Barney Britt v. North Carolina: Gun Rights Restored

While the country is taking a severe left turn in the Marxist direction in economics and "social justice" (which I think is a code word for wealth redistribution), we are actually making strides toward more gun freedom. Make no mistake, it is a fight every step of the way.

More and more states have become "shall issue" concealed carry states. States are expanding the places where there is a right to carry, such as restaurant, as long as the concealed carrier is not drinking. States are expanding the protections in self defense by expanding the state Castle Doctrines, making it clear that in your own home, you do not have the duty to run from someone breaking in.

Here is a case where a man name Barney Britt was convicted of a nonviolent drug felony in 1979. He completed his probation and his rights were fully restored by law including his right to own a firearm under North Carolina law. In 2004, the North Carolina legislature banned possession of firearms to all persons previously convicted of a felony, regardless of the subsequent history of being law-abiding.

In the case decided August 28, 2009, the Supreme Court of North Carolina held the 2004 law unconstitutional as applied to Barney Britt on the facts set forth above. The court said "In particular it is unreasonable to assert that a nonviolent citizens who has responsibly, safely, and legally owned and used firearms for seventeen years is in reality so dangerous that any possession at all of a firearm would pose a significant threat to public safety." The court went on to hold the 2004 statutory amendment to be a violation of Art. I., Section 10 of the North Carolina Constitution which states the right to bear arms in exactly the same words as the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Read the full case and the dissent here.

Quote of the Day

The Ultimate Recipe.

Kill stuff.
Add fire.
Eat.
Burp.
Have a good night.

Thank you very much, drive safely.

--Ted Nugent

Ted Kennedy -- Traitor?

Ted Kennedy has been lionized as a deal maker. Clearly he was a liberal icon. But was he also a traitor, trying to make deals with a foreign government, a communist "evil empire," to gain an advantage in American elections?

KGB files reveal facts that support that conclusion about the late Ted Kennedy, as reported by Forbes:

Picking his way through the Soviet archives that Boris Yeltsin had just thrown open, in 1991 Tim Sebastian, a reporter for the London Times, came across an arresting memorandum. Composed in 1983 by Victor Chebrikov, the top man at the KGB, the memorandum was addressed to Yuri Andropov, the top man in the entire USSR. The subject: Sen. Edward Kennedy.

"On 9-10 May of this year," the May 14 memorandum explained, "Sen. Edward Kennedy's close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow." (Tunney was Kennedy's law school roommate and a former Democratic senator from California.) "The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov."

Kennedy's message was simple. He proposed an unabashed quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan. In return, the Soviet leader would lend the Democratic Party a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential election. "The only real potential threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations," the memorandum stated. "These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign."

Kennedy made Andropov a couple of specific offers.

First he offered to visit Moscow. "The main purpose of the meeting, according to the senator, would be to arm Soviet officials with explanations regarding problems of nuclear disarmament so they may be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA." Kennedy would help the Soviets deal with Reagan by telling them how to brush up their propaganda.

Read it all.

Hanoi Jane, step aside, a bird of your feather has just passed by and passed on. With Americans like that, who needs enemies?

ABC Displays Its Partisanship

ABC has refused to run an anti-Obamacare ad because, according to ABC, it is "partisan." Wow. Since when is that a reason not to run a paid political ad?

It would break new ground to refuse to run an political ad that was demonstrabley false, much less "partisan."

The ad is straighforward. It favors neither Democrats nor Republicans. It never mentions party -- and there are plenty in both parties who oppose Obamacare. Here is the ad. You decide if it is "partisan."



As a private company, ABC has the right to refuse any ad it wants to. But, please ABC, don't blow smoke up our butts and give us a phony reason for refusing the ad. Tell us the truth: you are in the tank for the left wing of the Democratic party and the far left wants Obamacare. So you dive into the tank, including your 30 minute Obamacare infomercial.

Good Morning America's Diane Sawyer swore that ABC's much-scrutinized health care special with President Obama "won't be an infomercial." She also seriously touted the objectivity of the network, cheering, "I know that our network has worked very, very hard to be completely- completely responsible and fair and serious about big issues."

Now, two months later, here is ABC being responsible -- by refusing to allow paid debate on the big issue of health care reform.

With this sort of comradeship, oops I mean "partisanship," at the corporate level, how can your news teams have any journalistic credibility? Hint: Other than John Stossel, they don't unless you are comparing them to MSNBC.

Readers: Take this rejected ad and share it far and wide. Do for America what ABC refused to do.

Quote of the Day

Firearms stand next importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence.... From the hour the pilgrims landed, to the present day events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable.... The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference--they deserve a place of honor with all that's good.

-- George Washington

Source: Nugent, Ted, God, Guns & Rock'N'Roll

How Well Gun Bans Work

Chicago has one of the toughest gun bans in the nation. And gun crime? Rampant. Read about it here.

If something is not working, of course, you want more of it, right? That is EXACTLY the gun-bigots' proposed solution.

Yes, I think that ARE out of their collective minds.

Obamacare Taught

What Obamacare Means
You go to the grocery store. Obama is waiting for you at the door. He asks, "What are you here for?" You say, "Some steak and arugula". Obama says, "Do you have the money to pay for it?" You say, "Yes".

Just then, another person walks up. Obama asks her, "What are you here for?" She says, "I'd like some cans of ChiliMac and a package of Twinkies, but I don't think I can afford it". Obama tells you, "Give her some of your money so she can buy the ChiliMac and Twinkies". You do.

Obama then turns to you and says, "You can go in and buy some ChiliMac and Twinkies, too." You say, "Say what?" He says, "If that's all she's getting, it's fair that it's all you get, too." You say, "But I can still afford steak and arugula." Obama says, "That's fine. Buy that for me."

Source: Cree Tees

Geithner Defense Fails

Does it really comes as a surprise that the tax court would reject a Timothy Geithner-like Turbotax Defense?

For a copy of the tax court opinion, click here.

Gee, if the Turbotax defense is good enough to persuade Congress, why shouldn't it work for the ordinary Joe? Or Kenneth and Linda? After all, just like Mr. Geithner, Kenneth & Linda failed to include income on a return that was reported to them on a form 1099.

Could a double standard be at work here? Who'd a thunk it? Hope and Change. Not.

Quote for the Day

A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While the gun gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are to violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun, therefore, be the constant companion of your walks.

--- Thomas Jefferson

Source: Nugent, Ted, God, Guns & Rock'N'Roll

Obligatory Ted Kennedy Post

For a eulogy of Ted Kennedy for the rest of us, go to The Funeral Guy.

Stimulus Fraud

From the September 2009 Arizona Attorney, official magazine of the Arizona State Bar:

Stimulating Fraud
How big a story is the federal stimulus package? It's billion wide and billions long--but who's counting.

Well, the FBI for one.

That law enforcement agency says it expects a wave of fraud and corruption case related to the government's multitrillion-dollar economic stimulus efforts.

This statement was a teaser to the main article which contained information for lawyers to use in warning their clients about the risks of accepting stimulus money. It also discussed qui tam actions, by which a taxpayer may sue someone committing fraud and keep part of the recovery. Warning, though, unless the law has changed since I litigated one, the fraud cannot be a publicly known or reported fraud.

What Interrogation Is Too Harsh to Save Your Family?

I am not a fan of Eric Holder. No surprise there. Today, Dr. Zero on Hotair suggests that the administration announcement of criminal investigations into CIA interrogation techniques is a political deflection from the Obamacare fiasco. My favorite excerpt is:

If a group of people took your family hostage, and one of their associates fell into your hands, you would do anything to extract the location of your family from him. So would Barack Obama, and Eric Holder, and every Democrat who ever sullied the halls of Congress by referring to American soldiers as Nazis. President Obama would not dither about the finer points of a criminal’s hypothetical “rights” while the man’s accomplices were taking power tools to Michelle and the kids. Anyone who would is a lunatic… and I don’t want to leave the security of our country in the hands of lunatics. The moral justification for relying on professional military and law-enforcement personnel is the understanding that their training will allow them to do all the terrible things we would do to protect our family, more dispassionately, carefully, and efficiently than we could. Double-crossing them for political gain is using the families of other people as poker chips, in the smug certainty your own loved ones are in no immediate danger. If we don’t let the professionals do their jobs against a relentless enemy now, then one day, we will all be soldiers.

A few weeks ago, Eric Holder saw nothing wrong with Black Panthers using billy clubs to intimidate voters. Today, he thinks intimidating terrorists with cigars is a crime. Holder is the one who should be answering tough questions under oath.

GEICO: Dumb? Or Lying? You Decide

Glenn Beck is the bravest man in television and radio. He is exposing the soft, Marxist underbelly of the Obama administration. He is talking about -- and supporting with fact -- all that stuff that the limp-wristed MSM ignores. Glenn Beck is an opinion guy and a humor guy, but he brings his facts to the table. He denies being a journalist, but in truth, he is more of a journalist than most of the MSM big names.

Mr. Beck began exposing self-avowed Communist Van Jones who President Obama appointed as one of his Czars (oops, I mean "special advisers"). Van Jones founded the hate group "Color of Change." After Glenn Beck started exposing him, Color of Change began a mostly ineffectual effort to get advertisers to drop their advertising on the Glenn Beck program. A few cowardly companies have knuckled under, which brings me the subject of today's post -- GEICO. Here is GEICO's stated rationale as sent in a email to me, with my comments interspersed:

08-25-09

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your Internet request.

If you are a policyholder we thank you for being with GEICO and we want to tell you more about this matter. If you are not, we also want you to learn more.

This week we took action to move our marketing messages from the Glenn Beck show and you are wondering why.

Well, you deserve an answer.

If the inflammatory nature of the comments on a program overshadows our message and causes GEICO to be drawn into a national debate, we are likely to reconsider where we place our marketing messages, which is what we did.

How dumb is this statement? Withdrawing the advertising that draws GEICO directly into the controversy maelstrom.

GEICO delivers very important messages through its major marketing campaigns: we’re saving customers’ dollars … we’re easy to do business with … we’re looking out for our policyholders. That’s what we hope the public hears and sees and focuses on.

And how, exactly, is withdrawing advertising from the bravest man on TV "looking out for policyholders?" Glenn Beck's ratings are through the roof. Isn't in the interests of both policyholders and stockholders to get GEICO's message out to the largest audiences?

As a company, we do not take positions on controversial issues.

But in this case, by withdrawing advertising in response to a hate group's demand, GEICO takes a position.

As an advertiser, while a national debate on issues can be healthy and appropriate, we don’t see ourselves in the role of taking part in those debates.

It is the highly publicized withdrawal of advertising that places GEICO squarely in the debate in a way that continuing a past practice unchanged would not.

Our business is auto insurance. We want to bring people value and we attempt to reach large audiences with that message.

It is of little benefit to us if a program gets so much attention that our message is drowned out.

Of course, this makes no sense at all. How can a large viewership/listenership be a bad thing? How does the Glenn Beck message "drown out" his advertisers? That is not reasoning. It is sophistry.

Please let us know if we can be of further assistance.

Thank you for using GEICO's on-line services!

We appreciate your business and hope you have a great day!

Sincerely,
Jamie Pope

The bottom line is that GEICO, by withdrawing its advertising did EXACTLY what it claimed it did not want to do. It is placing its apparently political statement (protestations notwithstanding) at the center of controversy.

The folks at this company are either lying about the reason for withdrawing their advertising, or they are incompetent. They should have known the withdrawal would accomplish the opposite of the stated purpose.

Would you want to do business with a company that foolish?

For more information:
KeepGlennBeck.com
DefendGlenn.com

5 Liberal Lies About Obamacare

There is an excellent article at Townhall.com on the 5 Liberal Lies about Obamamcare:

Barrack [sic.] Obama and his pals in the mainstream media are doing everything in their power to keep people from finding out the truth about the health care bills that are winding their way through Congress.

Rather than engaging in an honest debate about the pluses and minuses of socialized medicine, they've abandoned all significant attempts to work with the GOP, they've demonized American citizens who've dared to voice their concern at townhalls, and they have lied more than Bill Clinton probably did the first time Hillary mentioned the name "Gennifer Flowers" to him.

Read it all.

Obama Lie, Babies Will Die.

Factcheck.org is a project of the Annenberg Foundation:

Summary

Will health care legislation mean "government funding of abortion"?
President Obama said Wednesday that’s "not true" and among several "fabrications" being spread by "people who are bearing false witness." But abortion foes say it’s the president who’s making a false claim. "President Obama today brazenly misrepresented the abortion-related component" of health care legislation, said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee. So which side is right?

The truth is that bills now before Congress don’t require federal money to be used for supporting abortion coverage. So the president is right to that limited extent. But it’s equally true that House and Senate legislation would allow a new "public" insurance plan to cover abortions, despite language added to the House bill that technically forbids using public funds to pay for them. Obama has said in the past that "reproductive services" would be covered by his public plan, so it’s likely that any new federal insurance plan would cover abortion unless Congress expressly prohibits that. Low- and moderate-income persons who would choose the "public plan" would qualify for federal subsidies to purchase it. Private plans that cover abortion also could be purchased with the help of federal subsidies. Therefore, we judge that the president goes too far when he calls the statements that government would be funding abortions "fabrications."

Congressional Power Defined

Here is what the United States Constitution says that Congress is empowered to do, and that is all it is permitted to do:

Section 8. Powers of Congress
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District [of Columbia] (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of Particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards and other needful Buildings;--And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Could someone point out to me where Congress is empowered to provide for universal health care? Anyone?

A Physician Analyzes Obamacare

THE OBAMA HEALTH CARE PLAN – IN ONE WORD

By David H. Janda M.D.

As a physician who has authored books on Preventative Health Care and Health Care Cost Containment, I was recently given the opportunity to be the keynote speaker at a Congressional Dinner at The Capitol Building in Washington D.C… The presentation, entitled Health Care Reform; The Power & Profit of Prevention was well received.

In preparation for the presentation, I read the latest version of “reform” as authored by The Obama Administration and supported by Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid. It is important to realize that The Obama Health Care Plan is comprised of two parts…..that’s right, not one but two parts.

The first part of The Obama Health Care Plan was buried in The Stimulus Bill which was signed into law by the President in February (see READ the STIMULUS). It is the second part of The Health Care Plan which is now being debated in Congress. Below is the link to the over 1000 page document….. Bill Text, Adobe PDF format.

Let me summarize just a few salient points of the two part Obama Health Care Plan. Warning……. They need to put the same warning on The Obama Health Care Plan as they do a pack of cigarettes…..Consuming this product WILL be hazardous to your health.

The underlying method of cutting costs throughout the plan is based on rationing and denying care, NOT PREVENTING health care need. The plan’s method is the most inhumane and unethical approach in cutting costs. The rationing of care is implemented through a Council, equivalent to the National Health Care Board in the British Health Care System. The name given to this panel is The Federal Coordinating Council For Comparative Effectiveness Research (”Federal Council”). (Section 9201 H.R. 1 Version of the Stimulus Bill.)

President Obama has already appointed the fifteen member Federal Council. According to the Stimulus Bill, p. 152, all members of the Council must be “senior federal officers or employees.” Thus, medical treatment will be dispensed by a group of bureaucrats from their ivory towers, not by the hands-on practitioners in the presence of the patients. The council was funded with $1.1 BILLION from The Stimulus Bill. (Source.)

“Comparative Effectiveness Research” is based on the formula of the approval or rejection of treatment for patients based upon the cost per treatment divided by the number of years the patient will benefit from the treatment.

According to former New York Lieutenant Governor and Health Policy Analyst Dr. Betsy McCaughey, the Federal Council will set a cost effectiveness standard for treatment. (Stimulus Bill p. 464) Translation…..if you are over 65 or have been recently diagnosed as having an advanced form of cardiac disease or aggressive cancer, dream on if you think you will get treated…..pick out your box. Oh, you say…this could never happen. Sorry….this is the same model they use in Britain.

The plan also empowers the Federal Council to create another level of bureaucracy, The Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research. (Health Care Bill, Section 1181, p. 502). The effect of this extra level of bureaucracy is to slow the development of new medications and technologies in order to reduce costs. How special is that!

The plan also outlines that doctors and hospitals will be overseen and reviewed by The National Coordinator of Health Information Technology. This “Coordinator” will be responsible for monitoring treatments to make sure doctors and hospitals are strictly following what the government deems appropriate and cost effective, and to “guide medical decisions at the time and place of care.” (Stimulus Bill, p. 116; see also pp. 442, 446).

The Stimulus Bill goes on to say that hospitals and doctors that are NOT “meaningful users” of the new systems will face penalties. The Secretary of Health and Human Services will be empowered to impose “more stringent measures of meaningful use over time.” (Stimulus Bill pp. 366, 478, 511, 518, 540, 541.) According to those in Congress, penalties could include large six figure financial fines and possible imprisonment. According to the Obama Plan, if your doctor saves your life but breaks government protocol, you might have to go to the prison to see your doctor for follow-up appointments. I believe this is the same model Stalin used in the former Soviet Union.

Section 102 of the Health Care Plan has the Orwellian title: “Protecting the Choice to Keep Current Coverage.” What this section really mandates is that it is ILLEGAL for you to keep your private insurance if your status changes, e.g., if you lose or change your job, become a senior citizen, graduate from college and land your first job. Yes, illegal. When President Obama was asked about this portion of his plan recently, his response was, “I am not familiar with that part of the plan.”

Obama hosted a conference call with bloggers urging them to pressure Congress to pass his health plan as soon as possible.

During the call, a blogger from Maine said he kept running into an Investors Business Daily article that claimed Section 102 of the House health legislation would outlaw private insurance. He asked: “Is this true? Will people be able to keep their insurance and will insurers be able to write new policies even though H.R. 3200 is passed?” President Obama replied: “You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about.”

Then there is Section 1233 of the Health Care Bill, devoted to “Advanced Care Planning.” After each American turns 65 years of age they have to go to a mandated counseling program that is designed to end life sooner. This session is to occur every 5 years unless the person has developed a chronic illness then it must be done every year. The topics in this government run session will include how to decline hydration, nutrition and how to initiate hospice care. It is no wonder the Obama Administration does NOT like my emphasis on Prevention. Under the Health Care Plan for cost containment, Prevention is the “enemy,” since people would live longer.

I rest my case….The Health Care Plan authored by Obama / Pelosi / Reid is hazardous to the health of every American.

In the question/answer session following my Capitol Hill presentation, a Congressman asked: “I am doing a number of network interviews next week on the Obama Health Care Plan. If I am asked what is the one word to describe the plan, what should I answer?”

The answer is simple, honest, direct, analytical, and sad, but truthful. The word is FASCIST.


*******************

Dr. Janda is a practicing orthopedic surgeon and a world-recognized expert on prevention, healthcare cost containment, and health care reform. His website is NOINJURY.com.

h/t AmericanDaughter.com

Bozos in Congress Demean 9/11

We need always to remember the vicious attacks on America on 9/11/2001 that everyone knows as simply "9/11." We need to keep that memory alive, so we never forget who we are as a country and never forget who is looking to sucker-punch us. We must remember, so we can remain ever vigilant. We should remember all such dates, like December 7, 1941, when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.

We are in an ongoing struggle against aggressive forces who want us dead. It is ongoing and subversive. We need to remember. We need to keep 9/11 as a national day of mourning.

So, why would Congress trivialize 9/11 by making that day a "National Day of Service" (meaning, service to the government, of course. Why can't they see that it should --it must-- remain a national day of mourning and remembrance? This abomination was slipped into a massive spending bill (which we can't afford) by the community organizer types (who by the way seem to be writing all the legislation coming out of Washington, these days). "Service." It is a loony liberal concept that sounds oh, so good, but is really enslavement. Usurping 9/11 for that goofy national day serves the purposes of our nation's enemies. Is anyone really surprised?

And to their everlasting shame, a bunch of Republicans voted for it, I guess because it sounded soooooooo good. More likely, they just didn't read the bill. That is a true Washington epidemic.

In the Soviet Union, the government substituted nice-sounding government holidays to wean children away from religious holidays as part of the concerted effort to destroy the churches. Isn't that the sort of thing that is happening here? Of the 350 plus days available, why pick 9/11? To destroy its significance, of course.

On 9/11, forget the trivial National Day of Service. Remember the attacks. Go to church. Pray for our country and the families of the 2996 innocent people lost. Remember the images of the airliners smashing into the majestic but helpless buildings. Remember the images of people forced to leap to their deaths to escape the incineration. Remember the buildings collapsing, spreading concrete dust for miles. Remember the images of the celebrations in the community of the attackers.

Remember. Mourn. And never forget.

And, if you want to do more, join the Project 2996.

Update. I guess it is not just me. I stumbled onto this at the American Spectator:

The Obama White House is behind a cynical, coldly calculated political effort to erase the meaning of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks from the American psyche and convert Sept. 11 into a day of leftist celebration and statist idolatry.

Read it all.

Update. The more I think about this the angrier I get. How many of those bozos in Congress bothered to read this bill? I want to know.

"Phony" Obamacare Claims Not so Phony

This just in from the Heritage Foundation debunking the purported debunkers:

Morning Bell: Myths and Facts about Obamacare
Posted August 24th, 2009 at 9.28am in Health Care.
Last week NBC News released a poll showing that while 36% of Americans believed President Barack Obama’s health care plan was a “good idea,” 42% of Americans believed it was a “bad idea.” NBC’s explanation for this inconvenient truth? “[M]isperceptions about the president’s plans for reform … that nonpartisan fact-checkers say are untrue.” Specifically NBC found that 55% of Americans believed Obamacare “will give health insurance coverage to illegal immigrants,” 54% believed it “will lead to a government takeover of the health care system,” 50% believed it “will use taxpayer dollars to pay for women to have abortions,” and 45% believed it “will allow the government to make decisions about when to stop providing medical care to the elderly.”

The President has since copied NBC’s diagnosis, devoting his Saturday Weekly Address to debunking these “phony claims.” The problem for NBC News, and the White House, is that every one of these concerns has rock solid foundation in fact.

Obamacare Will Provide Health Benefits to Illegal Immigrants: The President is correct when he says that the idea to provide illegal immigrants with health insurance “has never been on the table.” The problem is that the American people also know that despite the fact that our immigration laws did not intend it, there are 12 million persons illegally in the United States. The issue is enforcement and the provisions in H.R. 3200 are completely inadequate to ensure that illegal immigrants do not illegally obtain health care through the bill. In the House Ways and Means mark up of H.R. 3200, Rep. Dean Heller (R-NV) introduced an amendment that would use two citizenship status verification systems, the Income and Eligibility Verification System (IEVS) and Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) programs, to establish an individual’s eligibility to obtain the bill’s proposed affordability credits or enroll in the public insurance option. Both programs are currently used to determine citizenship status and eligibility for other public assistance programs. Safeguards to guarantee that only citizens can access federal health care benefits are necessary, considering that the US Census Bureau currently estimates that 9.6 million of the uninsured are not US citizens. The Heller amendment failed on a straight party-line vote.

Obamacare Will Lead to a Government Takeover of The Health Care System: Whether it’s a “public option”, individual mandate, employer mandate, the expansion and federalization of Medicaid, or the creation of a new health czar, the provisions in the health bills being pushed by the Obama administration call for more government regulation and intrusion in the American health care system. The nonpartisan, independent Lewin Group found that an estimated 56 percent of Americans would lose their current insurance under the House bill.

Obamacare Will Use Taxpayer Dollars to Pay For Women to Have Abortions: In all four mark-ups of health care legislation (three in the House and one in the Senate), Conservatives have offered amendments that would specifically prohibit federal funds from being used to cover abortion. None of them passed. Instead, the House Energy and Commerce Committee passed an amendment by Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA) that actually requires at least one insurance plan to cover abortion in every geographical region and requires the newly-created public plan to cover all abortion services. How can the President and NBC News possibly claim that Obamacare will not direct taxpayer money to pay for abortions? They’ve employed a complete accounting fiction, claiming that beneficiary premiums will pay for abortions, not federal subsidies. Since neither the federal government nor any insurance company will be required to create separate “abortion” and “non-abortion” general funds (and since the President explicitly promise Planned Parenthood his health care plan would cover “reproductive services“), Americans have every right to believe that the existing legislation will funnel their tax dollars to abortion.

Obamacare Will Allow Government to Ration Health Care: Both the House and Senate bills call for an increased role for Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) to determine which medical procedures are most effective at treating specific ailments. Although this provision is based on perfectly sound policy, many Americans are concerned that federal officials could use CER to make treatment, coverage, or payment decisions. Three Senators offered amendments that would have prohibited the use of CER to mandate coverage, deny care, or ration. CER, if used as a rationing tool, would obviously interfere with the traditional doctor-patient relationship. All three amendments failed on straight party-line votes.

These are just some of the very real fears Americans have about Obamacare. And as we have decisively demonstrated, all have sound basis in fact. But they do not even touch on another very real fear Americans have about Obamacare: the cost. This Friday, the Obama administration leaked news that they will be forced to raise their 10-year budget deficit forecast to about nine trillion dollars, up about two trillion from the previous forecast. Considering that all best estimates point to at least a $1 trillion price tag for Obamacare, it is a wonder just 42% of Americans believe Obamacare is a “bad idea.”

For more highly factual information, visit fixhealthcarepolicy.com, a project of the Heritage Foundation and other fine Heritage Foundation coverage.

Sexual Stimulus

You can't even make this stuff up. You don't need to.

From the New York Post, an article by-lined by Geoff Earle:

WASHINGTON - The stimulus package is living up to its provocative name by funding a bacchanalia of behavioral sex research, a Post analysis reveals.

The next fiscal year is set to be one of the friskiest ever in the nation's science labs, as researchers probe the ins and outs of sex patterns among humans and even some of our four-legged friends.

Among the most titillating grants awarded by the National Institutes of Health are studies that would:

* Examine "barriers to correct condom use" at Indiana University, at a cost of $221,000.

* Study "hookups" among adolescents at Syracuse University. Study's cost: $219,000.

* Evaluate "drug use as a sex enhancer" in an analysis of "high-risk community sex networks" at the University of Illinois, Chicago. That study will cost $123,000.

* Study how methamphetamine, thought to produce an "insatiable need" for sex among users, "enhances the motivation for female rat sexual behavior." Some $28,000 has been awarded for the University of Maryland at Baltimore study.

Health Care Reform Simplified

Received over the internet, author undisclosed:

Let me get this straight.

Obama's health care plan will be written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it and whose members will be exempt from it, signed by a president who smokes, funded by a treasury chief who did not pay his taxes, overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that is broke.

What could possibly go wrong?

Another Choice Town Hall

Brian "Brown Shirts" Baird gets told off at a town hall:



One of the best.

Rep Baird never called protesters brown shirts, he says, and he says he apologized for it.

Health Care Quote of the Day

What health care "reform" is really about:

"Now back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for president on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism. But he said under the name of liberalism the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program. One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can't afford it."

--Ronald Reagan on health care in 1961

Health Care and the Faith Community

I want to share Star Parker's column this morning about Obamacare. But first, I want to address those in the Christian community who incorrectly contend that Jesus would have approved of universal health care. I think he would have approved of all of us helping the less fortunate. No doubt about that. It is our duty as Christians.

However, it is also our individual choice the less fortunate -- and individual damnation if we do not. We were put on this Earth with free will.

The problem is that government provided health care is all about taking way free will. It is about forcing Citizen A to pay for Citizen B's health care. Where is the Godliness in that?

Now on to excerpts from Star Parker's column:

President Obama took his case for what he now calls "health insurance reform" to the faith community. He made his pitch in a phone call, also broadcast over the Internet, to clergy who called in and logged on from around the nation.

In his remarks, the President ticked off points of contention that dissenters have with his proposals -- "government takeover of healthcare...government funding of abortion...death panels" -- and dismissed these concerns as "fabrications." In one swipe, Mr. Obama reduced his opposition to liars.

And why, according to the President, are dissenters supposedly making all this stuff up? Because, he told his audience, they want to "discourage people from meeting...a core ethical and moral obligation...that we look out for one another...that I am my brother's keeper..."

So those whose fight for individual freedom are immoral and our moral champions are those who want to extend the heavy hand of government.

Forgive me if sermons about morality are a little hard to swallow from a man who supports partial birth abortion, who just announced his intent to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.

And who really wants to obstruct moral behavior?

About 100,000 Americans participate in private, voluntary Christian communities that take care of their own healthcare independently of government and insurance companies. They are called health sharing ministries.

These communities assess members "shares", based on family size, which are paid monthly, in addition to annual dues.

Those in the community who need care submit their claims to a central office, which sends members monthly bulletins informing them whose care their monthly payment will be covering.

No government. No insurance companies. It's health care with a true human face, operating in freedom, where those paying know who they are paying for and for what.

In addition to sending funds to cover costs, they send notes and pray for the sick person whose costs they are covering.

You wouldn't think that communities that embody the very essence of personal responsibility and Christian love would need lobbyists for their protection. But they do.

If Barack Obama has his way, they'll be out of business.

Rifqa Bary Update

I previously reported on the situation of Rifqa Bary, the 17 year old Sri Lankan Muslim who converted to Christianity. She ran away from her New Albany (suburb of Columbus) Ohio home and is living in Florida with a foster family. She says she fears for her life. My post has here.

As reported in the Columbus Dispatch, Sgt Jerry Cupps of the Columbus Police missing persons bureau discounted the girl's fear of death-for-apostasy and said the father had long known of the conversion and appeared to be a caring father.

Our laws generally favor parental rights to care for and control their children, subject to prohibitions on doing serious physical (and perhaps emotional) harm.

The Orlando Sentinel reports that on August 21, 2009, a Florida judge has delayed the return of the girl to her parents until the Florida Department of Law Enforcement can investigate to determine whether the home with the parents is safe. A further hearing is ordered for September 3, 2009.

These sorts of cases are incredibly difficult. It is certainly true that some Muslims believe that killing a child who converts to Christianity would be required to maintain the honor of the family. Some will not go that far, especially living in non-Muslim country where that is NOT the predominate belief in the country's culture. Obviously Ms.Bary believes her father to be in the former category (or she is an extraordinarly convincing liar -- see video).

The legal question is, "What is in the best interests of the child?" It seems to me that is the fear of death-for-apostasy is sufficiently credible, the safest thing for the child, who is only one year away from the age of majority, is to keep her in the foster home. If the fears are justified, the father now under the spotlight need not do the deed himself, but he can ship the daughter off to Sri Lanka and let relatives take care of business. But if the father is truly sincere in rejected the Islamic death penalty for apostasy, how sad for the family that the daughter can make up a credible story to escape whatever fate the teenager feels her family has for her.

Personally I would opt for the safe approach. But if I were the father, I would move all resources to rebuild the bridges with my daughter. Now, maybe if he converted as well....

Have a Yard Sale, Go to Federal Prison

The intrusiveness of federal laws is getting ridiculous. How are yard sales interstate commerce, anyway?

WASHINGTON — If you're planning a garage sale or organizing a church bazaar, you'd best beware: You could be breaking a new federal law. As part of a campaign called Resale Roundup, the federal government is cracking down on the secondhand sales of dangerous and defective products.

The initiative, which targets toys and other products for children, enforces a new provision that makes it a crime to resell anything that's been recalled by its manufacturer.

Read it all.

The Whole Foods Alternative to Obamacare

John Mackey, co-founder and CEO of Whole Foods hits one out of the ballpark.

Here are the first four of his eight points for health care reform, but you will have to to the original Wall Street Journal article for the rest so you can read the full article:

• Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits. Now employer health insurance benefits are fully tax deductible, but individual health insurance is not. This is unfair.

• Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines. We should all have the legal right to purchase health insurance from any insurance company in any state and we should be able use that insurance wherever we live. Health insurance should be portable.

• Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover. These mandates have increased the cost of health insurance by billions of dollars. What is insured and what is not insured should be determined by individual customer preferences and not through special-interest lobbying.

• Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. These costs are passed back to us through much higher prices for health care.

Bawney Fwank Insults Constituent

How does Bawney Fwank get elected when he treats people this way?



I'll grant that carrying into the meeting a picture of Obama that makes him look like Hitler is not really cool (but no different from the leftists' pictures and treatment of George W. Bush). But still, her opinion (if not her picture) deserves a respectful answer.

ACLU Outs CIA Agents to Jihadis

Unbelievable. The ACLU took surreptitious photos of CIA personnel at the homes and Gitmo detainees charged with complicity in the 9/11 attacks were shown the photos.

Washington Post news report here.

Michelle Malkin commentary here.

Unity? The Post-Partisan Presidency Myth (Updated)

From Jonathan Weisman at the Wall Street Journal:

WASHINGTON -- Barack Obama campaigned last year on a pledge to end the angry partisanship in Washington. He wasn't the first to promise a post-partisan presidency: Both George W. Bush and Bill Clinton offered a similar change, only to see the mutual hostility between Republicans and Democrats increase while they were in the White House.

Now, just as his predecessors did, Mr. Obama is seeing that promise turn to ashes. Angry town-hall meetings, slumping presidential approval poll numbers and rising opposition to his signature health-care proposals suggest an early resumption of politics as usual.

Obama critics say that is an inevitable result of his push for far-reaching liberal polices even as he made undefined offers to win over moderates and conservatives. The White House blames Republicans and conservative media commentators, saying they sought to sow dissent from the start.

One thing both sides agree on: Six months in to Mr. Obama's presidency, a growing core of Americans is turning against the president, including some voters he won over during the campaign.

"I thought he was going to unite us as a country. When I heard, 'There's not a white America, there's not a black America, there are the United States of America,' that resonated with me," said Leah Wolczko, a 42-year-old teacher from Manchester, N.H., who described herself as a political independent who had supported Mr. Obama but failed to vote in November. "But when they start talking specifics, well, now we've got some problems." She objects to what she calls Mr. Obama's big-government, big-spending policies.

Update. Looking for a scapegoat, Obama blames the GOP for his problems with the health care reform proposals. Earth to Obama: The majority of people are incensed over your hell care proposals. The GOP was just as surprised as you are and is following, not leading, the trend.

Lockerbie Terrorist Hailed as Hero in Libya Updated

Yesterday we reported on how foolish it was for the UK government to release the convicted Lockerbie terrorist merely because he is (allegedly) dying of cancer. Today, to no one's surprise except the UK government's, the terrorist is receiving a hero's welcome on his return to Tripoli.

Of course, from the public reports, the UK government does not handle its health care system with any greater skill.

"Put not your trust in princes...." Psalm 146:3

Update:

Lockerbie Terrorist Freed

This guy kills 270 people. It was not a youthful indiscretion. It was a planned and deliberate act of terrorism. He fully understood the nature and consequences of his act. He was sentenced to life in prison. His life is not yet over.

So, why would anyone think Al-Megrahi should gent any "compassionate leave" to get out of prison to die, just because he is diagnosed with terminal cancer? What message that send to other terrorists? Wouldn't it be better to let the other terrorists in the world wonder if he will be buried with pigs (and thus not attain paradise for his martyrdom)?

My grandmother lived about 35 years after her diagnosis predicting 3 to 6 months to live. That could happen here, couldn't it?

Obama Partners with God On Life and Death Matters

Just when you thought he could not get any scarier, the Chosen One addressed a group of rabbis on health care and said:

We are God's partners in matters of life and death," Obama went on to say, according to Moline's real-time stream.

Wow. The Chosen One thinks God is his partner in matters of life and death? In matters of life and death? Partners?

And he said there would be no death panels. He said he would not pull the plug on Grandma. Be he is now partners with God on matters of life and death?

An Incredibly Dishonest MSNBC

Wow. MSNBC complains about white people bringing guns to an Obama rally, showing a picture of the guy in yesterday's post. Somehow, the MSNBC camera never shows the guy's face.



Does MSNBC or Contessa Brewer have any credibility at all? Any conscience? Or is it down in the same dishonest much as the DNC?

Get a better view on CNN:


You decide.

Black Conservative Exercises 2nd Amendment Right

At a Missouri health care town hall, SEIU thugs beat up and sent to the hospital, a conservative black man protesting Obama's hell care proposal.

Now CNN is reporting, complaining really, that a health care protestor in Arizona is carrying a semi-automatic rifle (which CNN mischaracterizes as an "assault rifle"). Notice the picture:


How else is the guy supposed to feel safe from SEIU thugs who beat up black conservatives?

Beer by Obama

Even though President Obama's leap to judgment on the Cambridge Police-Henry Gates incident, sharply contrasted with his deliberative approach on the Russian invasion of Georgia and thus revealed plenty about Obama's inherent biases, the Rose Garden beer invitation was a classy move.

Beer when not used to excess can be a wonderful social lubricant. Anyway, here is a spoof on the incident:

Why Obamacare is Bad for Seniors

Please read the excellent column in the Wall Street Journal analyzing the problems of Obamacare for Seniors.

I wish AARP would pay attention.

Sherrod Brown: "Sniveling Coward"

I don't know how this guy got elected except this is last name is "Brown" which is a magic name in Ohio. Before being a Senator, he was the worst Secretary of State I have experienced in 35 years of dealing with that office. His people were uncommonly rude and incompetent. But I digress.

Sherrod Brown has been ducking those who want to question the Congressional hell care bills which he supports.

Senator Brown's office received many calls asking when he was going to hold a town hall. Intending to deceive the public, his constituents, his office denied that he was having any town halls. What they did not say is the Sen. Brown planned a "Roundtable" which is exactly like a town hall, but called by a different name. You see, by calling ti something different he could round up supporters for it before Hell Care opponents learned about the meeting. The truth is that he has already made up his mind and does not really want to know what the opposition has to say.

These videos say it all, first the "sniveling coward" video:





What a piece of work, Brown is! We don't need no stinking questions!

Sheila Jackson-Lee: The Queen of Rude

I echo the comments of my brother, the Funeral Guy, on Sheila Jackson-Lee.

How likely is this woman to listen to her constituents? She won't even listen to her interviewers, watch here and below if you can stomach it:



It seems to me that whether it is cell phones or answering interviewers questions, this is the queen of rude.

No Death Panels, But Illegals Still Covered

The Senate finance committee has bowed to the pressure and dropped the death panel provisions from the bill. Here is the statement that raises new questions about the President's credibility on the bill:

“On the Finance Committee, we are working very hard to avoid unintended consequences by methodically working through the complexities of all of these issues and policy options,” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said in a statement. “We dropped end-of-life provisions from consideration entirely because of the way they could be misinterpreted and implemented incorrectly.”…

“The bill passed by the House committees is so poorly cobbled together that it will have all kinds of unintended consequences, including making taxpayers fund healthcare subsidies for illegal immigrants,” Grassley said. The veteran Iowa lawmaker said the end-of-life provision in those bills would pay physicians to “advise patients about end-of-life care and rate physician quality of care based on the creation of and adherence to orders for end-of-life care.

Didn't Mr. Obama assure us that illegal aliens were definitely NOT covered?

An Answer to Sen. McKaskill's Query

I have a grudging respect for Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO). She veered from the DNC talking points today by acknowlegding the truth: the angry Americans protesting hell care at town halls are real people, not insurance industry shills. She also took issue with Rep. David Scott (D-SC) saying that the anger over the proposals is not race based.

In her town hall gone viral, she says she can't understand the rudeness of the angry folks.



Let me try to explain it, Sen. McCaskill, because I believe you are an intelligent and reasonable person. The rudeness comes from anger, fear, and frustration, not at you necessarily, but at the system in Congress and the Obamaniacs' attempt to rush and railroad a very, very bad and dangerous bill through Congress. It is not simply another piece of bad legislation. It endangers our most precious health care freedom. It has 1018 pages of bad stuff that we know our representatives have not read. And if they read it, they have not understood all of it. Who could? It is too much. And it is jam-packed with very bad stuff.

This bill should never have gotten this far. We are frightened that we will be subjected to the poor health care of the many socialized medicine countries of Europe and of Canada. We fear the cost of these massive programs, especially now when both the public and private sectors are financially dying. If there were ever a good time for Obamacare, now is definitely not the time.

If you don't understand the rudeness, Ms. McCaskill, understand the depth and breadth of opposition that all the hell care plans in Congress have. Understand that if you support them, you may be a casualty of the electoral process at the next opportunity, because the opponents of Obamacare are not merely interested, they are passionate. The rudeness should be enough (and I sense it has been in your case) to persuade you just how real the passion is.

Obama's Phony Town Hall Crowd Questioned by Media -- Finally

Obama's phony town hall was obviously packed with supporters as I previously opined. Even the normally in-the-tank-for-Obama media was not fooled:



Don't you love it when Robert Gibbs says, "I'm going to be honest with you..."? You know a whopper is coming. And when you think about those words, they are a tacit admission that he is not normally honest with us.

I believe the town hall participant were randomly selected by computer ... from probable Obama supporters. Interestingly in the other town halls around the country (until the Dems realized they need to pack in supporters), the participant were those personally concerned and motivated by the issues.

Even a real random selection will generate a different mix of people, because without random selection, you get those who are motivated.

Zoe Lofgren D-CA: Obamacare Should Cover Abortions

Congratulations. With Obamcare, your money will get to pay for abortions. Not just medically necessary abortions. Elective abortions. Which are not technically "health care."



Note the crowd reaction despite the heavily Democratic district.

Remember, as a state senator in Illinois, Obama voted in favor of so-called partial birth abortions that even Roe v. Wade recognized as prohibitable as baby-killing.

Extended Analysis of Health Care Bill

Here is a link to an excellent 14 page analysis and distillation of the 1018 page health care bill intended for folks who get to attend town hall meetings held by members of Congress. The analysis by by The Freedom Workbench.

If you want to find out about town halls in time to attend, you must get on liberal emailing lists, because they are trying to pack the town halls with supporters. The thinking: "We don't need no stinking tough questions, Man!"

Death Panels: Not Debunked, Exactly

To dispel concerns about the alleged "death panels" in the health care bills, President Obama said at his recent staged town hall meeting,

“Let me just be specific about some things that I’ve been hearing lately that we just need to dispose of here. The rumor that’s been circulating a lot lately is this idea that somehow the House of Representatives voted for death panels that will basically pull the plug on grandma because we’ve decided that we don’t, it’s too expensive to let her live anymore....It turns out that I guess this arose out of a provision in one of the House bills that allowed Medicare to reimburse people for consultations about end-of-life care, setting up living wills, the availability of hospice, etc. So the intention of the members of Congress was to give people more information so that they could handle issues of end-of-life care when they’re ready on their own terms. It wasn’t forcing anybody to do anything.”

Hmmm. This voluntary consultation (1) may be initiated by the physician who is encouraged to do it because the physician gets paid to do it and (2) is in a part of a bill whose stated purpose is “to reduce the growth in health care spending.” In other words, to reduce health care costs, the bill pays physicians to initiate conversations with grandma about her right to have the plug pulled.

No matter how the President tries to package it, this provision is about encouraging pulling the plug to save costs. Sarah Palin has a well reasoned discussion of this on her facebook page.

Pretend Physician Supports Obama's Hell Care

Sucker-punched by real ordinary citizen anger, we have been hearing about Congress-folk packing meetings with Obamacare supporters, trying to make the meetings merely rah-rah sessions, show halls rather than town halls.

Now there is a new low. Exposed by Patterico, here is one example of an Obamacare supporter showing up to a Sheila Jackson-Lee meeting out of her own district to show support pretending to be a primary care pediatrician.

Fraud. Deception. Lies. Obamacare.

h/t Michellemalkin.com

Sheila Jackson-Lee: Arrogance in Action

Just when we thought the arrogance of the Congressional elites could not get any worse. Watch this:



Sheila Jackson-Lee really displays her true level of respect for her constituents. I hope her next election opponent plays this over and over and over.

Update: CBS reports that a New Jersey teacher was fined $22,000 for a four minute cell phone conversation while on duty. What will happen to Sheila Jackson-Lee for the same offense?

Update 2: Was Ms. Jackson-Lee rude. I conclude that she is simply a rude person judging from the following interview -- watch her behavior:



I call her question answering technique a filibuster. Don't answer the question, but keep talking and talking and talking until you wear the questioner out or divert the questioner to a new topic.

Yes, it is rude.

The "Unity" President

During the presidential campaign, I vividly remember then candidate Obama's promise of unity. He would bring us all together. Oh, I knew that was fraudulent. When a candidate says that, he really means he wants everyone to see things his way.

Be that as it may, Mr. Obama seems destined to become the most divisive president of my lifetime. His hell-care proposals are generating what he describes as angry mobs of citizens. One liberal group claims that is a rise in militias.

That would not surprise me. I am seeing a revolutionary fervor over the socialized medicine plans and the out-of-control spending of the Obama administration. And among us gun enthusiasts, there have been successful movements to get state legislatures to remind the federal government about the 10th Amendment that the federal government consistently ignores.

We don't need a civil war. But, with Obama administration policies making people so angry on so many fronts, a new civil war is a real danger. So much for unity.

Message to the members of Congress. The anger among health care reform opponents is very real and very strong. You should be so lucky that all they do is vote you out if you pass one of the hell care bills now pending. Listen to the angry voices. They really are telling you something, and you need to listen.

We know what we do not want. We do not want any health care system in which you do not participate just as we will have to. You are not better or more important than the rest of us.

Why is there so much anger? We sense that you are not listening. We sense that you simply want to talk, as if, with flowery words, you will force us to see things your way. To us, you only persuade us that you think we work for you, not the other way around.

Listen. Listen. Listen.

Fathima Rifqa Bary Found in Orlando

While the courts fight over jurisdiction, this girl's life is in danger for converting to Christianity from Islam. She has turned up in Orlando after running away from a dangerous home in New Albany, Ohio (suburb of Columbus). This young girl's story -- and her fear of honor killing -- rings true to me.



I will not be surprised if the courts return her to her family and her death. Our courts are not equipped, legally or emotionally, to believe that a family would actually kill a daughter like that.

Oh, we won't find out about her death. She will be whisked off to Sri Lanka for that purpose. We will never find out.

AARP Backs Off -- For Now

From the Associated Press as reported in the Columbus Dispatch:

At the town hall in Portsmouth, N.H., [President] Obama said, "We have the AARP onboard because they know this is a good deal for our seniors." He added, "AARP would not be endorsing a bill if it was undermining Medicare."

But Tom Nelson, AARP's chief operating officer, said, "Indications that we have endorsed any of the major health care reform bills currently under consideration in Congress are inaccurate."

I am glad to see that the AARP is beginning to awaken to the fact that Obamacare will ultimately result in pulling the plug on grandma. Oh, that is not the intent -- today. That is not what the current bills say in black and white -- today. No one is saying the Obama wants to pull the plug on grandma. But we the people can see that that sort of rationing is the logical and inevitable result of government run health care.

Obama lying about the AARP of course is typical Obama. Like the rest of the Democrats, he is delusional about the support for his own plan.

Read the polls, Mr. President. Pass your health care plans, take away our health care freedom, and expect a Republican Congress next time around. And a Republican president in four years.

Crowder Reports on Angry Health Care Protest Mob

Angry mob mauls reporter.



These people are truly dangerous, aren't they? Why should they get to question members of Congress at "open" town hall meetings? No wonder members of Congress are now trying to pack the town halls with planted supporters. No wonder members of Congress are willing to inflict physical harm by calling out the SEIU and ACORN goons. No wonder President Obama will not denounce the thuggery.

Democrats Try to Stem Public Outrage By Packing Town Meetings

Is anyone really surprised by the dishonesty of Democratic Congresspeople who try to stack the deck against ordinary folks angry about the proposed loss of health care freedom? Pack the hall with supporters, so real people can't get in.

Dishonesty, intellectual and otherwise, is the Democrats stock-in-trade i the health care debate. I have detailed instances of dishonesty in this blog many times before. Here is a transcript and video of a Hannity interview with a cameraman who observed Democratic Congressperson Katie Caster's attempt to pack her "town hall" with supporters, rather than face the real public.

A small riot ensued.

Support Will Fall for Health Care Reform Despite Obama Scripted "Town Halls"

President Obama is on the road trying to sell his health care programs that will destroy our health care freedom in the United States. Ed Morrisey opines that these sorts of heavily scripted town hall meetings by the President will not help:

First, anyone expecting a real town-hall forum to occur with Obama in attendance is deluding themselves. Even the press — even Helen Thomas — criticized Obama the last time he held a “town-hall meeting” on health care. Each of these three meetings will carefully screen attendees and get the questions in advance, to minimize embarrassment to Obama.

Beyond that, town-hall meetings won’t solve the problem of national rejection of ObamaCare. People want insurance reform, but they don’t want a government takeover of the system. The big problem is the legislation itself. If Obama wants to fix that, then he needs a meeting with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, not the people of Bozeman and Portsmouth.

Meanwhile, public support continues to drop, as shown in the latest Rasmussen poll.

Why?

--People like their current plans and don't believe the President when he says they will get to keep them. Clearly, the shifts in the overall system will inevitably change everyone's plans.

--Congress continues to exempt itself. If the new system is so great, why won't Congress subject its own members to it?

--Rationing by government fiat is inevitable when the money runs tight. No one is claiming that rationing is currently planned, It is simply inevitable in the planned system. Goodbye Grandma, you're not productive enough for that new hip.

--Free abortions are part of the plan. Great public policy, eh? Sunday, I saw a wonderful Christian singer who was the product of a rape. Should he have been deprived of life? Should be world have been deprived of a good man? Aren't you glad your mother did not abort you?

--Free health care for illegals.

--The bills contain racially discriminatory provisions according to the US Commission on Civil Rights.

--At least one of the current proposals would outlaw private individual insurance.

--Government funded health care will send the deficit higher and higher. Obama claims that government health care will "save money" is simply not believable. It certainly will not save the government money.

--By taking the free market out of health care, government will do what government does best: stifle innovation. One size fits all (except members of Congress, of course).

--No one believes their Congressperson has read the entire bill and understands it. Everyone understands that the devil is in the details, details about which the members of Congress remain clueless. Hotair.com has been featuring a series or analyses by bloggers as they can get through the bills. It takes time. Lots of time. The language of the bills, like all legislation is ponderous with sections many pages removed from each other having an interaction of sorts.

Update: From all reports the Obama Town Hall today turns into a cheering party (worship service). It was packed with supporters, and the occaissional token Republican. It phoniness was so obvious that only a Democrat would not be embarrassed.

Obama Brown Shirts

Why hasn't President Obama a spoken out against the SEIU and ACORN thuggery intended to intimidate people opposed to the loss of their healthcare freedoms?

The message he clearly sends by his silence is that he approves of thugs beating up protesters.

I guess the American tradition of dissent must be squashed like a bug in the Obama administration. It looks like the revival of the Brown Shirts of 1930s Germany.

If we do not know our history, we are doomed to repeat it, I guess.

I hope we are different than the Germans in the 1930s. I believe the anger of people who value their healthcare freedom will not be squelched. I sense a revolutionary fervor. I hope it does not lead to a civil war.

Obama needs to stop the violence by his supporters now. Violence is likely to beget violence.

Update: Over on the Huffington Post, there is a published columnist named Joseph A Palermo encouraging the use of goons to shut down ordinary folks. A truly evil column.

Pelosi's Arrogance Exceeded Only by Her Ignorance

The conservative commentators are all over Nancy Pelosi's USA Today editorial in whic she calls the health care protesters unAmerican for supposedly disrupting town hall meetings about the awful health care proposals. Wow. Where was she when the leftists were out disrupting everyone they disagreed with on, well, just about everything?

In fact, the town hall meetings were not disrupted so much as tough questions were being asked and Congressfolk were being booed for supporting bad policies. Watcdh the videos posted previously on this blog and elsewhere.

However, it is now evident that an ugly campaign is underway not merely to misrepresent the health insurance reform legislation, but to disrupt public meetings and prevent members of Congress and constituents from conducting a civil dialogue. These tactics have included hanging in effigy one Democratic member of Congress in Maryland and protesters holding a sign displaying a tombstone with the name of another congressman in Texas, where protesters also shouted "Just say no!" drowning out those who wanted to hold a substantive discussion.

Sounds to me like Americans engaging in peaceful and civil protest. Unlike Liberal protests, the Congresspersons did get their words in. It is just that what they had to say was so bad they were booed or they inspired chanting. Sounds very American to me. No violence (except by union thugs supporting Obamacare).

Later in the article, Pelosi gets really arrogant:

This month, despite the disruptions, members of Congress will listen to their constituents back home and explain reform legislation

. How does explaining their terrible bills equate to any actual "listening?" If they were listening to their constituents, they would have nothing to do with Obamacare, would they?

Update: Hillary Clinton on protesting the administration -- in 2003:



h/t Hotair.com

Linda Douglass: Liar? Or Dolt? Redux

This woman is terrible. That is my opinion. Make up your own mind:



Somehow Obama's own words are "disinformation" about his goal. Has she any credibility? At all?

Note, while Obmam has said that folks would get to keep their health care plans, the Congressional proposals throw big monkey wrenches into that idea. Read the excellent CNN report here ("5 freedoms you'd lose in health care reform"). However, even if that were his position on the legislation expected this year, it is clearly intended by him as a mere step to the ultimate goal of a single payer government-controlled system.

Linda Douglass is the purveyor of disinformation in this debate.

Glenn Beck's Dis-Disinformation Czar

The Glenn Beck rips the Obama toady Linda Douglass video a new one, in such a clever way. Watch:



h/t Dustin's Gun Blog

Update: Dems Claim Town Halls Disrupted by Angry Mobs

Update: Check this out, photos of the actual mobs!

I hope everyone sees the new Democratic National Committee ad that calls the ordinary folks who questioned their elected representatives about the bloated and ugly health care proposals "right wing extremists."

Wow.

According to the DNC you are a right wing extremist if you value freedom in the health care decisions for you and your family.

This just shows the contempt that the Democrat elites have for us, the people of the United States. The ad is incredibly arrogant. Watch it yourself, but get ready to get angry. Keep your blood pressure medicine handy.



Everyone should see the ad. The thinking behind it shows the Democrats in their true colors.

I hate the thought that the Republicans are our only viable alternative, because they have lost their way, too. Just not as badly.

Crude Tactics by Obamatons

Peggy Noonan's column in the Wall Street Journal truly nailed it:

What the town-hall meetings represent is a feeling of rebellion, an uprising against change they do not believe in. And the Democratic response has been stunningly crude and aggressive. It has been to attack. Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the United States House of Representatives, accused the people at the meetings of “carrying swastikas and symbols like that.” (Apparently one protester held a hand-lettered sign with a “no” slash over a swastika.) But they are not Nazis, they’re Americans. Some of them looked like they’d actually spent some time fighting Nazis.

...

But most damagingly to political civility, and even our political tradition, was the new White House email address to which citizens are asked to report instances of “disinformation” in the health-care debate: If you receive an email or see something on the Web about health-care reform that seems “fishy,” you can send it to flag@whitehouse.gov. The White House said it was merely trying to fight “intentionally misleading” information.

...

All of this is unnecessarily and unhelpfully divisive and provocative. They are mocking and menacing concerned citizens. This only makes a hot situation hotter. Is this what the president wants? It couldn’t be. But then in an odd way he sometimes seems not to have fully absorbed the awesome stature of his office. You really, if you’re president, can’t call an individual American stupid, if for no other reason than that you’re too big. You cannot allow your allies to call people protesting a health-care plan “extremists” and “right wing,” or bought, or Nazi-like, either. They’re citizens. They’re concerned. They deserve respect.

These excerpts do not do the column justice. Read it all, please.

Pelosi Caught in Another Lie

John Lott contacted Nancy Pelosi's office about her claim that the angry folks protesting the health care bills were carrying swastika's. Here is the only photo they could come up with.
A "No Nazis" sign?

Of course, Nancy Pelosi is hardly the poster child for truth telling.

Astroturfing By Obamatons

Having been blindsided by the spontaneous uprising of Americans who don't want to lose their health care freedom, the delusional DNC accused nameless insurance companies and right wing extremists of astroturfing, that is drumming up false grass-roots support to pack Congressional Representatives' town hall meetings.

Now the Obamatons are shamelessly astroturfing to get supporters to town hall meetings. The missive to supporters reads:

Friend –

I wanted to send you an urgent invitation to an important Town Hall with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen on Thursday morning. She’ll be talking to constituents and gathering feedback — this is an ideal opportunity to make sure your support of health insurance reform is seen and heard at exactly the right time to make a huge difference.

Our congressional representatives are back home this month, and they’re facing more and more pressure from special interests on health insurance reform. It’s critical that we get out there and show them where we stand.

I hope you can join us.

What: Health Care Town Hall with
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen

Where: Grafton Town Hall
E Grafton Rd.
Grafton, NH 03240

When: Thursday, August 6th
10:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.

Our representatives are under attack by Washington insiders, insurance companies, and well-financed special interests who don’t go a day without spreading lies and stirring up fear. We need to show that we’re sick and tired of it, and that we’re ready for real change, this year.

Please come to the Town Hall, and make sure that the most powerful voices in this debate are those calling for real reform, not angrily clamoring for the status quo.

RSVP here: http://nh.barackobama.com/GraftonTH

Thanks,
Tim

Tim Arsenault
New Hampshire Field Director
Organizing for America

P.S. — Before the event, please print off a flyer to display and make sure that your support is visible.

Here's the funny part. The astroturfers are supplying signs with the Obama campaign logo. I guess that is truly transparency, but of an evil sort.


It is pitiful that the Obamacrats have to orchestrate friendly crowds to counter the spontaneous angry constituents. Pitiful. And evil.

h/t Hotair.com

AARP Angers Members by Supporting So-Called Health Care Reform

AARP has never been a friend of conservatives. Here they show their incredible arrogance by closing down a meeting when they did not like what the members had to say. Watch it here:


Who is that witch anyway? Watch the witch pull the microphone while angry members keep going. And who is the dumb cluck who says he is an AARP volunteer? What a know-nothing! He thinks insurance companies are in the business of denying health care.

Contact AARP and tell them what you think about their representation of seniors.

Update: The town hall meeting took place in Dallas.

Poll Numbers Bad for Dems

James Carville's Democracy Corps polling organization has, oh so quietly, released the results of its latest poll:

By 53%-42%, those who are likely to vote in the 2010 election say Barack Obama is 'too liberal.'

They believe by a margin of 53%-40% that he will 'raise my taxes.'

By 55%-42% they say 'he promises things that sound good' but that won't get done.

By a whopping 65%-32%, likely voters call Obama a 'big spender.'

The news for 'Democrats' more generally is no better.

On the economy, likely voters give 'the Democrats' just a 6 point edge (45%-39%) over 'the Republicans.'

Likely voters give the Republicans an 11 point edge (49%-38%) on taxes.

The Republicans have a 13 point lead (47%-34%) on government spending.

Republicans have a 5 point edge (42%-37%) on the budget deficit.

Will the Democrats listen? Or rush headlong to the elimination of our health care freedom?

How to Smuggle a Gun Into Jail

Well, if you are fat enough, tuck it -- and a couple of magzines -- between your layers of fat. This story from Houston, Texas.

Congress's Newest Convicted Criminal

Oddly the cash in the freezer did not get this guy convicted, but the jury found him guilty on 12 of the 16 counts of bribery and other corruption in office when he was an elected Representative to Congress.

The New York Times does not tell his party affiliation as an elected Represetative.

Guess? Anyone?

Does anyone think that detail would have been omitted if the guy had been a Republican?