PDA

View Full Version : Dems pass Healthcare- Anyone want to venture a guess as to what is next?


CitaDeL
03-21-2010, 09:30 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul

WASHINGTON – Summoned to success by President Barack Obama, the Democratic-controlled Congress approved historic legislation Sunday night extending health care to tens of millions of uninsured Americans and cracking down on insurance company abuses, a climactic chapter in the century-long quest for near universal coverage.

"This is what change looks like," Obama said a few moments later in televised remarks that stirred memories of his 2008 campaign promise of "change we can believe in."

Widely viewed as dead two months ago, the Senate-passed bill cleared the House on a 219-212 vote. Republicans were unanimous in opposition, joined by 34 dissident Democrats.

Now that they have passed health care, they need to expand the numbers of health care recipients by passing amnesty. This way, the Dems will bolster their chances of holding the Whitehouse in 2012 with all the new 'voters' with all the healthcare they deserve.

Perhaps BHO's move to approve the extentions on the Patriot Act (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama_patriot_act)was an act of self defense. Because he knows he might just have enough resistance between the tea partys and the immigration issues that he will have to circle the wagons.

rs232c
03-21-2010, 10:29 PM
Hello fellow subjects (I remember when we used to be citizens):

Obama says what's next is Comprehensive Immigration Reform. Palin says cap & trade.

Give him credit where credit is due, an Indonesian citizen did more damage to the republic in one year that would awe the Russians which they could not do to us in 45 years.

I would imagine congradulatory calls from Chavez, Medvedev and maybe Castro himself, who knows?

Commander Bunny
03-21-2010, 11:07 PM
Page 50 Section 152 in HC bill: HC will be provided to ALL non-US citizens, illegal or otherwise.
Page 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill: Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes.

Amnesty, or not....They'll still get treated by Our hospitals, and like always, We'll foot the bill as well.

Twoller
03-22-2010, 07:18 AM
....

Give him credit where credit is due, an Indonesian citizen did more damage to the republic in one year that would awe the Russians which they could not do to us in 45 years.

I would imagine congradulatory calls from Chavez, Medvedev and maybe Castro himself, who knows?

Don't blame the Russians for the grief caused by the Soviet Union. And don't confuse Medvedev with Chavez or Castro. Nothing that is happening in Russia has anything to do with Chavez and of course Castro is long gone.

Russia and Russians suffered greatly under the Soviet Union. In many ways the situation of Russia under the Soviet Union is like the US in relation to its parasite states and populations in South and Central America and even Canada too. We are host to parasite economies and populations that claim things from the US based on priniciple, but in fact have none that they care to account for.

Part of the spread of Islam into Europe was predated by population surges in the Soviet Union funded by communism, money flowed out from Russia into these Soviets and other east bloc countries.

Of course the Obamination is scum and needs to confronted, undermined and spurned as the rat he is at every opportunity. It is right to associate him with people like Chavez and the Castros. But Medvedev or Putin? I would not be so sure. Whatever problems Russia is having, it is clear that Russia has left communism far behind and neither Putin nor Medvedev can properly be associated with communism or socialism.

What I am waiting to see from the Obamination is government funding of "medical marijuana". What could be more apt? Government money flowing into the hands of foreign gangsters dealing drugs under the shallow guise of medicine. I'm also waiting to see what happens with the sick nightmare of transgender surgery. Is this going to be boosted by government funding.

The filth is definitely spreading and no relief is in site in upcoming elections for the forseeable future.

rs232c
03-23-2010, 02:57 AM
I don't doubt what you say is right. Since the wall fell, I don't have a handle on what kind of government Russia has since then at all. The only thing I remember was them starting to occupy a country that we wouldn't help.

Let me try to restate it this way:

Give him credit where credit is due, an Indonesian citizen did more damage to our Republic in one year that would awe the former communist Russian Government which they could not do to us in a lifetime.

I would imagine him receiving congradulatory calls from anti-capitalist heads of state all over the world.

I don't know if I mentioned this but I have one fundamental transformation of America problem with this at the top of my list. For the last 230 aught years we have had laws that state what we may not do, now we have set a precedent to pass a law that tells us what we must do - a very different point of view and one that I hope won't take another 230 years to correct as it perverses through all three branches of government.

I've yet had anyone in person explain to me that we are no longer land of the free and home of the brave because of this. Surprisingly everyone is shocked at the question and didn't see past the word 'Free" as in "Free Beer'.

I did have someone tell me on another site that we are more free today than we were yesterday. I could only advise him not to become wealthy as he would become a legal enemy of the state and ripe for the taking. Unless of course the government takes over your industry and says your exempt if you do what they tell you. Then you are insulated like the HMO's and you can pee on anyone you like.

The scary part is that was the highest on the intelligence scale I could get for an opposing view. To repeat the rest would only inflame everyone.

Twoller
03-23-2010, 06:45 AM
I don't doubt what you say is right. Since the wall fell, I don't have a handle on what kind of government Russia has since then at all. The only thing I remember was them starting to occupy a country that we wouldn't help.

What country was that? Are you talking about Georgia? Who?

Let me try to restate it this way:

I don't know if I mentioned this but I have one fundamental transformation of America problem with this at the top of my list. For the last 230 aught years we have had laws that state what we may not do, now we have set a precedent to pass a law that tells us what we must do - a very different point of view and one that I hope won't take another 230 years to correct as it perverses through all three branches of government.

I've yet had anyone in person explain to me that we are no longer land of the free and home of the brave because of this. Surprisingly everyone is shocked at the question and didn't see past the word 'Free" as in "Free Beer'.

I did have someone tell me on another site that we are more free today than we were yesterday. I could only advise him not to become wealthy as he would become a legal enemy of the state and ripe for the taking. Unless of course the government takes over your industry and says your exempt if you do what they tell you. Then you are insulated like the HMO's and you can pee on anyone you like.

The scary part is that was the highest on the intelligence scale I could get for an opposing view. To repeat the rest would only inflame everyone.

Are you talking about health care? You couldn't briefly explain why this bill does so much damage?

Patriotic Army Mom
03-23-2010, 07:58 AM
I want my Country Back!

rs232c
03-24-2010, 05:18 PM
I'm sorry for not being clear, let's see if I can stay focused long enough to explain (sometimes that's a problem for me):

I saw in a documentary of Justice O'Conner where she stated that our constitution and system of laws was one where the language was written about what we cannot do and there were no laws about what we must do with respect to Congress and individual rights. They can say an agency shall do this or an official will do that, but not Congress or individuals.

What was passed this week is a law of a different cloth. It is not the first this has happened but I can't pull up the websites that described that in 1933(?) the constitution changed as I recall (but don't quote me) from consitutional law to a public law. (Those great legal minds we have could explain this much better than I.) What I do recall is that before 1933 if you were on your own property and wanted it to be dirty or play loud music to your hearts content you were in the right because of individual rights triumphed. But after 1933 if your neighbors complained you had to 'cease and desist' not because any new laws were made, but their interpretation changed where the community would now be in the right over individual rights.

So now a precendent has been set that a law can be passed about what individuals shall do. They have no choice. Before it was signed the laws would say to the effect 'You may not own a vehicle without insurance' or 'You shall not work for wages without paying taxes', etc., but now they say 'You will purchase Health Care Insurance'. My biggest fear for this would be that the same laws would now be interpreted differently because of this, and this is how I see it has only begun. This small change to me puts us in a different set of rules and a different form of government and a different country that I recognize and understood.

Now I have seen how other changes are taking place, small now but destined to be larger in the future. For example, the 'Experts' pretty much agree that the supremacy clause trumps the unfunded madates and authority of the states and the right for Congress to lay taxes.

After reading the 13 state filing against the law I walked away with the understanding that now the supremacy clause of the constitution is not limiting in any way - that Congress has no legal limitations to what is necessary and proper or what interstate commerce is. This tells me that anything left to the states is nothing more than what the federal government hasn't gotten around to yet for taking from the states and they are agents of the federal government and no longer soverign.

The other talking point of the experts is how they are correctly restating that the constitution says that Congress has the right to lay taxes. That's pretty settled and understood. But what I didn't know or understand was that now we have a precedent that says what an individual will do by law: The interpretation of laying taxes have changed - now a person does not have to do anything to have the tax apply to them. Even if you do nothing, you are assessed a tax enforced by the IRS and subject to penalties way beyond failing to do something but choosing not to engage in interstate commerce.

This new interpretation is days into it's infancy and anyone's guess where it will lead. Sedition acts may become broader. Not informing authorities on your neighbors behavior,
and who knows about enterprenuership and innovation. Now you have to buy health insurance. Why not tommorrow cable tv after the FCC vision of minority exclusivity? Since there will be no real distinction between your state and the federal government how much public good will it be for the feds to mandate what your state must pay for to track you? Since you don't have to do anything to incur the tax, when will a 'deficit reduction tax' be passed under the same circumstances where you don't have to do anything but are assessed your fair share to reduce the federal deficit?

I have a friend that was told today that since the company does not have the minimum number of exmployees all health benefits will be cancelled in 2014. No one I know is happy except those that think of free health care like free beer.

That's the best I can do for now.