I don’t knoW IF YOU RECALL, BUT AS PART OF OBAMMYCARE CONGRESS AND STAFF WERE SUPPOSED TO PARTICIPATE JUST LIKEUS PEONS WELL AS GOMER WOULD SAY “WELL GOOOOOLY’ SEE WHAT HAPPENED NOW.
by KEITH KOFFLER on AUGUST 5, 2013, 9:24 AM By what authority did President Obama decide to exempt members of Congress and their staffs from a provision of Obamacare that would deny them their federal subsidy and and make them buy insurance on the exchanges like everyone else? Obama, as has been widely reported, promised Congress the other day that he would personally see to it that the federal benefit, which pays 75 percent of premiums, would be preserved even after Congress is forced onto the exchanges. Lawmakers were complaining of a potential “brain drain” as high quality staffers left Capitol Hill instead of ponying up thousands more for health insurance. Let’s be clear. Other brains would certainly have replaced the parting brains on Capitol Hill. It’s a cool job – makin’ laws for the rest of us – that others would have done before cashing in their padded resumes and scoring tons of dough in the private sector. The problem wasn’t a brain drain. The problem was a money drain. And so, lo and behold, the administration’sOffice of Personnel Management has dutifully determined that Congress will keep its taxpayer-funded health care gift. According to the Wall Street Journal, OPM has no authority to pay for plans on the exchanges, which are not part of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. This latest White House night at the improv is also illegal. OPM has no authority to pay for insurance plans that lack FEHBP contracts, nor does the Affordable Care Act permit either exchange contributions or a unilateral bump in congressional pay in return for less overall compensation. Those things require appropriations bills passed by Congress and signed by the President. The White House, the WSJ notes, was eager to issue a decree instead of pursuing a legislative fix that would have uncomfortably opened up the Obamacare can of worms and invited Republican mischief. So, as it has so often done when the law is inconvenient, the Obama administration has decided the laws are for stupid people.
Instead of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, it really should be called the BOHICA Unaffordable Care Act.
Blaming ObamaCare, the biggest U.S. movie theater chain has cut the hours of thousands of employees to 30 hours per week.
Perry Chiaramontereports for FoxNews.com, April 15, 2013, that Regal Entertainment Group last month rolled back shifts for non-salaried workers to 30 hours per week, putting them under the threshold at which employers are required to provide health insurance. The Nashville-based company said in a letter to managers that the move was a direct result of ObamaCare.
With revenue of $2.8 billion in 2011, Regal Entertainment Group operates more than 500 theaters in 38 states under the names Regal Cinemas, Edwards Theatres and United Artists Theaters and the recently-purchased Oregon-based Hollywood Theaters.
The company memo, obtained by FoxNews.com, stated:
“In addition, some managers have requested guidance on what they should tell those employees negatively impacted and, at your discretion, we suggest the following. To comply with the Affordable Care Act, Regal had to increase our health care budget to cover those newly deemed eligible based on the law’s definition of a full-time employee. To manage this budget, all other employees will be scheduled in accord with business needs and in a manner that will not negatively impact our health care budget.”
One Regal theater manager, who asked not to be named, told FoxNews.com the move has sparked a wave of resignations from full-time managers who have seen their hours cut by 25% or more: “In the last couple weeks, managers have been quitting on a daily basis from various locations to try and find full-time work. Regal up until now has never restricted anyone to anything below 40 hours.”The manager told FoxNews.com ObamaCare has had the unintended consequence of taking food off his table: “Mandating businesses to offer health care under threat of debilitating fines does not fix a problem, it creates one. It fosters a new business culture where 30 hours is now considered the maximum in order to avoid paying the high costs associated with this law. In a time where 40 hours is just getting us by, putting these kind of financial pressures on employers is a big step in a direction far beyond the reach of feasibility for not only the businesses, but for the employees who rely on their success.”
Regal is the latest company to respond this way to Obamacare’s requirement that employees at companies of a certain size who work more than 30 hours per week be provided health coverage. Applebee’s and Olive Garden also scaled back the hours of workers. A handful of colleges have cut hours because of the law, including Palm Beach State College in Florida and New Jersey’s Kean University.
In addition to the movie theater chain and several restaurants, the state of Virginia also rolled back the hours of all part-time employees back to 29 per week in February, with officials from the state claiming that the new mandate would cost the state tens of millions of dollars a year.
Critics say the law is boomeranging on working folks. “If you want to have reduced work, lower wages and economic stagnation, this is a great way to do it,” said Ed Haislmaier, senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation. I wonder how many of the workers whose hours are cut because of the unaffordable ObamaCare had voted for the POS in 2008 and reelected him in 2012? ~Eowyn
Thanks to Obamacare, the next time you bring Fido or Fluffy to the vet, it’ll cost you more. CBS Miami reports, March 11, 2013, that dog owner Lori Heiselman was surprised when her veterinarian posted a warning on Facebook, which reads: “Because medical equipment and supplies will be going up in cost, that extra expense will have to be passed on to the customers.”
Why the increase? It’s part of a new 2.3% federal excise tax on certain medical devices that just went into effect. The tax will help fund Obamacare, or the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Although medical device manufacturers pay the tax, a recent survey found more than half plan to pass it along.
Although medical devices used only on animals are exempt from this new Obamacare tax, vets do use certain human medical devices that are taxed. Those are devices that have a dual use, meaning they can be used on people and animals, such as IV pumps, sterile scalpels and anesthesia equipment.
The American Veterinary Medical Association represents 82,000 vets. At this point, they don’t know how much this new tax will indirectly cost them. The organizations members are waiting to hear from more device makers.
But some vets already are saying they can’t afford it. Dr. Mike Hatcher is one of them. He explained, “I’m extremely concerned how this is going to be a hidden tax to our consumers that is going to be passed on.”
Elections have consequences.
To all pet-owners whose votes last November ensured the POS’ reelection, I hope you’re happy. ~Eowyn
Two commenters on Fellowship of the Minds claim that Obamacare, aka the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, contains a requirement that all Americans be implanted with a microchip, thereby raising the specter of Revelation‘s 666 Mark of the Beast.
The best way to resolve questions like this is to go to the primary source document. The short answer to the question of whether there is a microchip implant requirement in Obamacare is “No”.
Here’s the long answer.
The first version of Obamacare is the House of Representatives’ proposed bill, H.R. 3200, which does have a reference to implanted devices in the the section on “National Medical Device Registry.” But it isn’t what you think it is. Instead, the implants refer to such implanted medical devices as cardiac pacemakers.
The section on “National Medical Device Registry” appears again in the final “reconciliation” version of the Obamacare bill — the 2310-page HR 4872, specifically Subdivision C: Subtitle C “National Medical Device Registry”, on pages 2056-2063:
Subtitle C—National Medical Device Registry
SEC. 2521. NATIONAL MEDICAL DEVICE REGISTRY.
(1) IN GENERAL.—Section 519 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360i) is amended—
(A) by redesignating subsection (g) as sub5 section (h); and
(B) by inserting after subsection (f) the following:
‘‘National Medical Device Registry” (g)(1) The Secretary shall establish a national medical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the ‘registry’) to facilitate analysis of postmarket safety and outcomes data on each device that—(A) is or has been used in or on a patient; and (B) is— (i) a class III device; or (ii) a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining.
(2) In developing the registry, the Secretary shall, in consultation with the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the head of the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, determine the best methods for—
(A) including in the registry, in a manner consistent with subsection (f), appropriate information to identify each device described in paragraph (1) by type, model, and serial number or other unique identifier;
(B) validating methods for analyzing patient safety and outcomes data from multiple sources and for linking such data with the information included in the registry as described in subparagraph (A), including, to the extent feasible, use of—
(i) data provided to the Secretary under other provisions of this chapter; and (ii) information from public and private sources identified under paragraph (3);
(C) integrating the activities described in this subsection with—
(i) activities under paragraph (3) of section 505(k) (relating to active postmarket risk identification); (ii) activities under paragraph (4) of section 505(k) (relating to advanced analysis of drug safety data); and ‘(iii) other postmarket device surveillance activities of the Secretary authorized by this chapter; and (B) is—(i) a class III device; or (ii) a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining. (2) In developing the registry, the Secretary shall, in consultation with the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the head of the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, determine the best methods for—(A) including in the registry, in a manner consistent with subsection (f), appropriate information to identify each device described in paragraph (1) by type, model, and serial number or other unique identifier; (B) validating methods for analyzing patient safety and outcomes data from multiple sources and for linking such data with the information included in the registry as described in subparagraph (A), including, to the extent feasible, use of—(i) data provided to the Secretary under other provisions of this chapter; and (ii) information from public and private sources identified under paragraph (3); (C) integrating the activities described in this subsection with—(i) activities under paragraph (3) of section 505(k) (relating to active postmarket risk identification); (ii) activities under paragraph (4) of section 505(k) (relating to advanced analysis of drug safety data); and (iii) other postmarket device surveillance activities of the Secretary authorized by this chapter; and (D) providing public access to the data and analysis collected or developed through the registry in a manner and form that protects patient privacy and proprietary information and is comprehensive, useful, and not misleading to patients, physicians, and scientists. ‘(3)(A) To facilitate analyses of postmarket safety and patient outcomes for devices described in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall, in collaboration with public, academic, and private entities, develop methods to—(i) obtain access to disparate sources of patient safety and outcomes data, including—(I) Federal health-related electronic data (such as data from the Medicare program under title XVIII of the Social Security Act or from the health systems of the Department of Veterans Affairs); (II) private sector health-related electronic data (such as pharmaceutical purchase data and health insurance claims data); and (III) other data as the Secretary deems necessary to permit postmarket assessment of device safety and effectiveness; and (ii) link data obtained under clause (i) with information in the registry. (B) In this paragraph, the term ‘data’ refers to information respecting a device described in paragraph (1), including claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary.
(4) Not later than 36 months after the date of the enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall promulgate regulations for establishment and operation of the registry under paragraph (1).
(A)(i) in the case of devices that are described in paragraph (1) and sold on or after the date of the enactment of this subsection, shall require manufacturers of such devices to submit information to the registry, including, for each such device, the type, model, and serial number or, if required under subsection (f), other unique device identifier; and (ii) in the case of devices that are described in paragraph (1) and sold before such date, may require manufacturers of such devices to submit such information to the registry, if deemed necessary by the Secretary to protect the public health;
(B) shall establish procedures—(i) to permit linkage of information submitted pursuant to subparagraph (A) with patient safety and outcomes data obtained under paragraph (3); and (ii) to permit analyses of linked data;
(C) may require device manufacturers to submit such other information as is necessary to facilitate postmarket assessments of device safety and effectiveness and notification of device risks;
(D) shall establish requirements for regular and timely reports to the Secretary, which shall be included in the registry, concerning adverse event trends, adverse event patterns, incidence and prevalence of adverse events, and other information the Secretary determines appropriate, which may include data on comparative safety and outcomes trends; and
(E) shall establish procedures to permit public access to the information in the registry in a manner and form that protects patient privacy and proprietary information and is comprehensive, useful, and not misleading to patients, physicians, and scientists.
(5) To carry out this subsection, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary for fiscal years 2010 and 2011.’’.
(2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall establish and begin implementation of the registry under section 519(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as added by paragraph (1), by not later than the date that is 36 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, without regard to whether or not final regulations to establish and operate the registry have been promulgated by such date.
(3) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 303(f)(1)(B)(ii) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 333(f)(1)(B)(ii)) is amended by striking ‘‘519(g)’’ and inserting ‘‘519(h)’’.
(b) ELECTRONIC EXCHANGE AND USE IN CERTIFIED ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS OF UNIQUE DEVICE IDENTIFIERS.—
(1) RECOMMENDATIONS.—The HIT Policy Committee established under section 3002 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300jj–12) shall recommend to the head of the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology standards, implementation specifications, and certification criteria for the electronic exchange and use in certified electronic health records of a unique device identifier for each device described in section 519(g)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as added by subsection (a).
(2) STANDARDS, IMPLEMENTATION CRITERIA, AND CERTIFICATION CRITERIA.—The Secretary of the Health Human Services, acting through the head of the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, shall adopt standards, implementation specifications, and certification criteria for the electronic exchange and use in certified electronic health records of a unique device identifier for each device described in paragraph (1), if such an identifier is required by section 519(f) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act U.S.C. 360i(f)) for the device.
In its final version — the actual 974-page Obamacare law — even that “National Medical Device Registry” section is deleted.
I did a search for the words “microchip,” “implant,” “medical device,” and “registry” in the law, and found nothing. You can verify this for yourself by going to the PDF version of the law: “Compilation of Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of the 111th Congress, as amended through May 1, 2010 and including Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Health-Related Portions of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.” Click here. To conclude, there is no microchip implant requirement in Obamacare.We have more than enough reasons to object to Obamacare without conjuring up fantasies. ~Eowyn
There’s a video that is getting around via e-mail, which contains an alarming claim about Obamacare, aka the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA).
The video is a statement by Congressman Mike Rogers (R-Michigan) at a House hearing in 2009 on the then Obamacare bill. Beginning at around the 1:20 mark, Rogers made an alarming claim that “Section 141” of the bill says the government can “reach in” and “dis-enroll anyone” — you or me — from our present healthcare plan!
So I did some nosing around on the net and discovered that Congressman Rogers somewhat distorted the truth. According to NationalJournal.com: “Section 141 of the House bill simply establishes the Health Choices Administration. The more controversial section Rogers was referring to is Section 142, which lays out the responsibilities and authority of the new agency’s commissioner. That person will be charged with making sure plans are enrolled in the Health Insurance Exchange and that plans in the exchange are offering adequate benefits for an affordable price. If a plan is not up to standard, the bill gives the commissioner power to levy fines or ‘[suspend] enrollment of individuals under such plan.’ However, this would only stop continued enrollment in the plan, not force people from their current insurance. For plans that continue to fall below requirements, the commissioner would work with state regulators to terminate the plan. This step would be taken only after warnings, and enrollees would be re-entered in the health insurance exchange to choose another comparable plan. So Rogers’ explanation of the section is technically right, but it comes with a caveat. Rather than the government being able to indiscriminately disenroll individuals and businesses from plans, people would only be removed from substandard plans after repeated warnings and attempts to correct those plans.“
In the video, Congressman Rogers also made another claim that was upsetting. He said: “Here’s the other tradeoff. According to… the National Cancer Intelligence Centre for the United Kingdom and the Canadian Cancer Registry, here’s the tradeoff that they picked by having government-run health care. If you get prostate cancer, you have a less chance of survivability than you do in the United States. And that’s the same for skin cancer, breast cancer, bladder cancer, cervical cancer, kidney cancer, ovarian cancer, leukemia, and the list goes on and on and on.”
This is what NationalJournal.com says: “Rogers’ office cites statistics from the National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health, the National Cancer Intelligence Centre in the U.K. and the Canadian Cancer Registry. They show that for most kinds of cancer, the five-year survival rates in the United States are higher than in Britain or Canada, which both have single-payer systems. The fact that Britain’s cancer survival rates are low have been well-reported; according to a study in The Lancet Oncology, England’s five-year overall cancer survival rates were fifth-worst out of 22 countries. Canada’s survival rates are much closer to those in the United States. According to the data supplied by Rogers’ office, Canada was within 7 percentage points of the United States on all but brain cancer, with most falling within 3 points. Canada actually leads the United States on cervical and pancreatic cancers.Additionally, that same Lancet study noted that other countries with single-payer systems have comparable rates to the United States, including Finland, Sweden and Iceland. In fact, Cuba’s system even showed a higher survival rate for breast cancer, although researchers admit that may have been due to poor record-keeping.”
Nancy Pelosi was wrong when, on March 11, 2010, she said in a speech that “we have to pass the [Obamacare] bill so that you can find out what is in it.” The PPACA law that is Obamacare is so long (906 pages) and so complicated that, two years after Obama had signed the bill into law, we still don’t really know what’s in it.
Yes, Virginia. There really are Obamacare death panels.
In 2009, in the lead up to the Democrat-controlled Congress’ approval of Obamacare, aka the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) , Sarah Palin was ridiculed by the media for her warning that the bill’s passage would mean the imposition of “death panels” on Americans.
It turns out she was right.
On November 22, 2011, a neurosurgeon who calls himself “Jeff from Chicago, Illinois” called into Mark Levin’s radio show with startling information. Under Obamacare, patients who are 70 years old or older are to only receive “comfort care” instead of neurosurgery.
This is what Jeff said:
He had just returned from a seminar in Washington, D.C., (I believe Jeff was referring to the annual meeting of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons, held in Washington, D.C., October 1-6, 2011), wherein he and other neurosurgeons were provided a document by HHS (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) on what Obama’s health care (PPACA) means for neuro-patients aged 70 and over. The document is Obama’s new Health Care Plan for Advanced Neurosurgical Care, in which patients are now depersonalized by being called “units”.
In Jeff’s words: “If you’re over 70 and come into Emergency Care for neurological reasons,” e.g., a brain aneurysm or bleeding in their brain, and you’ve covered by Obamacare, “advanced neurosurgical care is generally not indicated” — you get just “comfort care.”
The decision to undertake neurosurgery or not will be made by an Ethics Panel, comprised not of neurosurgeons but of administrators with no medical training. The withholding of neurosurgery to older patients units is prompted by two factors:
Neurosurgery is the smallest field in medicine.
Neurosurgery is the most expensive of all surgeries.
This information presently is not published somewhere for citizens such as you and I to get hold of and read, but is discussed only within the neurosurgeons community — the American Association of Neurological Surgeons and the Congress of Neurological Surgeons. Mark Levin remarked that this information likely will be made available to the public after the November 2012 elections.
Help make this “neurosurgical death panel” go viral. Send this post to your e-mail list and post it to your Facebook page!
H/t my dear friend Barbara.
The American Association of Neurological Surgeons has issued a statement disavowing Jeff’s claim that there is such a document denying advanced neurosurgery for patients over 70 years old. Here’s the statement, but note the carefully parsed language: “The AANS and CNS are unaware of…”):
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Alison Dye January 10, 2012 (202) 446-2028 email@example.com
Neurosurgeons Condemn False Assertions Made About Health Reform Law on Mark Levin Show Refute Statements that the Law Would Ration Neurosurgical Care for the Elderly
Washington, DC – On November 22, 2011, an individual claiming to be a “brain surgeon” made several statements referencing neurosurgical care on a Mark Levin radio show segment. The American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) and the Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) reviewed this segment and found that it contained several factual inaccuracies which we wish to clarify.
The AANS and CNS are unaware of any federal government document directing that advanced neurosurgery for patients over 70 years of age will not be indicated and only supportive care treatment will be provided. Furthermore, in conducting our own due diligence, the caller who identified himself as a brain surgeon is not actually a neurosurgeon, nor was there any session at the recent Congress of Neurological Surgeons’ scientific meeting in Washington, DC at which a purported government document calling for the rationing of neurosurgical care was discussed.
Neurosurgeons are committed to providing timely, compassionate, and state of the art treatment for all patients — regardless of age — who have neurosurgical conditions. As such, we have requested numerous times that this podcast be removed from Mark Levin’s website as it portrays inaccurate information which could potentially be harmful to the patients that we serve.
Notwithstanding the AANS/CNS denial, the plain truth is that for cost-effective reasons (health care costs mount in our older years), all government-run health care systems — euphemistically sugar-coatedly called “single-payer” — necessarily entail medical rationing, otherwise called death panels. There are two examples in America already: Arizona and Oregon. As recounted by Wesley Smith for The Weekly Standard, Jan. 31, 2011, the Arizona legislature cut its Medicaid budget because the state is in dire financial straits—a move approved by the Obama administration. The cuts led to canceling Medicaid coverage for organ transplant surgeries, and the death of a potential organ recipient.
Then, there is “Oregon, a decidedly liberal state…. In 1993, the Clinton administration gave permission to the Oregon Health Plan, the state’s Medicaid program, to introduce rationing. The system involves a treatment schedule that lists 649 potentially covered procedures. The state pegs the number of procedures the state will cover to the available funds. Patients requiring procedures above the cutoff line are out of luck. As of October 2010, only the first 502 treatments were covered. But even that low number doesn’t tell the full story of rationing in Oregon. The Oregon Health Plan also rations covered procedures under certain circumstances. Chemotherapy, for instance, is not provided if it is deemed to have a 5 percent or less chance of extending the patient’s life for five years, meaning that a patient whose life might be extended a year or two with chemo may not receive it.”
Smith reminds us that both the Arizona and Oregon examples “resulted from a single-payer health care system crashing into a budgetary brick wall. The real lesson here is that ‘single payer’ and ‘death panels’ go together like ‘See’s’ and ‘candy.'”
And so, despite the AANS/CNS’s statement of denial, anyone with an average IQ knows that Obamacare does/will have rationing, which is another word for death panels. ~Eowyn
No signing statements to nullify or undermine congressional instructions as enacted into law Obama Lies to Keep Czars No “boots” on the ground Libya
Anyone that has worked with the AC-130 gunship can tell you, you need spotters to let aircraft know where the targets are. Usually it is Special Forces, Rangers etc trained for this mission. It’s CIA Agents in Libya on the ground Reform will also rein in the abuse and excess that nearly brought down our financial system. It will finally bring transparency to the kinds of complex, risky transactions that helped trigger the financial crisis. Obama Lies About Financial Reform Bill All Americans WILL BE were, “surprised, disappointed and angry” about Lockerbie bomber Obama Memo I will not rest until the BP Oil Spill stops Obama’s Schedule The health care bill will not increase the deficit by one dime.
Campaign and Presidency
Take our nuclear weapons off hair-trigger alert
ArmsControl.org – “the current alert posture … should not be changed” Mr. Ayers as “a guy who lives in my neighborhood,” but “not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis. News Busters I had a uncle who was one of the, who was part of the first American troops to go into Auschwitz and liberate the concentration camps United States Holocaust Memorial Museum Obama campaign would accept public funding ABC Minimum Wage will increase to $9.50/hr A Socialist Ann Dunham spent the months before her death in 1995 fighting with insurance companies that sought to deny her the coverage she needed to pay for treatment. Mounting Heath Care Lies Didn’t know Jeremiah Wright was Radical Dreams of My Father – A radical Socialist. Would have the most transparent administration in History Cato Institute We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way. Boston Globe I have visited all 57 states. Snopes I’ll get rid of earmarks Source: Any bill passed during presidency When a bill lands on my Desk, The American people will have 5 days to review it before I sign it. Campaign Speech My father served in World War II. The Videos and the Facts Have troops out of Iraq by March 31, 2009 News Video Seniors Making less than 50,000 will not have to pay taxes YouTube Would not vote for any bill supporting troop funding without a firm withdrawal commitment from the Bush Administration.
He has done nothing but continue the Bush admins strategy and to explain how the “surges total failure” has now become his greatest achievement. Present Votes Are Common In Illinois NPR I Won Michigan Huffington Post I won Nevada The Nation I don’t Have Lobbyists US News My Campaign Had Nothing To Do With The 1984 Ad Crooks and Liars I Have Always Been Against Iraq Washington Post My Wife Didn’t Mean What She Said About Pride In Country CNN Barack was never an ACORN trainer and never worked for ACORN in any other capacity. Obama Campaign Video I Barely Know Rezko Sun Times My Church Is Like Any Other Christian Church ABC News
Submit A lie
Are we missing a lie on the list? Submit the lie and your source below: Please put source as a real address on the web
And now a word from our sponsor. Someone please tell this RINO his Career isover. Thanks , Steve. Sunday, 15 May 2011 07:31 PM By Tim Collie
Surprising many conservatives, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich stirred a lively debate Sunday by slamming Rep. Paul Ryan‘s plan to reform Medicare on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
In what one popular conservative website described as Gingrich “tacking left,” the now-declared presidential candidate dismissed a plan popular among many conservatives as “radical change” that he suggested was dangerous for Republicans to embrace heading into an election year.
The House budget chairman’s plan is designed to move to a system where seniors receive vouchers to buy private insurance. It has been endorsed by the majority of House Republicans.
But Gingrich said it was “too big a jump. I think what you want to have is a system where people voluntarily migrate to better outcomes, better solutions, better options.”
“I’m against Obamacare, which is imposing radical change, and I would be against a conservative imposing radical change,” he continued.
“I don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering,” Gingrich said. “I don’t think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate.”
To Read the rest of Gingrich ( Ahh, RINO“S) Drival, Pls Go HERE https://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/gingrich-ryan-medicare-radical/2011/05/15/id/396427?s=al&promo_code=C44A-1 ~Steve~
Do you want to pay even more taxes than what you already are paying? (For a list of Obamacare taxes, GO HERE.)
Do you want to see doctors leave the profession by droves, as many say they will?
Are you just tickled pink by the government forcing you to buy medical insurance?
If you say “NO” to any of the above, please help to drive a stake through the black heart of Obamacare.
The House will vote on repealing Obamacare this week, most likely on Tuesday or Wednesday. Grassfire Nation is spearheading a Citizen Petition to Repeal ObamaCare. The Petition states:
As a concerned citizen, I am signing this petition to show my support for the repeal and dismantling of the 2010 health care reform law (The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act). I ardently oppose any government interference in my personal and private health care decisions. ObamaCare is an affront to the ideals and values outlines in the U. S. Constitution. I also urge Congress to defund all aspects of the ObamaCare legislation until it is purged from our laws.
Grassfire aims to deliver at least 100,000 signatures to House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) before the vote. Go here to sign the petition.
To sign the petition, you are asked to give your name, address, phone, and e-mail address. After you’ve done that, unless you really want to, do NOT check any of the “I am also interested in” items.
H/t beloved fellow May. ~Eowyn