Sunday, May 29, 2011

Is America getting close to being a Police State?

Everyday, the American People are being attacked by all sides limiting our freedom. There are many things on the horizon that our Government wants to impose on the People in order to CONTROL THEM.

The Smart Grid will be used to CONTROL your thermostat and appliances. Obamacare will CONTROL your lifestyle, what you do and what you eat. Starting in 2011, all new cars (eventually all cars) will be mandated to have in them the "black box" to CONTROL your freedom of movement. It will show where you go, your speed, whether you are wearing your seatbelt etc.

Some people may have heard about the FEMA Camps meant to round up the People around the country. Officials call the controversy about them "Conspiracy Theories;" something that will never happen. Nevertheless, it did. The United States had internment camps in the past. Today, Senator John McCain, along with several other Senators is sponsoring The Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010, or S. 3081. The bill authorizes the President to deny a detainee a trial by jury simply by designating that person an “enemy belligerent.”

Who would be considered an enemy belligerent?  Could an enemy belligerent be a Tea Party Protester? Possibly, because in April 2010 the Government did a security exercise at Fort Knox and sent out the following message regarding it: “Friday, 23 April 2010, and identifies the terrorist threat adversaries as "Local Militia Groups / Anti-Government Protesters / TEA Party."

Democrat Senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey sponsored Senate Bill 34 Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2011. It gives the Attorney General, currently the biased Eric Holder the authority to deny the sale or distribution of firearms or explosives to individuals whom the Attorney General has determined to be engaged in terrorist activities. Who in Eric Holder’s mind may these people be? Could it be Tea Party Patriots? 

In the 2008 Presidential election the Obama Regime set up “Truth Squads,” made up of people in POWER, like prosecutors and sheriffs to intimidate people from using their First Amendment right of Free Speech to criticize the candidacy of Barack Hussein Obama. During that election cycle the police were also given a directive to take caution when stopping vehicles displaying the Gadsden Flag, Tea Party stickers, or Ron Paul stickers. Now in 2011, the Obama Regime has a "Truth Czar," who calls himself the terminator. His job will be to scour the internet and the Media looking for people criticizing Obama. When he finds them will they be considered “enemy belligerents?”

More and more everyday American citizens are loosing their freedoms and most of them do not even know it. Wake up America! 

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Newt and the Mandate

On May 15, 2011 Newt Gingrich appeared on Meet the Press with David Gregory and stated, “I am against Obamacare,” but then contradicts himself stating he supports a mandate to purchase health insurance. Gingrich said, “I agree that all of us have a responsibility to pay--help pay for health care," and added, "I've said consistently we ought to have some requirement that you either have health insurance or you post a bond ..."
Gingrich also admitted that his proposal is a "variation" of the individual mandate, a key component of the Obamacare legislation President Obama signed into law in 2010. Gingrich’s mandate is better than Obama’s mandate because Obama’s plan basically is trying to replace the entire insurance system, creating state exchanges, building a Washington-based model, creating a federal system.

Newt went on to state, “There are an amazing amount of people who think they ought to be given healthcare. So, a large amount of people earning $75,000 a year don’t buy health insurance, because they want to buy a  second house or a better car or want to go on vacation and you and I and everybody else picking up for them. I don’t think having a free-rider system in health is any more appropriate than having a free ride in any other part of our society.”

David Gregory brought up the fact when Gingrich was on Meet the Press in October 1993, Gingrich said: “I am for people, individuals -- exactly like automobile insurance -- individuals having health insurance and being required to have health insurance. And I am prepared to vote for a voucher system which will give individuals, on a sliding scale, a government subsidy so we insure that everyone as individuals have health insurance.” Is Newt saying everyone now needs to purchase auto insurance, even those who do not have a car and do not

Newt Gingrich is concerned with people who have no health insurance showing up for treatment at a hospital. What is wrong with giving the people who receive treatment a bill for services? He did not mention that insurance companies have an extra charge in people’s health insurance premiums to cover people who do not have insurance. Will the insurance companies reduce their premiums then?

 There is a mandate that everyone who drives and has a vehicle need to purchase liability insurance. That insurance is to protect the other driver, not necessarily the owner of the insurance. Nevertheless, they may not have enough insurance, therefore the insurance companies offer underinsured insurance. However, you must purchase uninsured motorist coverage in order to get the underinsured coverage. Why is that? Could it be the insurance company wants to make more money off of the policy holders?   

There are people who claim an individual mandate to purchase health insurance is Constitutional and people should be forced to purchase health insurance, because sometime in everyone’s life they will need healthcare. People may or may not need healthcare throughout their life, however if they do receive treatment it is their responsibility to pay for their treatment.

Newt calls for an individual mandate, wherein people would be forced to purchase healthcare insurance or post a bond to cover possible future healthcare treatment. A mandate is a mandate, whether it is from the Federal Government or the States.

Those people who favor the mandate justify it saying sometime in everyone’s life they will need healthcare. People definitely have to eat. When people go to a restaurant they eat their meal and then pay for the food plus a tip for service. Therefore, using their logic should people be required to prepay for the food they will consume in the future? Of course not, the same should hold true for health insurance. Newt stated, “I don’t think having a free-rider system in health is any more appropriate than having a free ride in any other part of our society,” yet says he would issue vouchers to people who could not afford it (“free-riders”) so everyone would have health insurance. What? Wouldn’t those people receiving the subsidies be considered “free-riders?”  People should buy what they want to buy and not have it forced on them by Government. People need to be taught to be self reliant, responsible and not dependent on Government.  If people receive goods or services, give them a bill and have them pay for it.

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

ObaME and the “Gutsy Call?”

 Barack Hussein Obama happened to be President when Usama Bin Laden was located and killed. The so-called Mainstream Media (MSM) were drooling all over themselves that Bin Laden was killed under this Democrat President.  NBC interrupted regular programming, which was Trump's show The Celebrity Apprentice for an important announcement from Obama. As of 10:30 p.m. he had not made the announcement that Usama Bin Laden was killed, however the MSM did; they could not help themselves. I thought it was going to be Obama making the announcement.

Andrea Mitchell said it would help Obama politically. The gloating MSM called Obama’s actions to go forward with the raid a "GUTSY CALL!" If you stop and think about it, it was the only call. Obama supposedly, made it his mission to capture or kill Usama Bin Laden. Therefore, when it was learned that Bin Laden was in the compound in Pakistan Obama had only one call to make. Go get him! It wasn’t a “GUTSY CALL!" BTW it took him 16 hours to make the decision and supposedly they knew Usama’s location since August 2010. What took him so long?

A "GUTSY CALL" was when Todd Beamer, along with some fellow passengers on flight 93 made the decision to fight against the jihadists and he said, “Are you guys ready? Let's roll!" The operator heard Beamer's words after he dropped the phone, leaving the line open.     

Obama gave the order to take Bin Laden out, which was a good thing, however maybe for the wrong reason. Obama wanted to show that he is not a wimp, but a macho man. Remember, Obama wants/wanted to close down GITMO, give Miranda warnings to the jihadist’s captured in the field and is against enhanced interrogation methods, which helped get the info to take out Bin Laden. The hunt for Usama Bin Laden had been going on for 10 years and it was the Special Forces that did the work not Obama.

Let's not forget the Obama regime is still investigating the CIA personnel who did the enhanced interrogation methods on some of these terrorists. Obama prosecuted the Navy Seals for a bogus claim of abuse by a terrorist/jihadist. The Seals supposedly gave this jihadist a fat lip when he was captured. This jihadist was responsible for burning alive some Blackwater Contractors and then hung their remains from a bridge. I guess the Seals that killed Bin Laden were concerned if they would have tried to take him alive they might have gave him a fat lip.

At the Obama photo-op, a sister of a 9/11 victim Debra Burlingame confronted Obama about Attorney General Eric Holder prosecuting the men who interrogated KSM, which  produced intelligence leading us to Bin Laden. "Can't you at least give them your opinion? And Obama said 'no I won't,' and he turned around and walked away." That's because Holder is Obama, just like all of the other radicals in his administration. They are him. Barack Hussein Obama has said, "Tell me who you walk with and I'll tell you who you are."

Furthermore, why is our Government telling the World they are getting intelligence information from seized computer hard-drives and equipment from Usama Bin laden's compound? Why does the World need to know that information? Is the information any good now? There was NO need to disclose that information, just act on it.

Barack Hussein Obama gave a speech regarding the death of Usama Bin Laden. He was reading from the teleprompter when he read the words, “These efforts weigh on me every time I, as Commander-in-Chief, have to sign a letter to a family that has lost a loved one, or look into the eyes of a service member who’s been gravely wounded." After all, Obama is running for reelection.  Nevertheless, it was a spontaneous statement when he was wining about wearing a sport coat on Super Bowl Sunday and being in a bubble, which shows his true feelings.

Obama's actions speak of what he truly believes of the military. Remember, just a few weeks ago Obama wasn’t going to pay the troops if there was a Government shutdown. He was going to use the military as pawns or a shield. He signed a memo on 4/7/2011 stating if there was a Government shutdown the troops would have their payments delayed, contrary to what was allowed in the past by other Presidents. Obama floated the idea that military personnel wounded in battle should have their private medical insurance pay for their medical bills. Now, he has Michelle Obama and Jill Biden doing commercials about the American people supporting our troops. The American people do not need any phony commercials. Our soldiers should be paid on time and soldiers who served in the military should have the best medical care provided to them as a benefit for serving and protecting this great country.

Barack Hussein Obama said, "No need to spike the football," as his reason for not disclosing the photos of the deceased Usama Bin Laden, yet he goes to New York to dance in the end zone. Then his administration sent out a cheesy email to a few select families of victims of 9/11to meet with him for a photo-op. Classless. Then again, what do you expect from a Community Agitator. Obama's re-election campaign has begun.

Without showing proof by showing the photos that Usama Bin Laden is DEAD, wouldn’t Usama Bin Laden become larger than life, which can perpetuate the belief that he is still alive? Obama claims they buried him at sea to prevent a memorial from being set up at his grave site. What is to prevent them from making a Memorial at the sea side or making the compound where Usama was killed the next Graceland?

The problem most people have with Barack Hussein Obama is he is a LIAR. He said he was going to be the most TRANSPARENT president ever, yet refuses to disclose any of his documents. Now, he does not want
to release the photos of Usama Bin Laden. The Obama Regime is UNTRUSTWORTHY. All of America was attacked on 9/11. The photos should be released to those that want to see them. For those that do not want to see them, DON'T LOOK. As for the credit for taking out Usama Bin Laden that should go to the Special Forces. In addition, thanks needs to be given to everyone who served and is serving in our military. 

Sunday, May 1, 2011

Embryo’s for Jobs

Have you seen the people standing on the street corners holding signs that read “I’ll work for food?” It’s a scam. Instead of giving them money offer them a job. Tell them you’ll feed them (give them money) if they will cut your grass or paint your house etc. and see if they will accept. Now, the U.S. Appeals Court has allowed a similar scam by paying “researchers” for unnecessary and unethical embryonic stem cell research with federal (taxpayer’s) dollars.

President George W. Bush had issued an Executive Order restricting the use of federal funds for embryonic stem cell research in 2001. In 1996 Congress passed the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, which prohibits federal funding for "research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death greater than that allowed for research on fetuses in utero." 

Nevertheless, Barack Hussein Obama, who is an ardent supporter of embryonic stem cell research, on March 9, 2009, issued an Executive Order authorizing the use of federal funds for embryonic stem cell research. At the signing Obama said the following regarding embryonic stem cell research: "Medical miracles do not happen simply by accident…  Promoting science isn't just about providing resources, it is also about protecting free and open inquiry, it is about letting scientists like those here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it's inconvenient especially when it's inconvenient. It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology. Too bad he does not take the same position regarding the HOAX of “Climate Change.” Obama continued, “I cannot guarantee that we will find the treatments and cures we seek. No president can promise that. But I can promise that we will seek them actively, responsibly, and with the urgency required to make up for lost ground."

Obama said, "Rather than furthering discovery, our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values. In this case, I believe the two are not inconsistent. As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering." This coming from a man who also supports late term abortions and infanticide.

There are ethical and moral grounds for opposing embryonic stem cell research.  Some of which are: creating a life to take a life,
because in most cases the research process involves destroying the embryo. What’s next, making babies for spare body parts? What about human cloning?  Obama denies embryonic research would lead to human cloning and said, "And we will ensure that our government never opens the door to the use of cloning for human reproduction. It is dangerous, profoundly wrong, and has no place in our society, or any society." Some may say that statement is a contradiction. In Denmark they are creating designer babies, where “doctors” are playing with DNA to make the “perfect” child. In essence, some of these “doctors” are playing God. Moreover, many scientists have said embryonic stem cells are irrelevant to medical progress, because there have been scientific breakthroughs with adult stem cells. The scientists are also having results from adult and cord blood stem cells.

In contrast, according to Francis Collins the Director of the National Institute of Health (NIH), embryonic stem cell research could not be conducted in the United States without Federal funding and calls the research necessary. Collins said NIH has invested more than $500 million (taxpayers’ dollars) in human embryonic stem-cell research. There has been a ban on human embryonic stem-cell research in the United States since U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth issued a preliminary injunction August 23, 2010 against the NIH from funding the research. However, on April 29, 2011 the DC Appeals Court, in a 2-1 decision reversed the decision of Justice Lamberth allowing federal funds to be used for embryonic stem cell research. Their reasoning: the scientists would be out of a job without federal funds. What?? The country is going bankrupt, yet these Judges believe the taxpayers should pick up the tab to keep these people employed. With that type of thinking no programs could be cut.

Collins said, “If the ban were upheld, it would result in the loss of more than 1,300 full-time or part-time jobs, as well as the potential loss of top U.S. scientific talent as lead scientists may be forced to move to other countries to pursue their cutting-edge research.” As I stated, others in the science/medical community are having success with adult stem cells, so why is there a need to use embryonic stem cells. Just like with Planned Parenthood, why does the research have to be federally funded? Whatever happened to using private venture capitalist money?

The Federal Government receives its money from the taxpayers. Article One, Section Seven of the U.S. Constitution states, “All Bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives, but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.” Hence, the House of Representatives control the purse strings, because the revenue has to be raised to pay for programs, and they vote on who and what gets funded.  Embryonic
stem cell research should not be funded by the taxpayers.