of Americans, and especially the large baby boomer generation, are now being bargained for between the insurers, pharmaceutical industries, and big labor.

And I wonder just what recourse will be included for citizens if denied treatment, or if there are any delays or negligence in the care received by government employed physicians and hospitals? What kind of shell game then might Americans face in attempting to redress those grievances between the bureaucrats, insurers, big labor and pharmaceutical companies playing "Whose on first?"

Another take:

http://www.getbetterhealth.com/tag/galen-institute

Gee, I wonder if in this instance as in others whether following our Constitution might be a better idea, and break up the "associations" of these large industries in order to facilitate a truly free market once again, and get Big Labor out of the insurance and health care business which they had no right to enter into in the first place.

Maybe simply beginning to perform their Constitutional function in regulating and overseeing both the type of plans sold at either federal or state levels depending on carrier customer base and home office location.

For accountability, then funding a centralized complaint department for the American citizens to utilize which might be a better useage of those stimulus monies instead of what is going to become another Lawyers Employment Act in its violation of citizens privacy rights with that concocted national health care database for citizens medical information for the feeder industries and states nefarious purposes in the interest of "public unsafety."

I foresee such a bureaucratic administrative nightmare in the end will result in eventually putting small business physicians and software providers out of work, and ultimately increase costs due to government fees and costs which will be tacked on to the patients bills in order utilize that huge mistake-in-the-making system to store and transfer patient records, even if the correct records get transferred. Just imagine the potential lawsuits for unauthorized, misused or incorrect information.

Maybe what we need to do here is step back a moment and look at the legal and "long view."

What a novel idea.