Category Archives: Health Care

Vote-rigging in referendum on independence for Scotland; 1 in 4 Americans favor secession

On September 18, 2014, in a record voter turnout of 84.59%, the people of Scotland seemingly rejected independence from the United Kingdom by a whopping 55% “no” vs. 45% “yes”.

Scottish unionists won by a wider-than-expected 10-percentage-point margin, to the surprise of everyone because right up to the actual referendum, polls had shown a neck-to-neck race between “yes” and “no”.

It is, therefore, sobering that clear and visual evidence of vote fraud has been uncovered, as shown in this video, where a vote counter is seen periodically moving ballot sheets from the “yes” to the “no” pile, and where stacks of ballots are piled up in the “no” section when the top ballots can be seen to have the “yes” box checked off.

[H/t FOTM's Gingercake for the video]

So who/what is thwarting Scotland’s independence?

How about TPTB of the European Union, for one?

Two days before the Scottish referendum, Dina Spector reports for Business Insider:

The Scottish independence movement will embolden other active separatist groups in Europe to win their freedom, whether or not Scotland votes to secede from the UK on Thursday. From Catalonia and Basque Country in Spain to Veneto, South Tyrol, and the island of Sardinia in Italy to Flanders in Belgium, ‘the precedent of the vote on self-determination will reverberate around the Continent,’ The New York Times writes. If you want a rough idea of how European borders would have to be redrawn if regions with a separatist agenda got their way, you can look at the map below, put together by the European Free Alliance [EFA], to which “40 progressive nationalist, regionalist and autonomous parties throughout the European Union” belong.

Click map to enlarge

Map of Europe's secessionist movements
Meanwhile, back in the good ol’ U. S. of A., a new Reuters/Ipsos poll finds that as many as a quarter of Americans, or 1 in 4, are open to their states leaving the union — a move no U.S. state has tried in the 150 years since the bloody Civil War that led to the end of slavery in the South.

Some 23.9% of Americans polled from Aug. 23 through Sept. 16 said they strongly support or tend to support the idea of their state breaking away, while 53.3% of the 8,952 respondents strongly oppose or tend to oppose secession.

Some other findings of the poll:

  • The urge to sever ties with Washington cuts across party lines and regions, though Republicans and residents of rural Western states generally favor the idea more than Democrats and Northeasterners. By region, the idea was least popular in New England, the cradle of the Revolutionary War, with just 17.4% of respondents open to pulling their state out. It was most popular in the Southwest, where 34.1% of respondents back the idea. That region includes Texas, where an activist group is calling the state’s legislature to put the secession question on a statewide ballot.
  • Anger with Obama‘s handling of issues ranging from Obamacare to the Islamic State (aka ISIL) jihidasts drives some of the secessionist feeling. Mordecai Lee, professor of governmental affairs at the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee, who has studied secessionist movements, said interest in secession “seems to have heated up, especially since the election of President Obama.” Brittany Royal, a 31-year-old nurse from Wilkesboro, North Carolina, said anger over Obamacare made her wonder if her state would be better off on its own, “That has really hurt a lot of people here, myself included. My insurance went from $40 a week for a family of four up to over $600 a month for a family of four. The North Carolina government itself is sustainable. Governor (Pat) McCrory, I think he has a better healthcare plan than President Obama.”
  • Others say long-running Washington gridlock prompted them to wonder if their states would be better off striking out on their own. Roy Gustafson, 61, of Camden, South Carolina, who (ironically) lives on disability payments from the federal government, said, “I don’t think it makes a whole lot of difference anymore which political party is running things. Nothing gets done. The state would be better off handling things on its own.”

~Eowyn

‘Family Glitch’ in Obamacare to Impact 1.9 Million Americans

obamacare

FreeBeacon: Vague language within Obamacare will result in nearly 2 million Americans being unable to afford health insurance, according to a new report by the American Action Forum (AAF).

The so-called “family glitch” occurs when an individual is offered health insurance through their employer but the plan is not extended to the rest of their family. Due to the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) interpretation of the law, other immediate family members are not eligible to receive subsidies for insurance, even if their income is below the federal poverty level.

The AAF has estimated that 1.93 million Americans will be affected by the glitch, making it “practically impossible” for them to obtain affordable health care coverage.

“The ‘Family Glitch,’ as it has become known, is an odd and particularly problematic side-effect of the Affordable Care Act (ACA),” the report said. “Since several provisions of the law are rather ambiguous, they unfortunately combine to create a perfect storm where obtaining affordable health insurance is practically impossible.”

Under Obamacare, Americans below 138 percent of the poverty line are eligible for Medicaid coverage, and anyone up to 400 percent of the poverty level can also receive subsidies to help pay for insurance purchased through the health exchange.

However, this provision does not apply to families who have been offered employer-sponsored insurance (ESI), even if it is only offered to the individual employee.

“This provision of the law lacks clarity on the point of whether or not the coverage offered must be family coverage, or whether individual coverage is sufficient,” the AAF said. “The Internal Revenue Service (IRS), through rule making, has interpreted the statute as only requiring an employer to offer individual coverage, and pegged affordability at 9.5 percent of the employee’s household income. The glitch occurs when one (or both) spouses are offered affordable individual ESI under the IRS definition, but family coverage is either not offered or is unaffordable.”

“Spouses and children of an employee offered ESI could be unable to afford the employer plan, but because it is offered to one family member, the rest are made ineligible for subsidies in the Exchanges,” the report added.

Using census data from April 2013, AAF estimated 947,000 spouses and 984,000 children could fall into this category, and left uninsured. The glitch will affect up to 428,000 women and 519,000 adult men. If Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) funding expires, 2.28 million children would also be affected, according to AAF.

The provision could have unintended consequences for employees in the middle class, forcing them to not accept higher paying jobs out of fear of losing subsidy eligibility to pay for their family’s health insurance.

The AAF also said the glitch could result in families choosing to separate or divorce, in order to keep subsidies.

“The family glitch is just one of many problems that will inevitably arise from the ACA’s complete restructuring of the health care system,” the report concluded. “It is an unintended consequence that creates hardship and perverse incentives for American families struggling to obtain affordable health insurance. This year alone 1.93 million Americans will be impacted by this glitch and that number will likely increase as the employer mandate goes into effect.”

elections have consequences

DCG

100 most livable cities in USA

bay6

Livability just came out with their 2nd annual top 100 best small to mid-sized cities in the U.S.

More than 2,000 cities were ranked by the following criteria:

  • Amenities: Variety of terrain; access to water; farmers markets; golf courses; parks; a moderate climate; role of arts in the community. 
  • Demographics: Racial, ethnic, and age diversity; population growth.
  • Economy: income inequality; income growth forecasts; employment; the amount residents spend on food.
  • Education: Quality of public schools; presence of colleges and universities; education levels of the adults.
  • Health care: Presence of hospitals within the town limits; low-birth-weight rate among children; obesity rates among adults; ratio of primary care physicians per 100,000 residents.
  • Housing: Access to affordable housing; diversity of housing stock.
  • Social and civic capital: Who are the people in your neighborhood? and what do they do for your neighborhood?
  • Transportation: Access to major airports; walkability; transportation costs; percentage of the population who commute to work by some means other than driving alone.

Below are the top 100 cities:

  1. Madison, Wisconsin
  2. Rochester, Minnesota
  3. Arlington, Virginia
  4. Boulder, Colorado
  5. Palo Alto, California
  6. Berkeley, California
  7. Santa Clara, California
  8. Missoula, Montana
  9. Boise, Idaho
  10. Iowa City, Iowa
  11. Bozeman, Montana
  12. Asheville, North Carolina
  13. Ann Arbor, Michigan
  14. Bellevue, Washington
  15. San Mateo, California
  16. Santa Barbara, California
  17. Overland Park, Kansas
  18. Salt Lake City, Utah
  19. Rockeville, Maryland
  20. Eugene, Oregon
  21. Pasadena, California
  22. Fargo, North Dakota
  23. Ventura, California
  24. Fort Collins, Colorado
  25. Sunnyvale, California
  26. Mountain View, California
  27. St. Louis Park, Minnesota
  28. Santa Monica, California
  29. Durham, North Carolina
  30. Ames, Iowa
  31. San Rafael, California
  32. Frederick, Maryland
  33. Greenville, South Carolina
  34. Lakewood, Colorado
  35. Provo, Utah
  36. Sandy Springs, Georgia
  37. Lincoln, Nebraska
  38. Miami Beach, Florida
  39. Quincy, Massachusetts
  40. Cambridge, Massachusetts
  41. Sioux Falls, South Dakota
  42. Towson, Maryland
  43. Tempe, Arizona
  44. Portland, Maine
  45. Alameda, California
  46. Renton, Washington
  47. Bellingham, Washington
  48. Beaverton, Oregon
  49. Fullerton, California
  50. Columbia, Missouri
  51. Bismarck, North Dakota
  52. Helena, Montana
  53. Irvine, California
  54. Reno, Nevada
  55. Olympia, Washington
  56. Santa Cruz, California
  57. West Des Moines, Iowa
  58. Honolulu, Hawaii
  59. Eau Claire, Wisconsin
  60. Ashland, Oregon
  61. Monterey, California
  62. Chapel Hill, North Carolina
  63. Alexandria, Virginia
  64. North Bethesda, Maryland
  65. Cedar Rapids, Iowa
  66. Lexington, Kentucky
  67. White Plains, New York
  68. Costa Mesa, California
  69. Corvallis, Oregon
  70. Manhattan, Kansas
  71. Tampa, Florida
  72. Silver Spring, Maryland
  73. Kirkland, Washington
  74. Lawrence, Kansas
  75. Westminster, Colorado
  76. Bend, Oregon
  77. Redmond, Washington
  78. Santa Rosa, California
  79. Goleta, California
  80. Knoxville, Tennessee
  81. Stamford, Connecticut
  82. Des Moines, Iowa
  83. Fayetteville, Arkansas
  84. Denton, Texas
  85. Springfield, Missouri
  86. Orlando, Florida
  87. Menlo Park, California
  88. Salem, Oregon
  89. Burbank, California
  90. Hayward, California
  91. Greensboro, North Carolina
  92. Charleston, South Carolina
  93. Richardson, Texas
  94. Tysons Corner, Virginia
  95. La Crosse, Wisconsin
  96. Grand Rapids, Michigan
  97. Framingham, Massachusetts
  98. Billings, Montana
  99. Brookline, Massachusetts
  100. Coral Gables, Florida

Do you live in one of the above cities?

Do you agree with the ranking criteria? (I’m surprised crime rate isn’t a criterion.)

~Eowyn

“Who wants their son to live the life of a handicapped person? Maybe some families want this, but we don’t.”

AFP Photo

AFP Photo

France24: Parents of an extremely premature baby, currently in hospital in the city of Poitiers, have asked doctors to take their child off life support, or “passive euthanasia”. The doctors, however, say they need more time to evaluate the baby’s condition.

“We made this decision over a week ago,” said the baby’s mother, Mélanie, who was interviewed by France Info. “Who wants their son to live the life of a handicapped person? Maybe some families want this, but we don’t.”

The baby boy, named Titouan, was born on 31 August, four months before his due date. He weighed just under 2lb at birth and suffered from an intracerebral haemorrhage. For now, the doctors at the University Hospital Center of Poitiers (CHU) are unable to judge the extent of the damage to his brain.

“If we want to be able to fully understand the consequences [of the haemorrhage], we can’t rush this. We need a few weeks to evaluate his condition,” said Professor Fabrice Pierre, of the department of gynecology and obstetrics at Poitiers CHU, on French TV channel France Bleu. “Currently, we are not giving him intensive treatment; we are simply giving him life support to give us the time to do a proper evaluation.”

The baby’s parents, Mélanie and Aurélien, who are both in their 30s, say that doctors have already told them that their son will be paralysed on one side and that it is very likely he will be “severely disabled.”

They accuse the “inhumane” doctors of prolonging their son’s suffering.

Currently, euthanasia is illegal in France, though the 2005 law says that doctors are allowed to end or refrain from using treatments or care that result in the artificial prolongation of life, as long as the family agrees with the doctor’s decision. This is often referred to as “passive euthanasia,” or withholding treatments necessary to the continuation of life.

Importantly, the 2005 law also puts the decision in the hands of the doctors.
Faced with the repeated demands of Titouan’s parents, CHU’s neonatal unit sought out the advice of an ethics panel. They have yet to make a decision.

Earlier in the year, French President François Hollande announced that the government planned to enact a tightly-framed law allowing “medical assistance to end one’s life in dignity”.

Close to nine out of ten French people (89%) interviewed said they would be in favour of a law authorising euthanasia, according to a survey published in French daily Le Parisien at the end of June.

In situations when a person is too sick to make the decision themselves, 53% said the family should make the decision, 41% said a doctor should only 6% said a judge should make the decision.

In June, The Council of State, France’s top administrative court ruled in favour of so-called passive euthanasia in the high-profile case of Vincent Lambert, a tetraplegic patient who has been in a state of minimal consciousness for the past six years.

See also:

DCG

Ebola Coming to a Town Near You? Our Illustrious Comrade Dear Ruler Sending 3000 Troops to the Center of Ebola Hell

obama_ebola

No, the little spineless Kenyan coward refuses to put boots on the ground to eradicate the ISIS cancer that is currently devouring large swaths of the Middle East, but he seems to have no problem exposing 3000 of our bravest to the most deadly disease in recent history.

Via  dailymail.co.uk:

By David Martosko, Us Political Editor for MailOnline

Published: 23:01 EST, 15 September 2014 | Updated: 23:07 EST, 15 September 2014

The United States government is sending thousands of military troops to the west African nation of Liberia as part of the Obama administration’s Ebola virus-response strategy, the White House said late Monday night.

‘U.S. Africa Command will set up a Joint Force Command headquartered in Monrovia, Liberia, to provide regional command and control support to U.S. military activities and facilitate coordination with U.S. government and international relief efforts,’ a statement from the White House press office said.

‘A general from U.S. Army Africa, the Army component of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM), will lead this effort, which will involve an estimated 3,000 U.S. forces.’

Liberia is the hardest-hit of the four west African nations that have confirmed Ebola cases, accounting for more than one-half of the fatalities. The others are Sierra Leone, Guinea and, to a lesser extent, Nigeria.

You will find the rest at this link.

—————————————-

I wonder how many of these soldiers are going to return home and ultimately infect their family members and friends?

Somehow I don’t much think the POtuS gives a damn.

-Dave

(h/t: Drudge)

Dictator Obama To Wait Until After Mid-Terms To Release Invading Horde Into America.

I’m thinking maybe we should tell him and our representatives to screw off now, and not wait till then.

Ann Coulter seems to agree. Great column below.

———————————————————————————————–

President Obama now says he will wait until after the November elections to implement an “executive amnesty” for 11 million illegal aliens, so as not to hurt Democrats’ chances this year.Instead of waiting to be enraged in December, voters, could you please be enraged now? Once the holiday season kicks off, you’ll be too busy going to parties and Christmas shopping to notice that you’re suddenly living in Mexico.

Getting Obama to postpone a rancid idea isn’t something to celebrate. Yay! We did it! We forced him to delay doing something the country doesn’t want for SIX WEEKS! Every Republican candidate better be jamming Obama’s threat down the throats of their Democratic opponents.

Obama is claiming to have the powers of a dictator. Amnesty was considered by Congress, but — here’s the important thing: It didn’t pass. It only passed the Senate, with the votes of all Democrats and 14 not-bright Republicans. After that, widespread public revulsion prevented Marco Rubio’s amnesty bill from even being considered in the House.

But according to Obama, the only reason illegals haven’t already been given amnesty is that Congress is not “doing its job.”

What does Obama imagine Congress’ “job” is? Being his errand boys? Their job is to represent their districts. I promise you, House members are doing a better job representing their districts than at least a dozen senators are at representing their states — or than Obama is doing representing the country. It’s called the “People’s House” for a reason.

Noticeably, every Republican senator running for re-election this year claims to oppose amnesty — even the ones who voted for it. (Let’s hope they remember how unpopular mass immigration is when it’s time to vote, not just when they’re running.)

Obama’s base isn’t even looking for representation. We could have a 1929-level stock market crash, Obama could commit a murder on the White House lawn — and they would still support the first minority president!

Oh Please jump in the hole.

Oh Please jump in the hole.

But Obama says he can do whatever he wants on immigration because it’s “a serious issue and Congress chooses to do nothing.”

If bills became law provided only the Senate and president agreed, the Nicaraguan Contras would have been funded out of the U.S. Treasury, Reagan would have gotten his MX missiles in 1982 and the Soviet Union would have fallen five years sooner, school busing would have been eliminated without waiting for the courts to act a decade later, and most of George W. Bush’s tax cuts would have been made permanent. In all those cases, a president wanted to do something — and the Senate agreed! But the House said no, so it never happened.

Obama can’t ignore the House and make amnesty happen either. That’s why he’s talking about an “executive amnesty,” which sounds like the top-tier donation category at one of the 4 million fundraisers Obama has held since becoming president, where the dinner starts at $25,000 per couple and you might bump into Jay-Z in the men’s room. Actually, it just means Obama publicly, openly, officially stops enforcing immigration law.

Except in his own mind, Obama can’t make illegals legal. But he can direct the entire immigration apparatus of the federal government to act as if amnesty has passed. The theory is that once they’ve been treated as if they’re legal for a few years, it’s a fait accompli, and no future president will resume enforcement of the law.

Although consistent with historical practice, it’s not where the country is at all. This election is our first referendum on amnesty.

Not only do we have Obama’s promise that he’ll refuse to execute the law — it’s not as if he took some kind of oath, after all — but there’s good reason to believe him: After this election, he’s got nothing to lose. Democrats will have two years to sign up 30 million illegal immigrants for Social Security benefits, food stamps and voting cards.

There is no more important political issue than this: Republicans must take the Senate this year.

You know how much you’ve been enjoying the courts overturning state referendums prohibiting gay marriage? Get ready for a lot more of your hard-won political victories to be nullified by the courts if Republicans don’t take a Senate majority.

Remember how the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare on a 5-4 vote? Obama could have a shot at replacing another Supreme Court justice in the next two years. As a senator, he voted against both of Bush’s nominees, so he can’t very well complain if Republicans reject his loony-bird nominees.

Have you heard about the federal judge conspiring with Attorney General Eric Holder and the ACLU to bring deported illegal aliens back from Mexico? Yes, he’s bringing them back. That judge, John A. Kronstadt, can’t be impeached unless Republicans take the Senate.

With Republican majorities in both the House and Senate, Congress should just keep passing bills and sending them to the White House — or whatever golf course Obama’s on, busily not executing the law. If Obama vetoes their bills, Republicans can denounce him as a “do-nothing” president.

And keep in mind, this election will determine whether President Ted Cruz or President Mitt Romney will have a Republican Congress in 2017. They won’t — unless Republicans win every possible Senate race this year. The Senate seats up for election two years from now are not nearly as favorable to Republicans as the Senate seats up this year.

Unforced Republican errors in Delaware, Indiana, Missouri, Connecticut and West Virginia in the last few election cycles have already cost Republicans five Senate seats. (See my last book for the heart-breaking details.)

Five! Think of that! Republicans would have 50 seats in the Senate right now — maybe 51, if they could flip Sen. Joe Manchin in West Virginia — but for Republican stupidity, arrogance and narcissism. Instead of desperately hoping to win a bare majority, we would be one “wave election” away from a veto-proof majority.

Surveying the wreckage of a mere two years of a Democratic president with a Democratic Congress, all Americans should be focused like a laser beam on putting the Senate in Republican hands.

Won’t you be angry if our power-mad president grants millions of illegal immigrants “executive amnesty” on the basis of his nonexistent constitutional authority to ignore the law? The surge of needy foreigners across our Southern border, so far, will be nothing compared to what’s coming if Obama does this.

He says he will. He thinks voters are too stupid to notice.

Prove him wrong.

‘She’s not a fetus, she’s a fully-formed human being’

baby2

DailyMail: A mother has released the first photograph of the moment her premature daughter was born, hours before she passed away too small to survive. Emily Caines and her husband Alastair want to raise awareness of the issues surrounding neonatal death, after losing tine Adelaide when she was just hours old.

She was delivered at 24 weeks but was too small to survive. The couple’s treasured image of their daughter shows doctors bringing her into the world. The current law allows babies to be terminated killed up to 24 weeks gestation – the point at which Adelaide was born.

Mrs. Caines, 25, from Yeovil in Somerset, said: “Our picture shows Adelaide was not a fetus, she was a fully formed human being and to think that a baby like her could be legally terminated killed is to me horrifying. Our hospital was amazing and did all they could be Adelaide suffered complications which made it impossible for her to survive but many babies born at 24 weeks do live.”

“That makes a mockery of the 24 week legal limit. Our daughter may not have lived long but she was still our daughter and we love to talk about her and celebrate her life. Sadly in this day and age some people still find that offensive or uncomfortable.”

“I find it particularly hurtful when people use the term late miscarriage to describe our daughter because she was born so early into my pregnancy. But I think this picture of her crying out shows that clearly that is not the case. I went through labor and delivery with both of my premature babies. Adelaide lived for more than an hour and will always be very much part of our lives.”

baby3

Mrs. Caines also lost her first daughter, Isabelle, who died during delivery as she arrived prematurely at 23 weeks. Mrs. Caines and her family and friends have raised money for the stillbirth and neonatal death charity Sands in light of her daughters’ deaths. She said she hopes the picture of Adelaide’s delivery will help encourage people to talk about baby loss.

Mrs. Caines also hopes the image of Adelaide will help re-open the ongoing debate surrounding abortion reform. Read the rest of her story here.

24weeks

A baby at 24 weeks: Your baby is about eight-and-a-half inches long (standard letter size!) and weighs one-and-a-half pounds, gaining steadily at a rate of about six ounces per week. Much of that weight comes from growing organs, bones, muscle and accumulating baby fat. Wondering what (and who) your baby will look like? If you had a baby cam at 24 weeks pregnant, you’d almost be able to tell by now. That beautiful face (though still tiny) is almost fully formed, complete with eyelashes, eyebrows and hair. 

All kinds of sounds can be heard by your baby in your womb: air exhaling from your lungs (deep breath now), those gastric gurgles produced by your stomach and intestines, your voice and your partner’s (which your baby will be able to recognize at birth) and even very loud sounds such as honking horns, barking dogs or a wailing fire truck.

DCG