Capitalizing on Gabby: Giffords Interview Poses Questions

As a former long term Arizonan of 45 years, I just could not bring myself to watch the entire much publicized interview with Gabrielle Giffords, the Congresswoman from Tucson who was shot ten long months ago by a gunman in a Tucson grocery store parking lot along with six others who perished in the incident.

Why?

It was far too personal, and painful for me personally...

Ms. Giffords was not my representative, but from a state that I hold dear to my heart and in which I grew up in long ago when times were different, and things were much simpler.

She, too, is a native and long term Arizonan from the second largest city in Arizona, in the still wild and wooly west (if you speak to any Easterner, that is, who has never been there for any length of time other than possibly for rehab).

I had seen snippets of the interview, which Diane Sawyer seemed to publicize on every ABC affiliated program and station in the nation the past several weeks.

Gabby is courageous, that much is evident.

And still very much healing...

What I found totally unbelieveable is that this interview comes on the heals of a book that she supposedly "wrote" with her husband, astronaut Mark Kelly.

Ms. Giffords has come a long way, but is still having a great deal of trouble with her speech, although is remarkably improved from where she has been to where she is now. But capable of even corroborating on a book, while continuing her intensive therapy?

I highly doubt it.

Not to mention the fact that most of the entire segment seemed geared also toward extolling the virtues of the medical profession and her somewhat unusual therapy for her traumatic brain injuries at TIRR Medical Center in Houston, Texas (which also just so happens to be the home of her husband, a non-Arizonan).

In Ms. Giffords present condition, though again remarkable, I just wonder how much she understood and consented to this interview, given her still healing brain function, and seemed she was once again being used clearly for a political agenda.

It is, after all, less than a year until the next major election, and the Supreme Court today "advised" the public that it would be hearing the lawsuits which have occurred in light of the passage of ObamaCare, and that dreaded and unconstitutional "mandatory" provision contained within it.

Gaining public support and sympathy prior to the hearing of that case, seems to be also a focus of both the medical profession (who will benefit ultimately) and also the politicians who sold out the American people with the passage of that provision and those founding fathers.

Gabby Giffords did vote for that bill, although is receiving care that will and is far exceeding that which would be given to any "regular" American citizen under some of those "low cost" health care plans marketed through those "co-ops" Mr. Obama envisions.

And in states such as Arizona, most of the "native" citizens have been paying for many of those hospital research grants, and also operating costs through their state property taxes, in addition to the monies they contribute to their state through the income tax, and also at the federal levels.

Here's to Ms. Giffords full and complete recovery, whenever that may be...

But let's hope that Diane Sawyer, and those media types leave her alone until then...and the politicians, lawyers and the Supreme Court start arguing their case for ObamaCare on Constitutional grounds.

On which, there really aren't any...

The Twilight Zone: Texas Man Gets Face Transplant

Today it was reported in the mainstream media that a young man injured in an industrial accident from Texas was given a full face transplant by a team of over 30 doctors in Boston.

The operation was funded by his father's insurance plan apparently and it was also reported that this surgery was made possible by the recent health care legislation which afforded him to remain under his father's health care plan until he reached the age of 26, and he was at the time of the surgery 25.

Not to go too far into the rather Twilight Zone surgical procedure that also was undertaken transplanting the face of one individual onto another (although the donor also remained nameless in the article), rather than applauding again this faulty legislation for what it is, a violation of our Constitution in its present form, maybe we could ask just why this young man had run out of options and benefits prior to this legislation to begin with?

It was reported he had had over 30 operations prior to this one, and his state indigent health care benefits had thus run out, although will qualify for Medicare when he turns 26. Although I for one was covered through an employer many years ago with dependent coverage so long as those dependents, my children, were still dependent for tax purposes and either going to school, or living at home, until age 25.

I wonder, what was the overall costs for those 30 operations, while most likely those corporate hospitals and medical facilities were getting their public grant monies also for the bulk of the sums for their operating costs and expenses?

Why was this surgery also not performed in a "fellowship" or teaching hospital, due to its rather experimental nature (less than a half dozen of these surgeries have been performed at this point throughout the world).

I for one heard the Twilight Zone theme in the background while reading this particular news story.

Obama and Calderon Plan Meet and Greet While More Americans Die

It was announced by the White House press corps that Barack Obama plans to meet with Mexico's President Felipe Calderon in the near future with respect to the border situation. A meeting announced and purportedly planned prior to the recent events in both Arizona and Mexico which have once again cost several Arizonans and Americans their lives due to the escalating tensions over the border situation, and another recent death of a U.S. border patrol agent in Mexico this past week.

A death that then also was attributed to guns smuggled into Mexico from the U.S., which firearms just so happened to trace back to the State of Texas?

I mean, as a long term Arizona resident it doesn't appear that drug cartel members are "buying" guns from the U.S. but from those smuggled in from South America which are unregistered and thus for the most part untraceable as has been historically the case. Or those they appropriate from the many law enforcement personnel whose lives have also been taken during the escalating violence at the border.

I wonder, at this point in America's history with the decades long and increasing violence, and the number of American lives and property losses which have also increased ten to twenty fold since the mid 1950's in the border area, would the founding fathers still be holding discussions with the government of Mexico over the loss of American lives and property, rather than actually securing our porous southern borders and providing for the common defense of the citizenry as is their primary Constitutional duty and function?

The "discussions" are continuing, and one of the topics is "immigration reform" of those poorer citizens from Mexico who also have had to flee that country due to its poorer economy and also the violence which continues to occur there so that those cartels, and the auto thieves that operate cross borders can continue to market their products on both sides of the border.

A situation which has also fundamentally increased since the Reagan years, when the interstate also from Mexico through the State of Arizona was widened and also the first amnesty was passed thus affording those wealthy profiteers to then apply for American citizenship and thus facilitate also their "commerce" cross borders.

Just what WILL it take for the federal government to actually even begin to do their fundamental job and begin practicing true "human rights" and protecting the lives of the American people, their property, and also the lives of those Mexican nationals who are dying in the desert at the hands of their former countrymen from Mexico who are for the most part those Coyotes charging them thousands of dollars to only leave them in the desert to perish.

21st Century Health Care in America: Paying More, Getting Less?

With the ongoing challenges which are now being raised in many states throughout the nation regarding the recent passage of the Obama Administration's Health Care Reform Act, this boomer has watched the progression in health care delivery from the 1960's to today, and can truthfully say that while costs have exploded in those four decades, the degree of care for the American public overall has seen better days.

In order to reduce costs for many of the public and private health care clinics and hospitals, more and more Americans are not receiving the care they deserve, but what will reduce the bottom lines for the nationalized corporatized health care system that is predominant across the nation after Nixon's HMO legislation passed in the 60's. Many even public clinics and hospitals are now "owned" through various contracts by "private" corporate entities as they have become privatized, even after their initial building costs and research grants were funded by the American public.

Upon even emergency room visits, more and more patients are being seen initially by not medical doctors or those with advanced diagnostic degrees, but by physician's assistants or other support staff but at costs that far exceed those fees and charges in the past for trained physicians and without the expertise to accurately diagnose complex medical conditions.

Throughout many states, there are even signs posted at many of these emergency clinics and hospitals advising that they are not accepting new Medicare patients. Thus, the future for the boomers and their offspring at this point in America's history has not even begun to be addressed by those in Washington or at the state levels in just why health care costs have risen so out of proportion to the cost of living even though the entire HMO concept and "free market" privatized clinics were sold to the public in order to reduce costs and provide better care when that legislation was proposed back in the 60's.

Instead, it has resulted in numerous trips to several different doctors or providers in order to get accurate diagnosis, or physicians more geared toward treating the symptoms rather than the disease and using medications which many times create even more problems or different health issues in concert due to drug interactions and complications.

Changes are needed, but not the changes that Washington appears to be focused on in merely consulting the "stakeholders" in corporatized medicine. But the American public that is paying a larger share than ever before for their health care costs, both nonemergency and emergency.

How much of the health care dollars now provided by the taxpayers and insurers are now being earmarked for all those ads on television mostly directed toward choosing a hospital for maternity and childbirth needs? Or elective procedures?

Or advertising their facilities and services for non-English speaking patients for all those federal and state grant monies in providing care for non-citizens at the general public's ultimate expense? Or the increased costs in those ten to twenty page bills passed on to the public for those highly paid lobbyists at the state capitols and Washington?

It appears to this boomer in the end, the Health Care Reform Act is more similar to the mandatory auto insurance laws throughout the nation, with the same mindset and ultimate costs in increased taxation for all in passing on governmental functions, such as the settlement of property claims, or life and death issues to the financial sector, banks and insurers who will be more concerned with THEIR bottom lines and business needs, rather than quality of care.

I mean, unlike mandatory auto insurance, an unpaid or disallowed claim has a greater likelihood and much higher percentage of eventually ending in death or bankruptcy rather than a fender bender so the analogy used in order to include that "mandatory" provision left much out in regulating both those costs, and the provision and most likely will also then, as with the insurance laws, end up again costing the taxpaying public more in providing all the courts that will be needed in order to address those "breach of contract" or "wrongful death" actions.

Progress in this area, as with it appears so many others in the new millineum to many Americans, just may come at a much greater cost than even in those Nixon years.

And it appears to this boomer that the great Health Care Reform Act just may become the precursor to the Great Health Care AND Bank bailout of 2025 or sooner, when this patient dies.

Posturing Republicans To Reverse Obamacare?

On the "high" tide of the Republican victory re-establishing themselves as the voice of the House (and, by inference, then the people although clearly those corporate special interests rather that financed that Citizens United case), it was declared that the first order of business would be to reverse that monumental Constitutional faux pas of the Democratic controlled Congress, Obamacare.

Right.

And bite the hand that actually feeds them?

Although only two Senators "officially" voted for Obamacare in order to get it through and made into "law," clearly that political move was seen by most Independents, and the non-corporate affiliated Tea Party members even for what it was.

Pure politics.

After all, Nixon was sitting in the Oval Office when the disastrous HMO concept was hatched in order to purportedly save the American people a bundle on both their insurance costs, and their out of pocket health care costs.

That, of course, didn't happen.

Instead, there is now a chain of command and numerous individuals who get a part of those insurance proceeds before you even get a diagnosis, in many cases, or treated for the malady that ails you in most of those "clinics."

With the staff of those clinics now also billing according to the amount of time each doctor spends with you, and also for filling out all those lengthy and numerous now insurance forms.

Instead of one, they now get to bill for three or four for your average physical.

Obamacare simply has increased the "corporate" control over patient care, and also the eventual costs to the public when those that are now homeless and jobless cannot pay for those even "cut rate" co-op plans that were put forth as bait in order to simply quell the outraged public and masses.

Those global and national "chains" of hospitals and health care providers have been given carte blanche over the American people's future health, especially the upcoming boomer generation, again without even a minimum of oversight or regulation other than a few "foreign" lackeys in Washington and "yes men," for their administrative decisions depending on their occupancy, budgets, and shareholders needed profit margins.

There definitely was a reason that "privatized" hospitals also were not the intent of those founders, but state and county hospitals and faith based primarily donor supported facilities.

Lower costs overall, since no shareholder profits or "advertising" expenses were needed in those budgets. And those expenses add plenty to that final bill.

And not to be a doom and gloom pessimist, but having recently experienced a three year ordeal in just how progressive and major illnesses are now treated under Medicare, can only wonder just what "cut rate" health care for the boomers will be like.

I mean, we have stepped up these death row executions within the past few years in most states throughout the nation, testing all those new lethal injection drugs on those prisoners as was recently done in Arizona using a British made drug that has been in use in this country since the 1920's (sodium pentathol), but somehow during that highly publicized event, we were "out?"

Those DNR forms also are getting attached to most admissions forms upon emergency treatment when Americans reach a certain age, so I wonder just what will happen if some of those mega-health care providers need that bed instead for a lucrative, elective plastic surgery?

And most of the boomer generation have paid far longer, and much more than the previous generations for the building of those hospitals and clinics, in both the state and federal grant monies extended to them for their building, operating and research costs through both their "income" taxes, and also their state property taxes in most states throughout the nation.

It was interesting to note a recent article that even some of the faith based hospitals are excited about ObamaCare, since it makes the value of those hospitals, built with public donations mind you, so much more valuable for them to sell to the highest "global" bidder.

Doctors are now performing for many procedures, assembly line operations for heart disease and other common degenerative diseases due to age, six and seven before even lunch.

Between ObamaCare, that carbon tax, and the foreclosure mess the Republicans certainly won't have to concern themselves much with their platform positions on the "death tax."

The boomers won't have anything left at all, when they face those DNR forms.

And this particular generation may have the shortest life span of all, for those "global" profits.

And AARP its lowest membership in their decades long history also progressively.

No wonder they start sending out those enrollment forms at 50.

It Isn't A Race, It's A Foreign Nationality

With all the continuing propaganda and the liberal population using the "race card" inappropriately, the education in this country at the present time (which is primarily dictated now by the U.S. Department of Education in most local communities due to federal grant monies received by all those school districts) is at an all time low.

And it obviously has nothing to do with the amount of dollars expended, but the curriculum dictated by most the liberal educators within that Department of Education.

It is also a great many of those educators, and lawyers in this country affiliated with those foreigner civil rights groups that continue to use the words "racist" to attempt to marginalize the Americans in this country who are outraged at our porous border situation, and the negative impact it has had on more and more by the year in losses of American lives, property and livelihoods.

When the entire issue is one of national origin, and not race in any manner whatseover.

At least in my better education than what is found today, I was taught that there are really only four "races" in the entire world.

Caucasian (White), Mongoloid (Asian), Negroid (Black) and Indian (Native Americans).

Latino is merely a hybrid broad based term for those from South America whose ancestors were of Indian and European descent. Exploring Spaniards and Indians intermarried.

And basically are Caucasians, and certainly not a minority in this world or due to America's open borders and the migration north of so many of Mexico's poorer citizens (with the Mexican government's blessings, of course) becoming rather a majority minority in this country by the year.

Of course, also due to religious beliefs as primarily Catholics whose Church's teachings on birth control are rather well known and thus tend to have more children than most other segments of at least the U.S. population.

But while all those poor European immigrants migrated to this country at the turn of the century went through the process, a great many of these immigrants did not - even though for the past twenty years even the immigration applications in this country have been printed in Spanish - where those of the European immigrants who did not speak English simply had to muddle through the process with even the language barrier to deal with.

The costs to the American people to now print ballots, social service applications, and even telephone prompts are in the billions, not to mention the costs of now our court system where some states and jurisdictions have gone to providing Spanish speaking judges and segregated courtrooms for these individuals.

The founders would be rolling over, since although the majority of those founders were English speaking Europeans, there were many French and other nationalities present in large numbers when that Constitution was ratified.

And it was written in English.

By that very act, the founders did establish that English was the official language in this country, not French, Celtic, or German.

Some were landholders, some were not.

The Constitution isn't even written in the King's English in many of its provisions, and is the oldest federal charter in existence and predates even Britain's and is quite different from theirs, although they have yet to grasp the difference in the hierachy in this country, as opposed to theirs.

The people are not accountable to the government, nor is our President given much true power in any manner whatsoever except in times of declared war, and a supposed check on the legislative process with the only power in that respect the power of his veto. No power to create "Executive Orders" in any way, shape or form. Or panels. Or tribunals. Or regulatory agencies independent of Congress's oversight since all power was given to the people through their respective district representatives - which were clearly meant to be representative of the people living within their districts.

Not global or national corporate entities, or "special interest" lobbying groups.

I do hope with all the taxpayer paid civil rights organizations that are now challenging the very fabric of the Constitution over this issue, are submitting their bills for their legal fees to their true home countries, Britain and Mexico primarily it appears, for these frivolous challenges to the will of the American people for whom that Constitution was ultimately written in order to protect from just such challenges as are now occuring over our porous and unsecured borders and laisse faire immigration policies that have progressively occurred particularly since the 1980's, which ultimately resulted in an attack on this country unparalleled in the loss of American lives on native shores since World War II.

With now several tens of thousands more adversely impacted in the nine years since.

The Mexican Civil Liberties Union Strikes Again

The MCLU (Mexican Civil Liberties Union) has taken to the newsprint media in order to attempt to blast a small, mostly rural town in Nebraska for having the gaul to attempt to pass city ordinances (similar to those attempted in Pennsylvania) banning both the hiring, and affording housing rentals to illegal immigrants.

It appears, however, the town of Fremont which is involved is getting prepared for the onslaught of "foreigner" rights groups that they foresee will challenge the ordinance if it is passed into "law" after today's voting.

How so?

By advertising that they will institute additional taxes, and cutting city services in order to fund the lawsuit challenges, without of course disclosing that if the municipal governments are like those in Arizona (and county), they have used much of that tax revenue they collect in order to purchase insurance policies indemnifying any and all municipal employees from liability in the event of such lawsuits. Whose, of course, premiums then will go up accordingly and for which the city and state will plead the need for more revenue from the citizens in order to cover their then budget shortfalls.

Which also then provides them with an impetus to continue to pass more and more unconstitutional legislation for individual politicians benefits no matter which side of the aisle they claim to hail from. Both use politics and political maneuvering and backbiting in order to remain in power, while the citizenry then continues to be adversely affected both monetarily, and in quality of life issues - and whose children will also be burdened then with such clear treason in not carrying out their Constitutional, or even charter functions.

The municipal government are in the same positions the state's are, beholding and accountable not to the people but to their "feeder" big brother dictators.

Unbelieveable, actually, and just goes to show what is really going on here - since the municipal governments are, after all, state actors of the state government and it is the state government that continues to increase those requests in most states throughout the country for foreign workers in order to feed their corporate backers and sponsors and for them to save money on those taxes inflicted on Americans so they can continue to contribute to their future campaign coffers - and now potentially in unrestricted sums.

The criminal activity in our political systems seems to be getting worse by the month now.

These proposed ordinances are being compared to the steps Arizona has undertaken, and truthfully most of these measures simply seem to be frivolous and rather transparent actions taken by vulnerable politicians in order to use for future campaign purposes, and to feed those civil rights lawyers, many of whom are writing these laws for their own benefit, it appears and also who are receiving federal and state taxpayer dollars for the defenses or prosecutions of the laws they are writing using their legislative lackeys to actually undermine the Constitution and its provisions also by the month or legislative session.

The ACLU has become one of the biggest drains on the taxpayers ever, and is using a federal statute which was passed years ago which was meant simply to provide for their legal fees for true AMERICAN civil rights actions in order to mask most of these lawsuits they are initiating on behalf of foreigners as somehow within that statute's provisions or its intent.

The ACLU, of course, is promoting this as unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment, which was actually meant in order to protect American citizen's rights in this country, not "corporate" entities in any manner whatsoever.

And since foreigners actually have no inherent civil rights in this country under America's Constitution unless and until they go through the naturalization process (the Preamble does state We The People of the United States....for US and OUR posterity), it can only be the corporate and the ACLU's own self serving interests that is behind all the blustering.

I wonder why the ACLU isn't actually bringing the needed lawsuit on behalf of American civil liberties in this country in upholding the Constitution's provisions in reinstituting the tax on foreign labor, and removing the tax on domestic labor, which just might turn this country's economy around and bring more jobs to Americans in this country than any "jobs bill" of Congress, which will simply provide for more government or taxpayer paid jobs at the American public's expense, and thus create more and more homeless and a widening gap between the poor and the rich and facilitate the agenda here truly of wiping out America's middle class.

So that we can then be more like Great Britain, Mexico, and a host of those other "socialized" countries with "sovereign" governments, instead of as ours is supposed to be - of the people, by the people, for the people - the American PEOPLE, not the corporate special interests such as the ACLU and their corporate backers.

The fact that the Supreme Court overturned the Pennsylvania municipal law does not surprise this writer. It has been clear that those justices on the Supreme Court have not been able to read the Constitution for literally decades.

The ACLU also stated that it is "immigration reform" that is needed, not these segregated attempts by the states and their "state actor" municipal corporations to institute such measures. Although since there is already a process for immigration on the books, can't see where the ACLU also is taking such a stance.

But what they truly really want and mean is nothing more than "amnesty" in order to again feed the legal profession who, of course, will be needed and necessary in order for these individuals to eventually gain that coveted prize - citizenship. And in which most of those truly seasonal and migrant workers will not apply for in any such instance anyway as they didn't for the Reagan amnesty.

Since most of them couldn't afford the fees, and the rest were merely here in order to feed their families back home and dollars brought their families remaining in Mexico a higher standard of living than their remaining and working in Mexico would.

If you wish to work here, apply for a green card before entering, and wait your turn.

Temporary work visas are available in abundance, but you do need to leave after that seasonal work is done and if you migrate to another area than for that which the original work visa was granted, you do need to visit INS to get it extended from my understanding.

And it is the large corporate agribusinesses in Nebraska and meatpackers that hire the most of them to cut their labor costs, since the small farmers as in decades past usually shared seasonal workers, and also provided for housing, meals and medical care for those workers for which the small towns and community as a whole shared during planting and harvesting season - as one who knows who due to marriage, had grandparents who owned land and a farm in the Midwest at one time and used migrant or seasonal workers to plant and harvest their crops. And whose grandmother took them out their lunches, or prepared full course breakfasts, suppers and dinner for them during the season and also arranged for housing if necessary in the old "bunk" house.

If you overstay your "visa" longer than the proscribed period, and are not granted an extension by the State Department or by INS (now ICE), then you are suppose to go "home," not be working here illegally, or renting an apartment.

And these laws, I'm sure, are much less stringent than those you will find in Mexico, Canada, India, or any other of the number of countries in which the U.S. has taken in literally thousands upon thousands of those who wished to immigrate legally.

If it is the expense that is the problem, then that is a simple matter of reducing the fees and original costs to that which those in some of the poorer nations can afford, such as in the "olden" day, and the original application process one in which it doesn't take a lawyer charging $300-$400 per hour to complete.

The immigration process was not intended to be one which fed the lawyers in this country, civil rights, immigration, criminal or otherwise. But that is exactly what has occurred due to the illegal extension of civil rights to even these civil rights groups that are not at all representing Americans, but foreigners.

Although with the amount of jobless and homeless in this country during the biggest recession/depression since the Great Depression, this country still in an ongoing war due to an attack on it by foreigners from within, and the shear number of immigrants this country has taken in progressively due to unconstitutional wars of the past, at this point in America's history the federal government is once again negligent in not exercising that other provision in the Constitution and not only restricting immigration, but banning it altogether at this point.

Until this "war" is over, and there are few Americans in this country without gainful employment and these corporate entities start using America's labor pools and fighting for removal of that 16th Amendment also which has circumvented and placed this country's government in a lopsided and unaccountable position across the board with the feds now reining "Supreme" over the citizens, and the states, progressively.

With even now funding this MCLU, MALDEFF and a host of other "educational" for profit non profits headed by mostly "civil rights," immigration, corporate or criminal lawyers with American taxpayer dollars illegally.

And with the Obama Administration threatening Arizona's new law, I simply hope that the Governor of Arizona files a countersuit under the "common defense" provisions of the Constitution, and the 2006 Secure Fence Act in order to get the funding for that fence the feds promised forthwith - instead of once again feeding the industry in which the majority, it appears, now come in all three branches of government illegally representing their own self interests more and more by the decade.

That other offshoot from the Brits, and a country which more and more of these Supreme Court justices are actually educated and hail, the American Barrister's Association which has progressively returned its educational focus, it is quite clear, to not American jurisprudence but foreign jurisprudence - mostly Britain's or the UN's "accords" (created inially by Britain post World War II) and the country we fought that original war over to establish this sovereign nation and to protect its citizens from "foreigners" abuse or influence in our country's government or political matters.

So in essence in all of these ACLU, MALDEF, and other foreigner focused groups, it is the American people actually who are paying for their own abuse in most of these court actions - and in which these groups are contributing to our out of control deficits more and more for their own "welfare."

And the only true Constitutional funds that the federal government has within their powers over foreigners are:

1. To provide a naturalization process (which we have)

2. To provide the federal courts for any prosecutions against foreigners for "crimes committed against the nation" before naturalization;

3. To regulate commerce insofar as the hiring of those foreign workers in monitoring the impact that foreign outsourced labor and products affect domestic labor and production;

4. To tax the states for any and all "foreign" labor which is needed and for which those green cards are issued at their request, since it is the states that request and petition for those "guest worker" visas and work visas annually, and then forward those requests to the federal government. These taxes were meant to both protect domestic labor and commerce from foreign competition detrimental to the U.S. economy and workforce, and also provide for the needed revenue for their needs while working or visiting this country, such as the increases in "use" taxes for roads, state provided benefits for community services, etc.

So other than the costs which are now involved, and re-evaluating the process in order to make it similar to that which was in force and effect at the turn of the century, in which there wasn't this influx of illegal foreigners in any manner whatsoever (since at that time there were even restricted ports of entry for any and all of these permanent or temporary foreigners through Ellis Island primarily), just what type of "reform" is actually needed?

Perhaps enforcing the existing law on the books insofar as letting the punishment fit the crime, and not providing "immigration hearings" for those which have not immigrated legally and returning them forthwith back across those borders when proof of citizenship cannot be provided or legal guest worker status verified such as the laws in Arizona are attempting to do in codifying that federal law at the state level?

Or turning over those that commit felonies while in this country to the U.S. Marshall, and the state attorney generals actually doing their jobs and prosecuting them through the federal courts in order to get the true criminal element off the street which have been progressively victimizing the Arizonans and American people in other states in greater and greater numbers by the decade?

Enforcement and a rewind to the procedures which were instituted while I as growing up in Arizona in the 1960's and 1970's is what is needed here, in my educated opinion as both a victim and one who is familiar of the long history of this issue from personal experience, appears is what is needed, not "comprehensive" reform at all.

With the federal government actually doing their primary job - providing for the common defense, and protecting the lives and livelihoods of the American people first and foremost.

Los Angeles Boycotts Arizona: Hooray!

With much ceremony and political rhetoric, it appears the City of Los Angeles has boycotted doing business with Arizona businesses in response to the "new" illegal immigration measures signed into law by Arizona's Governor, Jan Brewer.

As a former 45 year Arizonan and victim of illegal loans sold to thousands of Arizonans through California domiciled banking institutions that were not even based on the U.S. currency, but the British LIBOR rates, all I can say is hooray!

It doesn't appear to me that the City of Los Angeles knows anything at all about how corrupt some of their own politicians and businesses are, so since it is more expensive to bring litigation in the California courts due to all those outrageous hotel and bed taxes levied there, this boycott appears it will work in favor of the Arizona businesses whose contracts will be illegally broken due to the Council's actions.

It seems California's budgetary problems will become even more extreme after this latest scene right out of Hollywood.

Interesting also that during all those illegal immigrant rallies held in Los Angeles in years past, during the one in which the rubber bullets were used, the Mayor of Los Angeles just happened to be out of the country in Mexico at the time.

It would appear that since most of those Arizonan businesses also hire local day laborers in Los Angelese to assist with some of those contracts, the Council has just taken a stand that may cost a few illegal immigrants their jobs.

Way to go, Mayor and Council, you made your constituents proud.

At least those that are waiting in front of the Home Depots now, but you might want to schedule a few more trips out of the country when those jobs dry up.

Just a suggestion from one who has waited a long, long time for California to show their true colors in just how far afield they have gone from even giving the slightest credence to the U.S. Constitutuion.

Or California's.

And I wouldn't be looking for many of those Zonies on the beaches, so the Governor might need to up the budgets on those "See California" ads for the rest of the country, at least in those which have state citizens that can still afford those bed and tourism taxes.

Hey, if Arizona can't get its water back that you've stolen, just give them the cash.

They will need it for all those deportation hearings, including over half California's former residents who fled to Arizona within the last fifteen years due to its "progressively" regressive policies such as these.

Maybe even some of them will too finally leave, since it is a great many of those former Californians who may have left California, but brought their same excesses and expectations with them.

Which has progressively also impacted the long term and native Arizonans along with the illegal immigrant situation, many of whom are now living in those desert washes.

Do you think you can get San Francisco and San Diego, and the rest of the state to join you?

Please?

The first that need to go are all those California New Agers that have taken over Sedona - including those that even recently baked a few women in a plastic tent after charging them over $10,000 each for the privilege.

Obama On Image Rebuilding Tour Of Afghanistan?

Am I the only American that found it interesting that as soon as the ink was dried on the most controversial, and egregious unconstitutional taxation law against the American people since FDR, Mr. Obama immediately went on an "unscheduled" visit to Afghanistan in a highly publicized meeting with the U.S. troops still stationed there now nine long years after 9-11.

Could this just possibly be an image tour created by Mr. Obama's marketing team in order to deflect attention from the travesty of this past two weeks, and also hope to gain a little support from those independent vote casting Baggers that still support the war in its present form, absent any real focus on capturing Osama bin Laden as occurred with the Bush Administration?

Much was made of this trip, a "surprise" one at that.

And much hype publicized over Mr. Obama's speech to the troops asking them to "perservere" and using the flag and patriotism once again with the "Americans don't quit" jargon for these men and women, some of which are on their third or fourth tours of duty, with no end to this war yet in sight.

Nor any real focus on bin Laden whatsoever.

Gracious accolades were also heaped upon the American people by the Afghanistan government, thanking all the taxpayers for funding the rebuilding efforts there for those government contractors that are rebuilding Afghanistan now from the ground up after the American invasion post 9-11.

Before, of course, the focus was shifted to Iraq and Saddam Hussein's past transgressions on the guise that he was harboring Taliban members and was friendly toward Al Qaeda.

Seems to me the consensus of those on the Hill that spend their hours devising political strategy and maneuvers (which are also paid by the American taxpayers) in advising our leaders in ways to skirt around the Constitution for political party and individual governmental officials campaign benefits most of all, must have advised Mr. Obama after the absolute desecration of the United States Constitution this health deform legislation engenders, to "get outta Dodge."

And wave the flag with the troops for the folks back home until things cool down.

Do you think?

Is ObamaCare Really Law?

With all the fallout which has occurred since Sunday and the Health Care Deform legislation supposedly signed into law by Barack Obama on Tuesday, and with the two mainstream political parties attempting to continue to milk this egregious legislation for their future political purposes for all it is worth, the fact that this law may not be law at all has failed to get any significant press in any of the mainstream news sources, or even those talking heads on national television whether affiliated with Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp. organization (Fox), Turner television or GE controlled sources.

In the educated opinion of this writer, all theatrics and representations to the contrary, I would state this Act of Congress is questionably law at all, whether or not Mr. Obama has signed it, or whether or not these bogus Congressionally created "procedures" such as "reconciliation" (whatever that is) were followed to the letter.

Since any "law" passed that doesn't have a Constitutional foundation at its outset, or in any of its provisions, is really no law at all.

And Executive Orders, as most educated Americans also know, do not also carry the force of law, they are simply directives of the President to the Executive office employees and regulatory agencies which are not immuned also from Constitutional provisions with respect to validity or legality.

Using Executive Orders to legitimate illegitimate legislation is also something that is increasing with each "progresssive" Administration.

This has been the new game on the Hill consistently for about the past 50 years.

Pass an unconstitutional law, get it signed and announced as legitimate using national news sources, and then use it in the future also for political partisan fodder and for election purposes when those budgets come through from the regulatory offices then charged with enforcing these "nonlaws" in the Appropriations Committee.

Such as also all these Fusion Centers being funded under the Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Act, which continues to be funded through the Appropriations Committee, but which has not been passed by one branch of Congress, nor even signed by the Executive since it also clearly in a great many of its provisions targeting the American citizens is fundamentally unconstitutional.

While then also using federal mandates then to also hold the states hostage to some of these mandates, and then in shifting the burden for execution of these NonActs to the states, leaving them then liable for the outfall and lawsuits which then subsequently ensue.

Or if not using the states to execute these mandates under threats of removal of funding for Constitutional functions, using the Supreme Court instead to use legalese such as "public policy" and "state's interests", and the newest one, holding with a "living Constitution" in order to also attempt to legalize laws which have absolutely no Constitutional foundation whatsoever.

Below is the actual proof that such is the case, and with those mandatory fines still included in this bill in its present form, when it is even questionable the federal government had any inherent right to wade into these waters absent using that Commerce Clause to do its actual job, regulate those national and global health care industry vipers and also hold them accountable for unexplained increases in their rates and terms rather than throwing the citizenry to the wolves once again without oversight.

From the Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Section 256, which affirms that the U.S. Constitution, unless and until LAWFULLY amended as contained within it's express provisions including recognizing the needed consent of the people and the states per the 9th and 10th for all matters outside federal authority for any future amendments to it, is the defacto law of the land, and a contract between the federal government, state government and the people.


Section 256. Generally.

The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, whether federal [29] or state, [30] though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, [31] but is wholly void, [32] and ineffective for any purpose; [33] since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it, [34] an unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. [31] Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted. [36] No repeal of such an enactment is necessary. [37]

Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, [38] confers no rights, [39] creates no office, [40] bestows no power or authority on anyone, [41] affords no protection, [42] and justifies no acts performed under it. [43] A contract which rests on an unconstitutional statute creates no obligation to be impaired by subsequent legislation. [44]

No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law [45] and no courts are bound to enforce it. [46] Persons convicted and fined under a statute subsequently held unconstitutional may recover the fines paid. [47]

A void act cannot be legally inconsistent with a valid one. [48] And an unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. [49] Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby. [50] Since an unconstitutional statute cannot repeal or in any way affect an existing one, [51] if a repealing statute is unconstitutional, the statute which it attempts to repeal remains in full force and effect. [52] And where a clause repealing a prior law is inserted in an act, which act is unconstitutional and void, the provision for the repeal of the prior law will usually fall with it and will not be permitted to operate as repealing such prior law. [53]

The general principles stated above apply to the constitutions as well as to the laws of the several states insofar as they are repugnant to the Constitution and laws of the United States. [54] Moreover, a construction of a statute which brings it in conflict with a constitution will nullify it as effectually as if it had, in express terms, been enacted in conflict therewith. [55]

An unconstitutional portion of a statute may be examined for the purpose of ascertaining the scope and effect of the valid portions. [56]


The numbers in [brackets] are footnotes that refer to court decisions. You can look them up in the American Jurisprudence at any law library.

Californication: Pelosi and Comrades Announcement Untrue

In the largest display of in- your- face legislation, even more so than the bank bailouts, GM assumption, and Scam & Trade, the House of Misrepresentatives, at the witching hour of 10:49 EST, passed the largest tax increase for all Americans since FDR.

And gave themselves a standing ovation for their efforts.

Nancy Pelosi, that Californicator, hogged center stage for most of the action on Sunday, along with her comrade-in-arms, Mr. Waxman (of the bow-tie).

Ms. Pelosi's final speech diverting and directing attention of what a massive Constitutional violation much of the language contained in this "stimulus" bill for the health care sector to women was just too incredible to believe for this female boomer.

Using women in order to gain future votes, it appears, as the savior of womankind stating that "being a woman will no longer be a pre-existing medical condition?"

Please, Nancy.

Just where in that legislation is there equality or any price controls on those new "health care internet shopping malls" that are going to create new jobs, especially since there is little, if any, regulation of commercial entities on the net at the present time?

Where is it stated that women will not be charged higher rates than men of the same age, living in the same states, with the same risk factors - since at the present time, women are charged higher rates for riders for those that have a history of breast cancer, or for maternity coverage and thus those additional riders that would be again required and those higher costs also do not appear to have been addressed anywhere in this legislation.

Sure, women can't be denied coverage, just as men cannot be denied coverage, but with no price controls over just how these insurers now can "package" these plans, exactly how has this legislation helped the American public in any manner whatsoever, be it men or women?

And with all the state challenges that are now going to be initiated so that those states can now play their part in this fiasco and save face for individual Governors and legislators at the state level, how much are these now challenges that will eventually wind their way up to the Supreme Court so that it, too, can use some politically based bias to legitimate this unconstitutional legislation going to now cost the American people - both at the state and federal levels for these cases (for the legal professions benefits most of all, at the American public's expense for those legal fees and state budgets that will now be affected).

This skewed legislation seems to be a job stimulus most of all for those comrades-in-arms since there is enough garbage in this legislation to provide fodder for the legal profession for decades to come, with all the massive legalese and pages to this legislation, and loopholes.

Were those costs factored into the projections?

It wouldn't appear so.

Congratulations, Ms. Pelosi.

You've screwed single mothers, and the rest of American womanhood in this generation.

And for generations to come.

Since, of course, women do still only make about two thirds of what men make for the same occupations (with the exception of federal legislators, that is, or select other governmental positions), they will be paying a heavier burden for this stimulus for the global financial sector, world bankers and gadget industry also progressively as these "packages" and "shopping malls" become reality based upon their lower salaries and percent of income, and childbearing and cancer risk factors for a substantial number of women in this country.

Mark my words.

I mean the FTC thus far has been ineffective in preventing much internet scamming or assisting citizens who are sold down the river by misrepresented commercial websites at this point at the present time, while Washington continues to feed the out of control gadget sector, and venture capitalists from your home state, along with those rip-off bankers affiliated with the Fed and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

You know, the ones whose creative marketing even went so far as to be selling loans not even based on the U.S. currency to many, many thousands of American citizens throughout the west and Southwest which primarily led to the mortgage and foreclosure disaster which is still occurring today.

And now this.

Way to go, Nancy,

Thanks so much for your care and concern, on behalf of women everywhere across the political spectrum.

Not.

Ms. Pelosi: Stop Preaching And Do Your Job

On network news again this morning, the erstwhile Speaker of the House, Ms. Pelosi, was hogging the media in order to once again preach to the American public about the health care deform legislation that she and her political party are backing which is clearly simply another nonconsensual backdoor tax on the American people in its current form.

Especially by continuing to include those "mandatory" provisions, and fees and fines and extortion if those in this country who cannot afford it at its current levels, or even due to the fact that so many are now jobless and homeless by this and the prior Administration's industry favoring legislation, be able to afford it at any level.

No recognition or media coverage has pointed out the fact that all Americans are and have been actually supporting the health care and medical community for decades with their tax dollars, yet upon any treatment getting little, if any, recognition of all those publicly funded grants at the state, local and federal level that most of them receive since Nixon's "corportization" of the health care sector way back when.

Including even zoning and building fees and costs for a great many of those massive global and national hospitals and health care networks.

Better yet, Ms. Pelosi, how about you and those other 434 rogue Congressmen start actually doing your jobs, and change the focus to where it Constitutionally and truly belongs.

Regulating most of those national and global health care vipers sufficiently, and rescinding that bogus Act of Congress that was passed actually also precluding the states from so doing as a power move and play for those on the Hill and their corporate backers post Nixon?

3/4's of these health care providers, hospitals, and teaching institutions receive federal and state grant monies at the public's expense, yet Americans are forking out hundreds of thousands of dollars per year (and their unaffiliated employers) to carry this industry. Most of those hospitals and medical providers refuse to even give "good faith" estimates prior to treatment for non-emergency measures to begin with.

And a good many of them overcharge so that their take of the Medicare proceeds continues to escalate, rather than bearing any relationship whatsoever nationwide in the true cost of health care in this country.

Especially since many of those doctors now are also getting federal grant monies for their educations, or we are now outsourcing more and more to doctors who either are not Americans (such as the great many East Indian doctors now practicing in this country) or were educated free of charge at some of America's foremost medical colleges and universities.

With all the money going to medical research now also, are the costs of development of those new procedures and high tech gadgetry also being credited to the American public who paid for most of those procedures development?

The entire focus of this legislation is a**backward, in my and a great many Americans opinions, and Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Obama's posturing appears to now be "preaching to the choir," and a "choir" that is, from the tone throughout the country on this legislation progressively getting more and more outraged, and about to bring out those nooses.

Maybe also it would be nice if these press conferences would stop, and members start scrutinizing more and more of the past legislation that has lead to the "crisis" we are now facing.

Like bailing out all these industries at the public's expense, while the public then is raped on the personal level further when they engage their services (such as the increases now in bank fees and charges that are occurring nationwide, and 'creative" lending policies of those banks for mortgages getting even more outrageous - since a great many of those original loans in the West and Southwest for refinances or new home purchses weren't even based on the U.S. currency, but the British LIBOR rates).

Or the progressively lawyer industry favoring laws which have enriched a great many of the members of the Bar in the removal of punitive damage lids throughout the nation on medical malpractice claims and those even legitimate losses, and then costs for all those lawyers now employed by the health care sector that are also paid with those premium dollars in that totally unregulated industry which is actually simply another branch of the government itself - since all lawyers are inherently members of the judicial branch and have a monopoly also due to local court rules and regulations on it - since even what might be deemed small claims matters on some of these losses in coverages and benefits become civil and not small claims actions at higher costs.

Hogging air time to present your case isn't working on a public that has less and less trust that its representatives represent anyone other than their own self-interests.

And from most of the citizen media based websites, it does appear to me that either many Americans are unaware of just how much of their tax dollars are already going to subsidize the health care industry and sector, or are actually Canadians or Mexicans that hope that they will get in on better health care subsidized by the American people than their socialized plans in their own countries - or at least coverage then in the event they have some medical emergency while in this country for their "part time" residency status, with free health care nearby rather than having to return to their own countries for treatment.

Since, of course, a good many Canadians live in either those northern border states, or the American West and Southwest as retirees on a part time basis, or with second homes due to their better currency rates, and as then non-American taxpayers, would get that free ride for their care claiming "temporary resident" or "emergency" treatment status.

A good half the posters on most of those sites supporting this abridgement of the U.S. Constitution actually are Canadian bloggers and writers.

Which just goes to show it is appeasement once again of foreigners on the backs of Americans that is somewhat responsible for this push for this legislation, rather than at the demand of the American people at all other than the public's outrage at the escalating costs, pressuring a Congress to actually do their jobs and their "regulatory" functions on this massive industry that has gone for far too long without any regulation actually whatsoever, while being funded by and large by an American public who are watching the health care standards and even infant mortality rates decline by the year in favor of "profit" over "delivery."

Since Nixon, actually, and that entire bogus health maintenance organization concept and global corportization of the health care industry was sanctioned by that erstwhile Congress way back when, where it now takes visits to five or six doctors in order to simply get a diagnosis - that is if your "referring physician" feels it is in the corporate best interest to so do.

There are now as many levels in health care provision in this country, as there is in government.

Which has also contributed to where we are today.

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?

Senate Passes In Your Face Health Care Deform

Well it's official.

On Christmas Eve,while Santa was flying through the globe delivering his gifts to all the children of the world, the United States Senate robbed those same children of their fundamental rights in the most "in your face" gesture yet to the American people and trashing of the United States Constitution.

Even more so than the also bogus Cap & Trade bill (passing on U.N. and global taxes to the American people once again for an unconstitutional federal function, and without their implied or express consent in an manner whatsoever, nor amendment of the Constitution in order to so do).

Even more so than the bank and financial sector bailout, billing the American people yet again for the debts of the 2006 campaigns, and also a global London based insurer, again without their express or implied consent and outside Constitutional authority.

And are posing for the cameras now as if this is somehow a victory - while the lackey Republicans that were also in on this scam play the victims when actually with a vote such as this one, it appears that the same agenda is occurring here as has many prior bills in the past.

Each party takes a turn in order to be the "heavy" for unconstitutional legislation that outrages the public.

But since both parties have control of the American electoral process (also unconstitutionally), nothing really ever changes except the demonstrations of contempt both parties show for both the intended government which our founders fought and died in order to secure for their posterity, and also the American people themselves - the ones who they betray with each and every illegal Act favoring their corporate benefactors.

Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama are global socialists - but then so were George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and John McCain actually and were behind the global bank bailouts for the gain of the global market at the cost of the American people.

This bill is the largest tax (also with that Cap & Trade scam, and all those expenses now the taxpayers must pick up for that bogus Copenhagen meeting) ever to be passed by any U.S. Congress in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution since FDR's Social Security - and look just what is going on with Social Security, which was meant to be a "temporary" tax actually from its inception in order to guarantee at least a minimal income to all those that were affected by the Great Depression way back when, also manipulated by the very same European international banking cartel members that are behind this current recession in the U.S. for Europe's and the "global" market's mostly gain.

And with so many in this country now losing their homes and jobs right and left, inflicting another tax on the working class Americans, middle America and that midle class who are most affected, just shows that thumbing their nose at the American people is something that this Congress, as with the last, has absolutely no problem in doing.

And now what is occuring is that the Republicans are "threatening" to use this act of treason in order to gain seats for the 2010 elections.

Not, of course, bringing all those that voted for this clearly unconstitutional measure up on charges of treason.

Using it, rather, once again for political purposes just goes to show that the "outrage" was an act, and that this passion play for the American public and media means that now legislation is orchestrated with the precision of a Hollywood spectacle, with the outcome, whether the people like it or not, directed by the special interest groups and financial sector.

Voting these lackeys out won't do it America.

It appears tar and feathers is the only thing that just might, and getting that Sargeant at Arms in the Halls of Congress to start earning his taxpayer paid salary and arrest these suckers, which actually was one of his primary jobs - if you read the Constitution the only protection those "misrepresentatives" have from arrest are while traveling to and from the House and Senate floors in order to cast their votes.

And would appear those founders put in that language for a very good reason, in order that the people would have a recourse and those misrepresentatives only "limited" immunity from arrest due to the enormous power they possessed.

With the founders knowing that with those granted such powers, abuses were more than likely to occur.

Such as this one, and so many others since 9-11 it is getting hard to keep track.

Because apparently those now holding those offices are tone deaf, and need remedial reading classes and continuing education in American history and high school government classes.

But since last night after midnight was "officially" a Senate holiday, I just wonder whether this vote was even "legal" or not?

Such a game would not be beyond those now holding office, in order to protect them from charges of treason.

Such as the new game of passing unconstitutional measures in one branch, but then not passing them in the other yet then funding them anyway in appropriations bills thereafter.

Then after funding unfinished and illegal legislation, creating new bills instead granting regulatory authority then to the agencies without then legal authority to so do due to the "illegality" of those bills in the first place.

And then as the coup d' gras, using then the media to publicize and "terrorize" the public for compliance or direct the state legislatures to pass those measures at the state level on threat of removal of funding for some unrelated true federal function as their "bribe" or extortionary tactic on more and more illegal legislation to also then manipulate the public for their ultimate ends and appease most of all their special interest backers behind a great deal of these measures in the process - the ones that "invested" all those billions in their employee legislator in order to "buy" legislation feeding their corporate coffers at the public's ultimate expense.

In other words, corporate America, as with this bill, is using our Congress now as nothing more than a marketing representative, buying legislation most of all in order to sell their products, and then also reduce their risks and losses in the process for their corporate bottom line profits - which they then feed back to their "employee" legislators.

Oh the webs we weave. And this is just another example of how truly "misrepresentative" every single one of those legislators actually is at this point in both honoring their oaths of office, and also their true constituency.

The American people. Not their bankers or their special interest benefactors "corporately," in violation of America's true form of government as contained within that glass case a few short miles down the street - and the document which provides for the very offices in which they now hold yet show such little awareness of its provisions more so now within the last eight years than any other period in history.

The U.S. Constitution.

Senate Celebrates While Constitution Burns

(Edited and Revised)

It was announced by the AP today that Senate Democrats are ready to hand Barack Obama his "victorious" health care deform bill on Christmas Eve - the bill that was concocted mostly by consulting with the industry "stakeholders," such as the global insurers, AARP trade affiliated vendors marketing to senior citizens, and the AMA who now can potentially refuse treatment to any and all Americans that do not have some health care coverage, or use now this bogus measure to deny life saving treatments to many if their federally sanctioned plans do not so provide.

While, of course, providing free emergency treatment to illegal immigrants and foreigners under separate legislation that was enacted under the Reagan Administration after the first amnesty bill was passed, and through various trade agreements, especially with Mexico and Canada.

And, of course, even the government has its own escape clause in such instances. It is called the Federal Tort Claim Act, which only provides for compensation in such event for actual losses or damages, not punitive awards in any manner whatsoever for deaths or injuries which occur in which even those now "governmentally approved" plans provide.

So go try to get a lawyer in order to help you redress a federally sanctioned plan that has denied you coverage and watch the lawyers squirm, or quote you an hourly rate that would have you bankrupted within a week at their hourly rates which now at over $300 to $400 per hour (how many times is THAT over the minimum wage), and in some states throughout the nation, that rate won't even get you a few hours of legal research or status reports by their secretaries or paralegals, the profit margins on that profession are now so stratrospheric.

My main question has been, due to the length of this bill at over 2,000 pages of legalese which proves it was written by lawyers, for lawyers most of all, - just where has the ACLU, that organization dedicated to supposedly protecting American's civil rights and the Bill of Rights, been during this entire fiasco which has been ongoing since last summer?

The organization that was behind the "death by dehydration" of Teri Schiavo, as a "right to choose," whether or not medical treatment should be extended at all to the disabled if not responsive - even in the event where rehabilitation had been denied such individual even though covered by insurance provision, and who was clearly still breathing independently without any mechanical assistance whatsoever?

I mean, it would appear that in their silence now for six long months, their stances in the Teri Schiavo matter clearly were nothing more than empty rhetoric, and legal smoke and mirrors.

Where is the protection of the Constitutional rights for Americans to not be denied "life, liberty or property" without "due process" of law - since health care insurance is a product, and Congress really has no authority whatsoever to "mandate" that Americans must purchase a product or be "fined" and "sanctioned" by Uncle Sam if not in compliance.

Especially without a Constitutional Amendment granting such authority outside their enumerated powers and duties. If anything, this is a "state" matter and not a federal one in any manner whatsoever.

And one in which every single state in the nation already has existing plans in order to cover the very individuals that this bill presumes to include - the indigent, or those that are clearly denied coverage or cannot afford to provide it given their economic circumstances.

Although much has been made mention of the inclusion of the small regulatory function (their legal duty in such a matter, if any, over corporate concerns affecting the citizenry) of mandating that insurers cannot deny coverage for those with pre-existing medical conditions - in any the summaries I have read there is nowhere any federal regulatory agency charged with oversight, nor fines imposed on insurers that do not comply.

Nor is their language or any control over just how much it will cost, once again, for those that DO have pre-existing conditions.

The trick has been in the auto insurance mandatory laws due to states that have included such language for their state residents, simply to charge such an outrageous price for the coverage that only about 2% of the population could afford it.

Or the state's then collect more taxes from the general public in order to so provide those SR-22 policies that the state's then get a share in.

Yes, this is the bill that will "keep on giving" to the industries and financial sectors, at the cost once again of the American people resulting in lower and lower economic circumstances for most, and steadily continuing to wipe out the middle class in the process.

So it is clear that truthfully both parties have merged into the "global socialist party" and both work for their corporate benefactors.

With simply a small change in which major benefactor they are attempting to feed at the American public's ultimate expense.

And our Constitution be damned.

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.

Health Care Deform: Another Stimulus For Financial Sector, High Wage Earners

While Barack Obama is enjoying his vacation in Copenhagen along with the other world leaders in the name of saving the planet from its eventual demise due to carbon emissions (and in which the carbon emissions from the private jets of those world leaders beats the average citizen of all those countries by about 100 to 1), a Christmas gift is being prepared for the financial sector and health care industry that will, as they say, "keep on giving."

Apparently this bogus health care reform legislation just will not die, no matter how much the American people have already spoken loud and clear regarding the focus of the legislation, which is actually nothing more than a job stimulus for the top wage earners and corporate health care industries bottom line profits, at the cost mostly of middle class Americans.

That middle class that is disappearing in leaps and bounds, which will live in infamy as having become extinct in the first half of the twenty first century.

While Washington keeps promising that this will enable those that cannot now afford insurance to do so, with all the new creative spins on different options that will be available, the bottom line is that at this point there are so many now jobless and homeless that the cost of any health insurance at all is out of reach for most - yet those people will be the ones fined and penalized if this plan comes to fruition.

Also, much has been publicized about the "accountability" measure that will be built in so that the health care industry will be held accountable, which is what actually has been long overdue in regulating this vital industry on which every single American depends. But with the bill at now over 2,000 pages, little has been said about just how these accountability measures are going to be enforced - since, of course, most of the health care insurance industries offices are actually incorporated at the state, not federal, level.

And there are no "licenses" per se needed or given for any of these corporate entities - even though at this point many of them are actually global concerns and operating in this country without any effective regulation whatsoever.

In fact, about a decade ago Congress pass another of their backroom "Acts" which actually precluded the states from regulating most of these entities at the state level in any manner whatsoever - in the name, of course, of "free enterprise."

Only the "enterprise" we are speaking of are Americans lives.

And also much publicized has been the fact that employers will be required to provide insurance for their employees. Of course, in the article recently published it noted that this only applies if the employee involved is eligible for any "federal subsidies" for his health care costs.

In other words, the only real requirement or enforcement which will be made against employers is actually nothing more than a bribe - you offer insurance to your employees, Uncle Sam and the taxpayers will then reimburse you for some of those costs.

Nor is their language that determines whether those requirements mean that the employer must pick up the full costs for that health care coverage. Most employers of large corporations do as a fringe benefit for other than part time or hourly workers, at least for the worker.

It is amazing that instead of providing federal subsidies for employers (not citizens, it appears), it is too difficult to actually simplify our out of control tax code and make, as with corporate entities at the present time, any and all sums paid by individual Americans for health care coverage fully tax deductible - in order to then equalize that unequal "privilege and immunity" that has been given to corporate entities over sole proprietors or self employed individuals for literally decades.

And I would like to know on what Constitutional authority Washington is basing its "mandatory" provisions in that Americans must purchase a "product," which health insurance coverage actually is, or face sanctions and fines from Uncle Sam if they do not feed their corporate benefactors?

I don't see that anywhere in the 23 page copy I have of the U.S. Constitution - in fact, it does state that no citizen shall be deprived of "property" in any manner by the government without "due process of law."

And there hasn't been any "due process" with respect to consulting the citizenry or listening to their cries for regulation, both of the costs and of the practices, of these industries.

In fact, the only ones consulted seem to be the "stakeholders."

And as "stakeholders," does that not now mean that every single health care company, and provider, now is nothing more than an "agent" of the government, at this point - and those health care and financial sector industries - "state actors" and part of the government now itself.

Those involved are calling this legislation "historic," reminescent of Social Security - the program that the federal government has bankrupted by both unlawfully dipping into those sums for extra-Constitutional functions, and by distributing it not simply for the original reason it was intended - for those that, in their older years, were unable to work or who had not, due to circumstances beyond their control (such as the Depression, as it was intended to be only temporary) had the means to save enough through their incomes (especially after the rather questionable "tax on labor" went into effect) for their basic provision and needs.

And just what is going to occur at the state level, since so many states are now collecting taxes hands over fist for many of the state run programs that provide health care for those that are uninsureable, or cannot afford insurance which the state citizens have been funding now for decades?

Oh, and insofar as the requirement that individuals cannot be denied coverage based on pre-existing conditions?

Watch what has occurred in other areas where the insurance industry is involved. No denials of coverage, just setting those premiums at rates only the top 10% of the population could afford to pay.

This will be historic legislation alright.

Legislation that is making old Ben spin right about now.

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."