The moderates in the US Senate are poised to roll over on the nomination of Elena Kagan. This is a prime example of the changes that are going to have to be made in order for the Republican party to prosper and grow into this century. Announcing to all and sundry that Ms. Kagan’s confirmation is as good as a done deal was not the smartest thing you’ve ever done, Senator Kyl. That applies to John Cornyn of Texas as well.

We have some questions we’d like asked and answered. If Elena Kagan is confirmed she will be making decisions that will influence the court, the constitution and ultimately the daily lives of every man, woman and child in this nation for two or three decades to come. Is there a single reason that she should not be vetted accordingly?

We know quite a bit about her. We know she’s a hard-left liberal from upper New York… surprise! She has spent most of her career in academia. She clerked for Justice Thurgood Marshall and she worked for the Clinton administration for two years. The bulk of her paper trail will come from there. Last week, I said that Elena Kagan had never tried a case before a court. As a reader pointed out to me, I was incorrect. She has tried one case as Solicitor General before the Supreme Court.

She has some radical views on the first amendment and the government’s role. Kagan appears to have some serious anti-gun issues. Both of these deserve close scrutiny. Her shameful banning of military recruiters on Harvard’s campus should be a disqualifier by itself. For any Senator on the Republican side to state out of hand that he saw no impediment to Kagan’s passage is a slap in the face to every American citizen. You’re not doing the job we are paying you to do. To say we won’t filibuster is pure cowardice and is handing the problem right back for we the people to handle, in the form of a possible radical activist justice to deal with for decades.  read more »

I love enigmatic titles. This is one that is sort of sober in the sense that I’m attempting to discern how soon the business in the Middle East is going to erupt into something really nasty. The build-up of opposing forces is reaching fever pitch with multiple missile systems, both offensive and defensive, on both sides.

Fajr-5, supplied to Hamas by Iran.

Israel has developed some truly remarkable defensive anti-missile systems. Their offensive punch is legendary and has just been made much more powerful with the arrival of the LJDAM deep penetrating bunker buster shipment, which had been held up at the island of Diego Garcia by order of Barack Obama when he was trying to strong-arm Israel. With some help from US anti-missile systems Israel has a reasonable capacity to repel a rocket or missile assault. Still, with the sheer numbers of rockets and missiles they face, some are bound to get through.

Iran would like nothing better than for Israel to be bled out in a prolonged land engagement with Hizballah, with their other surrogate Hamas, and their ultimate stooge, Assad of Syria. The foremost thought in my mind at this point is just how long Israel can or will wait to take action?

Iran has juiced up its nuclear program to fever pitch, while President Obama runs interference for them with his feckless and ineffectual policy of appeasing Islamists and interference with Israel’s security, through endless, pointless negotiations in which Israel has been urged to give, give and give more, for the ‘promise’ of a peace which will never come and the Islamo-fascists who will grant no peace, having sworn to Israel’s destruction and the slaughter of every man, woman and child. More pointedly, their goal is the death of every Jew on Earth. That’s only the appetizer y’all. Then they are going to exterminate or enslave the rest of us if we don’t defeat this cult of death.  read more »

There’s been a recent bombardment of anti-Tea Party editorials, which have contained many misconceptions. Although some of the writers were well meaning, others were dizzyingly foul in their vituperative language. I am always willing to address the well meaning and explain what our Beaufort Tea Party stands for and what we don’t. People, most often, are wonderful and glad of the time and patience taken to help them understand the movement better. For those who choose the latter method of attack, I first, ask them to refrain from the foul language and enter an civil discussion. Often, this is met with an increase of abuse, wherein, I will abort any attempt at logic and walk away. We are a peaceful movement and abhor violence in both speech and action. Over the past year, we have hosted or participated in four rallies and at no time was violence ever an issue, by a Tea Party member. Violence has been perpetrated against Tea Party members and radically under reported in the media.

I have the distinct honor of being one of the five founding members of the Beaufort Tea Party, so I speak with expertise and passion on this issue. Many far right individuals have attempted to control the Tea Party movement with no success. This is a true grass root movement that has no central base of control. Some individual groups, do accept influence from the Republican Party, while the majority of us shun it. Others have slyly adopted the Tea Party moniker, while being loyal to the far left part of the Democratic Party in an attempt to blur and confuse public opinion.

Recently, the South Carolina Republican Party tried to create a Tea Party branch. When word of this action was made known, 22 Tea Party groups joined in protest and forced them to back down. Thus, we made them recognized our individual autonomy. It is the only time that all groups agreed on a single issue and acted in concert.

Although, many of our members are registered Republicans, we also have a healthy contingent of Libertarians and moderate Democrats. A substantial number of members have informed me that they refuse to register with any political party, feeling, and rightly so, that both major political parties have betrayed us. We never ask political affiliation and we get our information only through spontaneous disclosure. Although, there are a few Tea Party groups that have heavy Republican Party influence, people are free to leave them and move onto a neighboring group that refuses party influence. Beaufort Tea Party owes no affiliation to any political party, nor will we endorse any political candidates. The main purpose of our Tea Party is to educate the voters about the candidates and issues and allow them to make up their own minds as to how to vote.

Any person who claims that they are a Tea Party Candidate in South Carolina makes a false claim. Political Parties must be “certified” in order to be recognized. To date, there is no Tea Party currently “certified” and should anyone attempt to do so, they will have to face the ire of more than 20 Tea Party groups.

One recent Letter to the Editor, in the Beaufort Gazette by Raymond Dominick (May 3, 2010) claims that we are “anti-government, anti-tax, anti-abortion, anti-immigrant and pro-gun”. He got one thing right, we are pro-gun. The 2nd Amendment has been upheld by the Supreme Court, which provides the “right to bear arms” to the individual. As a police officer in Brooklyn, NY, I never once saw a legal firearms holder arrested for a crime with a firearm. I did witness and make arrests for crimes with illegal weapons.

The main tenant of true Tea Party groups is the adherence to the Constitution, not the reinterpretation of this founding monument of our nation. Congress has allowed the withering of our unalienable rights by ignoring this document. Therefore, we are not “anti-government” but for a Constitutional government, which respects the separation of powers, as well as a “limited” one. Our nation cannot function without a government. That would be anarchy and the death of this wonderful country.

To say we are “anti-tax” is another falsehood. Government cannot function without a source of revenue, which is provided for in the Constitution. Unreasonable taxes which cause a heavy burden on individuals and business are what we protest. Congress, which has grown hungry with earmarks, in order to garner votes and support a lifetime career have come up with creative ways to impose new taxes which has only added fuel to our current economic crisis. As a former small business owner and manager, I can say, some taxes are just job killers! We seek taxation with responsible representation.
“Anti-abortion” is a loaded phrase. This is a moral issue and one of states rights. It is an issue I struggled with as a young woman as Roe V. Wade was being debated in the 1970’s. There is a point where compassion for the mother under certain circumstances is a priority. However, when the issue is that the child is to be discarded simply because it’s inconvenient, than we will disagree strongly. If you demand the right to end a life, than we should equally be able to demand you be social responsible and prevent the child’s conception and prevent it’s life being an issue. If the termination of an innocent life is or no more than the reason of, “it’s a burden to my social life or budget” than it’s a death sentence to a child who committed no crime. A criminal commits their crime with the full knowledge that if caught they will face the death penalty. That is a free choice, which is something the unborn child is not given.

To say we are “anti-immigrant” is wrong. We oppose illegal immigration and amnesty. The illegal immigrant knowingly commits a crime when they cross the border. Hundreds of thousands of potential immigrants wait silently to enter legally and are being denied because our system is being overloaded. States and local government are forced to carry the burden as they swamp our emergency rooms for free health care, enter our school systems while avoiding paying taxes that support the school district, commit identity theft with stolen social security numbers, fail to pay federal income taxes that support the Medicaid, Welfare and other services they avail themselves of and comprise over 1/3 of our criminal prison population. Our unemployment rate is 9.9% and doesn’t tell the true numbers. This rate does not include those who are self-employed and not working, or those who no longer are eligible for unemployment, and/or have quit looking for work. If we were to expel just 10% of the employed illegal aliens, you would open over 1 Million jobs to unemployed Americans. Just imagine the relief to the State and Federal budget. Oh and yes, there are a few who do pay taxes, but they still have committed a criminal act when they came here and remain. We are for legal immigration, not rewarding someone for committing a criminal act. The hard part is seeing the consequences to the children of these criminals, but what of the consequences to the families of the unemployed Americans and legal immigrants, who lost their jobs to an illegal immigrant or was a victim of their criminal act? Do we, as Americans, now have less rights and freedoms than a criminal?

Why do we not demand countries that have the largest contingent of illegal aliens in our country reform their policies to promote their economic growth and the welfare of their people? Must we be the ATM of the world? We allow other countries to dictate our policies, why don’t we do the same? Balance the scales! We are the land of Lady Liberty & Lady of Blind Justice!

Truly, if you want to understand what the Tea Party is about visit our web sites, attend our rallies and meetings, read the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution over again. You need not listen to FOX News or Sean Hannity. You do need to think independently and with informed facts, while taking the time to understand the arguments fully on both sides before you take your stance and draw that line in the sand. Above all, debate the issues civilly! We are united as Americans, let’s debate these issues and make this a stronger country!  read more »

As the newly appointed Dean of Harvard Law School, Obama Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan decided, in the middle of the War on Terror, to cripple the Reserve Officer Training Corps’ recruitment capability on campus by denying it crucial access to funding, operating space, and assistance from the Office of Career Services.

Kagan’s action fits into a shameful history of antiwar college administrators’ kicking ROTC off university campuses nationwide, most visibly at Ivy League schools, out of opposition to the Vietnam War in the late 60s and 70s.  After the war ended, officials extended the policy out of supposed concern over the military’s ban on gays in the 80s and the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy in the 90s.

After the Solomon Amendment barring federal funding to universities that ban military recruitment on campus was fully implemented at Harvard in 2003, Kagan signed on to a legal challenge to the amendment.  The Third Circuit Court overturned the amendment in 2004, but stayed its ruling pending Supreme Court review.  Kagan, impatient with the vagaries of the legal system, decided to force Harvard back onto its anti-ROTC policy, even though the law hadn’t yet been changed.  The Supreme Court unanimously overturned the Third Circuit ruling in 2006, at which point Kagan reversed her actions to comply with the ruling.

Gay rights supporters defend Kagan’s actions as a necessary stopgap against government-sponsored military discrimination.

It is instructive to reconsider Kagan’s stance in the context of the role our military plays, the people and the rights it protects, and our enemies’ attitudes toward individual liberty and their treatment of gays.  read more »

When pondering the evils of Nazism and Adolf Hitler, one's mind reflexively turns to the horrors of the Second World War and the Holocaust because of the overwhelming loss of life surrounding these historical events.  However, coming in high on the list of the Third Reich's atrocities was its use of state power to undermine the most basic of human rights and the subordination of all other social institutions to the prerogatives of the Party.  In “Life In The Hitler Youth” by Jennifer Keeley, the reader learns of the Nazi subversion of the family and realizes the disturbing parallels that can be drawn with developments unfolding in our own nation.

According to Keeley, all of German life (including the minutest detail of one's personal life) was brought under Nazi control through the policy of Gleichschaltung or coordination so that all of society and culture reflected National Socialism (9).  As such, the 1936 Law Concerning The Hitler Youth decreed that all of German youth were to be incorporated under the banner of this organization.

Most Americans would probably marvel how all these things unfolded in Germany and take comfort thinking the same sort of thing could not happen in the United States.  However, then reading “Life In The Hitler Youth”, one comes away with an uneasiness in the pit of the stomach when one realizes the similarities of the philosophies justifying a number of the programs in Nazi Germany and the United States of America.

Many will be outraged by such a statement.  And though the United States is nothing like Nazi Germany in terms of destroying innocent human lives (at least in regards of those making it out of the womb without being hacked to pieces), if Americans do not now get a hold of certain ideological trends festering below the surface of public policy, the nation could very easily find it self sliding in this kind of downward direction.

In both the Nazi and secular progressiveist systems, it is not so much the individual created in the image of God protected by a set of unchanging eternal laws that matters but rather the larger group that counts.  For as much as the word “community” is used in “Life In The Hitler Youth”, one could end up thinking one was reading the press releases of the national service proposals of either the Democratic or Republican parties.  For example, the 1936 Law Concerning The Hitler Youth read in part,  "The whole of German youth is to be educated, outside the parental home and school, in the Hitler Youth physically, intellectually, and morally in the spirit of National Socialism for service to the nation and community (16).”

Often, justification for the Hitler Youth was couched in language that would not be al that foreign to our own ears.  As evidenced in one of Hitler’s speeches: “learn...that life for you must mean sacrifice, sacrifice of your personal freedom, sacrifice of your free time, sacrifice of many of the small pleasures of life; sacrifices when you take on yourself charges, not for the individual, not for yourself alone...but for your small, and yet so great community (39).”  Ladies and gentleman, have we not heard as of late the word “sacrifice” on the lips of another aspiring demagogue that has irrationally mesmerized the dupable masses?

Sophisticates will groan that Hitler Youth programs were compulsory while Obama’s are voluntary (at least for now anyway).  Eventually, it was indeed compulsory to join the Hitler Youth; however, the communalist rhetoric justifying such is worthy of Amitai Etzioni.

In much the same way the national service proposals brought before Congress and the American people claim to be voluntary, some of the service required of German youth was not explicitly obligatory but mandated anyway.  Keeley writes,
“To teach Hitler Youth the importance of their Volk community, the National Socialists suggested members participate in a form of land service.  Although not obligated to do so by any mandate or decree, every year young people ... were expected to help the Volk community...This was designed to teach young people about putting the needs of the community before their own (40).”

The objective of such programs --- be they either in a dictatorship or even in a representative democracy --- is ultimately to undermine the loyalty of its participants in regards to other authorities such as family or religion and to replace it with an absolute fealty to the organs of the state.  In pursuit of this goal, a number of policies were implemented to get the young away from what would likely have been moderating and counterbalancing influences.

Though always of maniacal intentions, the first phase of this program was seemingly innocuous enough as it consisted of scheduling so many activities and meetings that the good Nazi family had to take part in that they were basically kept running around, away from one another, and unable to reflect more critically about what they were being lured into.  This wasn't really all that much different than what is going on in many of these Emergent and Purpose Driven megachurches these days where activities and meetings are scheduled multiple nights per week and it is insinuated you are less than an ideal Christian if you only show up for the traditional scheduled Sunday and perhaps Wednesday services.

Those running afoul of National Socialist authorities underwent a process of scrutiny by the social service agencies of that day in a manner those under suspicions other than quantifiable physical abuse in our own time could relate to.  Parents refusing to go along with the Hitler Youth agenda could have their children taken away on the grounds of being “politically unreliable” (the old term for politically incorrect).  One might say such parents failed to have their children “properly socialized”, a term often invoked by those opposing home and private forms of education.

Common to all forms of socialism --- be they the Communist, Fascistic, or even more democratic and less blatantly homicidal varieties  --- is the aspiration to so totally order the existences of those living under these systems that the state comes to take the place once reserved for God in the hearts of the people.  Unlike Communism that was blatantly atheistic early on, the Nazis were a bit more sly in their manipulations to get Germans to unseat the Lord as the supreme authority in their hearts.

Keeley writes, “Finally, the Nazis attempted to replace Christianity with National Socialist ideology in the lives of youth.  Some National Socialists expressed discontent with the so-called Jewish roots of Christianity...The Nazis began to remove symbols, such as the cross, from schools (57).”  Sounds like a move straight out of the ACLU playbook.

 An example of the extent to which the Nazis would go to accomplish this objective was epitomized by a prayer children were required to recite in order to receive a free school lunch (a form of welfare also prominent in our public schools today): “Fuehrer, my Fuehrer, bequeathed to me by the Lord, protect and preserve me as long as I live.  Thou hast rescued Germany from deepest distress.  I thank thee for my daily bread.  Abideth thou long with me, forsaketh me not, Fuehrer my Fuehrer, my faith and my light.  Heil mein Fuehrer (58).”

With President Obama regularly refusing to speak with the name of and images pertaining to Christ in the background in a manner similar to the way a vampire cringes before a cross and with Youtube videos of songs such as “Sanctuary” being applied to him that should only be applied to Jesus, it is only a few short steps until the word “Fuehrer” is replaced with “Barack” in that blasphemous invocation.

From her work as an historian in this particular publication, one cannot decipher the politics of Jennifer Keeley regarding the election and administration of Barack Obama.  However, if allowed to speak for themselves, the facts and truths of history as chronicled in “Life In The Hitler Youth” serve as a warning no freedom loving American can afford to ignore.

by Frederick Meekins

The lie above was re-iterated by Shifty aka. POTUS in 57 Speeches and more than 150 remarks: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHQ3YWcCxHA&feature=related Here is the lie from Shifty himself from several of those speeches: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXqKp5B0ZLE&feature=related Now unless you are living on another planet or oxygen deprived like the liberal elitists that rammed this legislation down America's collective throats, the bill is going to raise the costs and raise the premiums:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AocglzP9kM The news every day is now showing the backlash from Americans rejecting Liberal Fascism and the Socialist programs they are in love with. Every day more politicians are "retiring" before facing the firing squad of this November's election's! (And in my opinion as well as with many other conservative Americans, they are showing their true cowardice in their inability to face the people they screwed with this bill.) Here are the facts that WILL change Individual and Group plans: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-3590 Timeline for Changes: Get a free copy of the timeline here: http://www.insnewsnet.com/HealthCareReform.asp?ccd=647 2010: Under the new law, individuals and employers/employees have the right to keep the coverage they had as of March 23, 2010 and are exempt from many reforms. These individual and group health plans are considered “grandfathered plans.” Collectively bargained plans that were ratified before the date of enactment are grandfathered until the date that the last collective bargaining agreement related to coverage ends. This also applies to changes made by your employer to group coverage. make one change and you lose "grandfather status." The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will establish a process for federal review of fully insured premium rate increases. By July 1, an Internet portal will be created for consumers and small businesses to shop for health Insurance. Starting July 1, 2010, imposes a 10 percent tax on tanning services. $5 billion has been appropriated to create a temporary high-risk insurance pool to help adults with pre-existing conditions get coverage if they have been uninsured for six months. The program will be effective through 2013. A temporary reinsurance program will be established for employers providing coverage to early retirees over age 55 who are not eligible for Medicare. The federal government will provide $5 billion to fund the program. Plans may not impose lifetime limits on the dollar value of essential benefits. Annual limits will be restricted (to be determined by HHS). Restricted annual limits do not apply to grandfathered individual plans. No rescission's are permitted, except in cases of fraud or intentional misrepresentation. Children may stay on their parents’ policies until age 26 if coverage isn’t available through their work, regardless of their marital status. Any employer contribution toward the premium is a tax-deductible business expense for the employer and not taxable income for the member. Plans may no longer impose pre-existing condition exclusions for children under 19(does not apply to grandfathered individual plans). Effective for new plans and plans renewed six months after the law’s enactment date (does not include “grandfathered plans”): New policies must cover the full cost of preventive care as recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, recommended immunizations, preventive care for infants, children and adolescents, and additional preventive care for women. New minimum requirements for internal and external claims appeals processes. Plans that require or provide for a primary care provider (PCP) designation must allow each member to designate any in-network PCP, or pediatrician for children, accepting new patients. Plans may no longer require an authorization or referral to an Ob-Gyn. Prior authorization or increased cost-sharing for emergency services is also prohibited. Nondiscrimination rules that apply to self-funded health plans are expanded to group fully insured health plans. Plans cannot base an employee’s eligibility or continued eligibility on hourly or annual salary. Beginning in 2010, small businesses with fewer than 25 employees and average wages of less than $50,000 get a tax credit for their contributions to buying health insurance for employees. The tax credit starts at up to 35 percent and increases to 50 percent in 2014 when the exchange is operational. A full tax credit may be available to small businesses with fewer than 10 employees and average wages of less than $25,000 2011: Beginning in 2011, employers will be required to disclose the value of health care benefits on an employee’s annual W-2. Employers will be required to notify employees: About the availability of the exchange, for new employees, at the time of hiring; for current employees, by March 1, 2013; They may be eligible for a subsidy under the exchange if the employer’s contribution to the plan is less than 60 percent of total allowed costs of the benefits; If the employee purchases coverage in the exchange, he or she will lose the employer’s coverage contribution. Beginning in 2011, the pharmaceutical industry will pay annual industry fees. The fee will be phased in and will hold steady at $2.8 billion a year after 2019. An insurer must publicly report on its MLR and spend at least 85 percent of large group premiums and 80 percent of individual and small group premiums on medical services, or provide rebate payments to enrollees. Health savings accounts (HSAs) and flexible spending accounts (FSAs) may no longer be used to purchase over-the-counter drugs unless prescribed by a doctor. Increases tax for non qualified HSA withdrawals from 10 percent to 20 percent, and for Archer MSA withdrawals from 15 percent to 20 percent. HHS is required to study the group health plan markets to compare employer characteristics and determine whether the new insurance market reforms are likely to cause adverse selection in the large group market or to encourage small and midsized employers to self-insure. HHS and the Department of Labor must also collect information on self-funded plans. These studies could lead to additional employer reporting requirements. Within 12 months of the law’s enactment, HHS, in consultation with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, will develop uniform standards and definitions for summaries of benefits and coverage explanations. Within 24 months of enactment, group health plans must provide enrollees and applicants with coverage documents that meet these standards. 2012: A new fee is imposed on individual and group health plans to fund comparative effectiveness research ($1 per participant through 2013; $2 per participant through 2019). The private sector may purchase standardized data extracts of Medicare Parts A, B and D claims data to combine with their own claims data to evaluate provider performance measures on quality, efficiency, and the effectiveness of care. 2013: Beginning in 2013, manufacturers of medical devices will pay a 2.3 percent excise tax on sales of medical devices. Beginning in 2013, the Medicare payroll tax rate will increase by 0.9 percent for individuals who make more than $200,000 and couples that make more than $250,000. A new 3.8 percent tax will be added on income from interest, dividends, annuities, royalties and rents for those at the same income threshold. Contributions to flexible spending accounts are limited to $2,500 a year. 2014: Beginning in 2014, a non-deductible premium tax will be imposed on insurers ($8 billion in 2014, $11.3 billion in 2015 and 2016, $13.9 billion in 2017 and $14.3 billion in 2018. After that, it will increase in an amount proportional to overall premium growth). Everyone must have coverage or pay a penalty, which will be enforced by the Internal Revenue Service. The penalties will be phased in over time: an individual without insurance must pay whichever amount is greater: $95 or 1 percent of income. Employers don’t have to offer their employees health insurance coverage, but most of them with more than 50 employees will pay an assessment if they don’t, or if they offer coverage that isn’t affordable. Full-time and part-time employees are included when determining whether an employer has 50 employees (based on current full-time employee equivalency rules). http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/workhours/parttimeemployment.htm Employers with 50 or more employees that do not offer “minimum essential coverage” will pay $2,000 for each employee over the first 30 employees if one of their employees gets a tax subsidy to buy insurance under an exchange. Everyone must be in the plan or the employer pays a penalty! Employers with 50 or more employees that do offer minimum essential coverage but have at least one full-time employee receiving subsidized coverage under an exchange, will pay whichever is less: $3,000 for each employee receiving a premium credit, or $2,000 for each full-time employee. Again if 1 person opts out the employer is penalizedfor every employee. Employers must provide “free choice” vouchers to employees with incomes below 400 percent of the federal poverty level if the employee’s contribution to coverage is between 8 percent and 9.8 percent of income and the employee chooses to purchase coverage in the exchange. No penalties will be imposed on employers with respect to employees who receive these vouchers. Employers with more than 200 employees that offer coverage must automatically enroll new full-time employees in coverage. Employees may opt out. Large employers will be subject to expanded 5500 reporting requirements to include information on the health insurance coverage of their employees. Individual and group health plans can no longer impose pre-existing condition exclusions for any person of any age (does not apply to grandfathered individual plans). Annual limits on essential health benefits are prohibited (does not apply to grandfathered individual plans). Health insurers must accept every individual and employer who applies for coverage. Rating restrictions go into effect for new fully insured small group plans. Insurance companies cannot base premiums on health status, claims experience or gender. Premiums can only vary by: – Age (no more than 3:1) – Geography – Family size – Tobacco use (no more than 1.5:1) States are allowed to merge the individual and small group markets. Coverage of routine patient care costs is mandated for participation in approved clinical trials (does not apply to grandfathered plans). State health insurance exchanges are up and running for small businesses and individuals to buy insurance. States can allow large employers to participate beginning in 2017. HHS will establish procedures, which may include rate schedules for broker commissions, for a state to allow brokers to: Enroll individuals in any qualified health plans in the individual or small group market as soon as the plan is offered through an exchange in the state; assist individuals in applying for premium tax credits and cost-sharing assistance for plans sold through an exchange. Essential benefit plan is created, which mandates the level of benefits that must be included in plans offered in the exchange, as well as in the individual and small group markets outside the exchange. Deductibles are limited to $2,000 for individuals and $4,000 for families in the small group market (self-funded plans and grandfathered plans are exempt from this requirement). There will now be a Cafeteria plan system offering 4 plans: Bronze, Silver, Gold and Platinum with coverage for the co-insurance amount ranging from a 80-20 to 100-0 and limits for Maximum Out Of Pocket or MOOP to individual 0f $5,000 and family $10,000. Currently the fewest amount of health plans I can offer anyone from any of the 8 companies I broker is 12 and the most 1100. If you currently have a plan you like through your employer and you leave, your coverage ends and you are now subject to the new rules. If you own your own coverage it must conform to the new plan guidelines or it WILL BE CHANGED as mandated by the bill. HSA's & FSA's contribution's are to be frozen and they are now examining and redefining what a "qualified expense" will be. Current contribution limits for HSA's are individual $3,000 & family $6150 and FSA is $2500 per person. Waiting periods cannot exceed 90 days. Expands health plan wellness incentives up to 30 percent of total coverage costs(up to 50 percent with HHS approval). A temporary reinsurance program will be established for the individual market and funded by individual and group health plan assessments ($25 billion in 2014-2016). (If you are not in the insurance or financial industry, a re-insurer is a company or entity that insures a primary insurance companies exposure to loss by owning the rights to that portfolio should it financially default). This is where the Single Payer System becomes FACT! Nowhere in the bill have they idetified that this will be a privatized program, it will be the Government! ANOTHER LIE: I will not raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 per year! Every tax on any product or service is passed on to the consumer, economics 101! In Summary: If you have individual coverage in force before the bill was signed and you NEVER make any changes to that coverage then you may be allowed to maintain that policy if the review boards and your insurance company DEEM it credible (and you can afford the premium hikes coming). The insurance reviews that will be permanently created to "study" insurance plans effectiveness have the authority to force a carrier to adapt plan coverage to meet its guidelines. This means that existing policies now such as High Deductible Health Plans for catastrophic coverage or Limited Benefit Plans, must be changed to meet new requirements of the bill! If you have group health coverage in place before the bill was signed and the plan administrators or your employer NEVER makes any coverage changes to the plan, then it too may stay in force. But those plans are also subject to the same governement oversight as individual plans and both will be combined into the "exchanges" when they are approved and this will force many group plans to go into them to find cost effective coverage. This was the case in Massachusetts when they enacted this legislation in 2006 and within 1 year only 4 insurance companies were still writing policies in that state. Lets look at Massachusetts for a snapshot of how this legislation is working there: Mark S. Gaunya, president of the Massachusetts Association of Health Underwriters, explains how Massachusetts’s system is in danger of collapsing because it did little to control costs. “Initially, MassCare was expected to cost $88 million a year — but today the Massachusetts health care budget exceeds $4 billion, and our fiscal budget for 2011 is underfunded by $294 million because of this law,” Gaunya says. “Simply put, Massachusetts can’t afford it.” The system’s weak individual mandate is also forcing insurance companies to take the sickest and most expensive residents while healthy people go without insurance until they absolutely need it, driving up costs for all the other residents who buy health insurance. To see why Massachusetts’s system is self-destructing and what lessons we should all be learning, click here:http://www.masstaxpayers.org/files/Health%20care-NT.pdfOr click here for Mass. HC timeline:http://www.masstaxpayers.org/files/Health%20law%20costs%20aren.pdf The same legislative loopholes exist in this bill with one indisputable result: higher premiums for those people who need coverage and can afford the skyrocketing premiums or Medicaid style health care for those who cannot. This plan even received a negative rating from Medicare's Chief Actuary Richard S. Foster on 04/22/2010, he stated that premiums could see annual rate increases of 12-17% or higher due to the bill. Also in their assessment they acknowledged that the resulting compensation cuts in Medicare and Medicaid would result in a 15% drop in providers and hospitals and that number was conservative. Also what most people are not privy to is that most insurance companies use the Medicare Fee For Service Schedule as the base line for negotiating reimbursement rates with doctors and hospitals. With the drastic cuts necessary, the health care system will become two tiered, those that can afford private care and the other 90% of us using public care. Yes that is what this bill creates a public care system or one step closer to their real goal: Socialized Medicine! So will you be allowed to keep your doctor or plan if you want to, that depends on if your doctor is willing or able to accept a 30% cut in pay and if your plan meets federal guidelines for coverage, you NEVER change it, you can afford to pay 100% more for it in 4 years or your employer is willing to provide health insurance instead of saving the money and just paying the penalties which would save them 150%! Sure Why Not? In Freedom to all Americans, Dr. Keith C. Westbrook Phd.

Yes, it’s going to be a cold lonely summer… Senator Bob Bennett R-Utah found out, and it didn’t have to go anywhere past the second ballot of the Utah State GOP delegation. Bennett was an eighteen year incumbent. The influence of the ‘Tea Party’ Patriots was definitely felt here.

Exit Stage LEFT

It’s going to be a very tough year on incumbents. It will be hard on Republicans, but it’s shaping up to be extremely difficult for our so-called ‘moderate’ Blue Dog Democrats… the ones who had an opportunity to stand up and be counted on the critical issues which came before them, but when the time came, voted against the American people.

All over the country races are shaping up to be a Demarxist debacle, the likes of which have never before been seen in American politics. We’ve been calling it the New American Revolution. That’s what it is. It’s the American people standing up to a rogue regime which threatens our livelihoods, our families, our property, our national security and our freedom.

A quick look at some of the other races is informative. Republican turned Democrat Arlen Specter looks to lose to Democrat Joe Sestak in Pennsylvania, proving that the Democrats didn’t want any more to do with him either. John Murtha’s Pennsylvania seat may be in jeopardy after being a Democratic mainstay for 35 years. Republican Tim Burns is in strong contention for Murtha’s Senate seat.
Meanwhile, the Indiana Senate race looks to be another Republican victory in the making, with newly chosen Republican nominee Dan Coats at 51% to 36% for Democrat Brad Ellsworth, according to Rasmussen. West Virginia Democrat Representative Alan Mollohan is facing his first serious primary challenge in thirty years.  read more »

We’re not talking about some monarchic ascension here, we’re talking about Bennett, the first of the DeMarxist casualties for 2010. It is the harbinger of things to come. The landscape for Democrats isn’t looking all that promising, and Bob Bennett is just the first to fall to the ire of Conservative Republicans and Independents who feel that he turned his back on the Conservatives.

Bob Bennett

He cannot, regardless of what he says, claim that he was not warned. Citizens and Patriots, by the hundreds of thousands, have repeatedly told him, and others like him, to stand up for freedom and conservative principles. I recall writing such warnings in this column numerous times.

Bob Bennett betrayed his constituents and his party by voting for the Wall Street bailout. His favorite hobby was pork hunting, something which did not endear him to Utah’s strong conservative electorate. Bob Bennett didn’t even make it to the primaries and was voted out of office by the Utah State GOP. Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, are you listening? Oh, and don’t worry, you’ll have plenty of company… from both sides of the aisle.

 read more »