Opportunities and Challenges faced under the Umbrella of Insurance
Opportunities and Challenges faced under the Umbrella of InsuranceKathy Gibson Boatman I sold insurance from 1994-2000 and I had an opportunity to learn how the products work and some of the challenges that insurance is incapable of handling. Like most people, I didn’t grow up saying….I want to be an insurance agent. An opportunity for a good job with a respectable company presented itself and I took it. Due to this opportunity I was able to learn about insurance and that experience has proved itself to be more valuable than I ever imagined it could be. While I was an insurance agent I took classes and learned the art of sales. I learned basic facts about the financial world that benefit me to this day. I learned how to read and interpret a contract. I learned what a fiduciary responsibility is. As defined in Wikipedia it means: A fiduciary duty is a legal or ethical relationship of confidence or trust between two or more parties, most commonly a fiduciary or trustee and a principal or beneficiary. As in insurance agent I had a fiduciary responsibility to my client and to the insurance company. read more »
With the Obama agenda, the New Age mindset shares the perspective that you are not so much a distinct individual worthy as such but rather a mere component emanating outward into larger and larger groups. For example, at the lowest level you are part of the COMMUNITY.
Note that the family has been skipped over entirely as the prerogatives of the reactionary fecund union between a monogamous man and woman must be overridden by the preferences of the bureaucracy administering the larger group. At the highest level, all identity is subsumed into an absolutist holism. Obama prophesizes, “...the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself.”
Chesterton, or someone nearly as wise, once remarked that one shouldn’t take down a fence unless you know why it was put up. Ladies and gentlemen (especially ladies), if we are to live as one common humanity, do you really want a Pakistani tribesman with Taliban sympathies to have a say over how you live your life in terms of whether or not you can go outside without a bag over you head, be permitted to drive a car, or even have windows in your home not painted over so that you can look outside.
A world without distinctions was also a dream shared by Communists. And as has happened in all regimes that sought to obliterate all distinctions save those imposed by the all powerful state such as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union or Red China, the attempt here will result in a wide-scale abridgement of basic human rights.
For example, throughout his inaugural address, Obama made the attempt to depict himself as no respecter of persons on the basis of race or ethnicity by denouncing segregation and the like as a “dark chapter” of our nation’s history. However, from an examination of the other rhetoric employed by the new President, like the pigs in Orwell’s “Animal Farm”, it is quite evident that Obama views some racial groups as being more equal than others. read more »
Jonathan Martin of Politico notes that even though racism against the president is widespread, “it’s still a sensitive enough issue that the [Democratic] party doesn’t broach it directly.” By “sensitive,” of course, he means “far-fetched, ludicrous, and laughable.”
Representative Hank Johnson (D-GA) claims that in Senator Joe Wilson’s outburst toward the president last week, Wilson “kind of winked at that element” of the U.S. that disrespects Obama because he is black. I’m not sure what criminal statutes are on the books for “kind of winking” at an “element,” but I do know that Democrats’ charges of racism until recently have been so timid and indirect because they know that if they make them openly, they might have to produce actual evidence of racism.
Recently some of the attempts to label opposition to socialized medicine and trillion-dollar deficits as racism have gotten more blatant.
The Reverend Jeremiah Wright was just caught on video snarling, “I think the racists in the right wing are upset because poor people are about to be helped.” And it wasn’t even during one of his weekly sermons!
Jimmy Carter also weighed in over the weekend: “[A]n overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man… [and] a belief among many white people… that African Americans are not qualified to lead this great country.”
MSNBC bloggers recently wrote, “Whether it’s fair or not, there is a perception growing that race is driving some elements of the opposition to Obama.” read more »
At President Obama's latest media extravaganza (I have to write this quickly before that line becomes outdated), Representative Joe Wilson (R-SC) shouted out at one point what many of his fellow Americans were thinking, "You lie!" (Video) I'd say he's a great example to the rest of us, but unfortunately he quickly apologized. Even so, Vice President Joe Biden said that Wilson had "demeaned the institution" of the US Congress. Biden and other Democrats repeatedly said they were "embarrassed." Republicans, including Senator John McCain (R-AZ), said it was "inappropriate" and "disrespectful." House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) even discussed taking punitive action against Wilson.
It seems like some perspective is in order here. Plenty of bloggers have pointed out Democrats' hypocrisy. Sharon Soon has a great piece here. Many point to Youtube videos like this one from 2005 where Democrats showed Bush the same level of respect that Republicans showed Obama last night.
But the truth is, if Bush couldn't handle some boos from his fellow countrymen, there was no way he'd be able to handle Saddam Hussein or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Kim Jong-Il, and the same goes for Obama. The office of the President is the most powerful office in the free world, and the policies of the President affect every American and many non-Americans as well. If the President can't even take as much in-your-face criticism as comedians do, how is he going to justify those policies to the American people and to the world with any kind of clarity and strength of purpose? read more »
Obama on Health Care
President Obama spoke to the Congress and the country about health care in a speech Wednesday night. The full text of the speech is available here. I have not witnessed previously any previous forty-eight minutes as crammed packed with lies, falsehoods, and prevarications. If this speech were made under oath it would be almost in its entirety perjurious.
Here are just some examples.
Obama begins by talking about health insurance and those that do not have it. He mentions that "these are middle-class Americans." Yet the ranks of the uninsured is not primarily middle class Americans. One third are not Americans at all. One third are not middle class but those poor enough to be eligible for Medicaid and the children's health insurance plan who do not enroll.
He continues: "Some can’t get insurance on the job. Others are self-employed, and can’t afford it, since buying insurance on your own costs you three times as much as the coverage you get from your employer." What are we to make of this statement. Buying individual insurance does not cost three times as much as the cost of employer provided insurance. The key to the half-truth here is the you as 'costs you three times as much'. This really is a lie. The employer may not directly charge you for the health insurance the employer is paying for, but you are paying for it in lower wages. The insurance itself does not cost three times as much, in fact if you could buy a policy that provided you the coverage you wanted and allowed you to accept the risks you wanted you could pay substantially less than the employer does. read more »
Obama wants to defame September 11th by highlighting the occasion as a day of service and downplaying the attack upon America. So if one questions compulsory voluntarism, one will be anathematized as a contingency operation instigator. We’re not suppose to use the word “terrorist” anymore.
Sean Hannity said he wouldn’t go down the road of criticizing Ted Kennedy so soon after the Senator’s death. I recall reading of Ted Kennedy driving off one of the roads he went down.
It has been reported that the healthcare reform legislation being considered will order the IRS to hand your tax records over to health commissioners. It was observed that apparently it’s OK to collect information in the name of universal healthcare but not to prevent terrorism. If it’s wrong to ascertain the legal status of immigrants as to whether or not they should be here, then on what grounds do government agencies have to be passing this information back and forth regarding actual citizens? There are already concerns about disparities of treatment among various groups and classes. Just think how much worse it will be when your chart reads, “Middle class. Do not resuscitate.”
The Healthcare reform bill also plans to spend over a billion dollars for jungle gyms, bike trails, and farmers markets. Guess the Chinese want fit slaves for when they take over after the United States defaults on the loans from the Maoists.
In embracing the Lockerbie bomber, Qaddaffi proves he is still human scum. Makes you wish for the good old days of the Bush Doctrine where, if you sided with America’s enemies, you were considered one of America’s enemies. read more »
President Obama is the opposite of Hamlet—he is desperately eager to do something on health care reform, right this minute, but he doesn’t particularly have any idea what it should be.
Obama spent most of July insisting that Congress pass a bill for him to sign before they went on August recess, in case they didn’t have enough political momentum for it by the time they got back. Privately, Congressional Democrats fumed that Obama was offering them no details on his preferred plan and was simply telling his spokespeople to assure them that he would not rule anything out that they decided.
Just before the August recess, Obama got on TV for a Wednesday night address to the nation to “explain” the “details” of his “plan.” The public’s reaction to his vague answers to reporters’ questions revealed as much frustration at his lack of specifics as Congress felt.
Since then, Obama has played “good cop, bad cop” with an unwilling Congress: that is, Obama gets to make flowery promises—everyone who’s happy with the status quo can keep things as they are, everyone who’s unhappy can have everything completely different—while Congress is forced to work out the ugly details like who’s going to pay for the plan.
At some point, Obama shifted away from his push for “health care reform” and began hinting that what he really wanted was “health insurance reform.” However, he was too cowardly or indecisive to state his altered intention outright. read more »
Representation, more or less?
I recently learned of a new third-party initiative, called GOOOH (pronounced "go"), for Get Out Of Our House, focussing on the U.S. House of Representatives. GOOOH describes itself as more of a system for selecting candidates than an ideologically-bound party; as such, it strives to be more representative of the individuals in a given district. You can find them at goooh.com. Achieving greater representation is always a laudable goal in government, so initially I was drawn to the idea. Further reading of their site, however, has led me to discover some problems in their approach. Quotes under each heading are taken from the GOOOH website.
1. An ideologically split party is bound to fall apart in Congress.
"GOOOH does not define (or have) a platform. It allows elected candidates to represent their district's interests unencumbered by partisan politics. Candidates will define their own platform by filling out the Candidate Questionnaire."
Every district will select a GOOOH candidate through the GOOOH process; as their website says, this is likely to produce a leftist candidate in a left-leaning district and a rightist candidate in a right-leaning district. Let's assume that GOOOH manages to get a large number, maybe dozens, maybe even hundreds, of candidates elected to the House in 2010. What will those newly-elected representatives do then? They will seek out other representatives who share similar opinions on important issues. They will form blocs who tend to vote together on most issues, who work together to draft legislation, to convince others to join them, and to block legislation advanced by other blocs. Over time, they will need to raise money for their particular issues, or simply for reelection, to supplement the money they receive from GOOOH. These voting blocs will then work together to raise money, holding town hall meetings and fundraisers. read more »
Every four years, the inauguration of the President sets the tone for the direction in which those in the highest executive office hope to steer the nation. Since that is the case, the American people should be very concerned about the lunacy put on display at the swearing in of Barack Obama from beginning to end.
With the gays going into the theatrical hysterics those of that proclivity are renowned for over the invocation delivered by Rick Warren, one would have hoped for something more theologically profound. However, many have no doubt heard sounder sentiments emanating from four year olds saying grace over crackers and juice.
Billy Graham in his heyday Warren is not. From Warren’s words, one could have easily come away assuming God did not know Obama was Black. Warren said, “...we celebrate a hinge point of history with the inauguration of the first African American president of the United States...We know today that Dr. King and a great cloud of witnesses are shouting in heaven.”
These things didn’t even need to be mentioned. For decades now, we have been repeatedly told that it is not the color of skin but rather the content of character that counts.
So then why should we be grateful to have a president whose only characteristic that set him above his peers was his mulatoo pigmentation? Would Warren and the other adherents of the outstretched hand of the Social Gospel been as fawning if the likes of Allan Keyes, Walter Williams, or Thomas Sowell had been elected to high office?
Furthermore, one might in the course of a speech rhetorically intonate that “Dr. King and a great cloud of witnesses are shouting in heaven” and not be too far out of line. However, doesn’t it smack of the utmost hubris to tell the Lord in a prayer what we know the inhabitants of Heaven are doing? As mortals not having crossed over yet to the other side, how in the world (since those mentioned are no longer in it), can we have any certain idea about what those on the other side think of a development here we are all a flutter over? read more »
That is correct, we are now the terrorists; that is according to the far left African-American wing of the Democratic Party.
I am, of course, referring to this absolutely asinine rant here. I would quote that bunch of nonsensical prattle on this blog and respond to it directly; but I am afraid that my emotions would get the best of me and I would say something that I might regret later. Leave it to the idiotic Socialist Liberal Democrats, to turn a fact finding mission, about an admitted Communist, who said everything and I do mean everything; under the damn sun about white people into a "White vs Black" witch hunt; starring of course; Glenn Beck.
The truth is folks, this had nothing to do with "White vs Black" and everything to do with Right vs Wrong. In fact, here is Glenn Back's Statement about Van Jones's ouster:
The American people stood up and demanded answers. Instead of providing them, the Administration had Jones resign under cover of darkness. I continue to be amazed by the power of everyday Americans to initiate change in our government through honest questioning, and judging by the other radicals in the administration, I expect that questioning to continue for the foreseeable future.
Learn what I am
A link to the U.S. Department of Education's site provided the fodder for this first entry from the southern-flyover lands.
As of 5:30 p.m. (CT) pdf files were available of follow up activities to President Obama's forthcoming speech to the nations' school kids. There are pdf files in age-delineated groups, but I would beg to differ with the "Teaching Ambassador Fellows," who wrote these plans, as to what Kindergarteners can write about.
I am highlighting the lesson plans for the 7th-12th graders; children that are capable of writing and asking deeper questions. Children that can figure out why a speech ostensibly about "staying in school," does not contain the word "stay" at all in the follow up lesson plans. ("School" is contained once.) Perhaps that will be covered in the speech. What is covered in the lesson plans sounds like a lot of work for teachers:
Teachers may post in large print around the classroom notable quotes excerpted from President Obama’s speeches on education.
...Based on these excerpts, what can we infer that the president believes is important in order to be educationally successful?
Granted, schools down here in the South have been in session since 8/10. Maybe teachers have had time to make these posters. I think not.
Before the speech begins, activities and questions are suggested for teachers to utilize.
“Why does President Obama want to speak with us today?”“How will he inspire us?”“How will he challenge us?”“What might he say?”“Do you remember any other historic moments when the president spoke to the nation?” “What was the impact?” After brainstorming answers to these questions, students could create a “cause-and-effect” graphic organizer.
I served in Vietnam from 1968-1969 and I had an MOS of 0251 as a USMC Interrogator/Interpreter with the 11th ITT, MACV-I Corps. Most of the interrogations were performed right in the field where the PW's (Prisoners of War) were captured so that we could collect timely tactical intelligence. I am sure that this saved many lives of my fellow Marines since we were able to provide actionable information to field commanders. After we conducted field interrogations, high value PW's were sent to detention facilities for more in depth interrogations to determine higher level strategies, command structure, and future battle plans. Interrogations were removed from Marines in the 1970's and given over to the Army and the CIA. Most of the interrogations took place away from the battlefield and timely actionable intelligence was rare because of the time it took to transport PW's to facilities away from the action. The CIA was not so concerned with tactical intelligence as much as strategic, longer-range intelligence. I cannot speak to the quality of the Army interrogations except for the reports that I have read which indicate that they were more concerned with not crossing the line of approved techniques per the US Army Field Manual than they were with obtaining timely, on-the-scene information which could be immediately disseminated to battlefield commanders. Additionally, many of the interrogators were not trained in the language and customs of the enemy, as we were in Vietnam, so much of the intelligence was filtered through translators which meant that information could be misunderstood or manipulated. Now CIA interrogators are under scrutiny by the US Justice Department and are intimidated by possible prosecution for their interrogation techniques. It appears that the Obama administration wants to release terrorists and go after those who questioned the terrorists. The CIA is now so blackballed that all future interrogations will be conducted by the FBI - a law enforcement agency. This is madness! The terrorists who were captured on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan or planned attacks against America are not scofflaws - they are captured enemy combatants. They are not bank robbers or carjackers or muggers. They are Jihadists - soldiers for Islamic extremism with a mission to attack the "Great Satan" America. The Obama administration and his Justice Department want us to return to a pre- 9/11 mentality. I want us to return to a Vietnam battlefield mentality. We would all be a lot safer if we did. read more »
An extraordinarily alarming <a href=" http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6127514/Sentenced-to-death-... in the UK <span style="font-style:italic;">Daily Telegraph</span> describes the adoption by Britain's National Health Service of a protocol to end the life of patients considered terminal by withdrawing food and water and other care. The denial of care decisions are made without consultation or notice to the patient or the patients family. The policy, the Liverpool Care Pathway, was recommended by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice). Nice is the model for the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research established in the Department of Health and Human Services under the <a href=" http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2009pres/03/20090319a.html">stimulus</a> act.While the comparative effectiveness research council would do research and make clinical recommendations, Americans receiving their health care at government expense could expect to have that care conform to the recommendations developed by the council, just as the Liverpool Care Pathway was adopted by National Health Service hospitals on recommendation by Nice.When we begin to describe health care as costing the nation too much money, instead of recognizing the costs are borne by individuals with individual, personal rights and decision making capability we are on the same path which led to the adoption of this policy by the National Health Service.No private health care plan, doctor of organization in the United States could adopt a policy of purposeful death of patients today without criminal and civil penalties. The fifth amendment to the Constitution states no person shall... be deprived of life...without due process of law. The current proposals to move more of the management and control of health care expenditures and decision making from individuals to government will inevitably lead to adoption of the same type of death protocols as now adopted in Britain. Government decisions to end the life of citizens without criminal conviction and without due process can have no other name than tyranny. Sic Semper Tyrannis is a proper motto for opposing the health care proposals now before the Congress. Read the <a href=" http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6127514/Sentenced-to-death-..., read the accompanying comments. Who has a pike.
Viewers wanting to see "Knowing" staring Nicholas Cage might expect a film not all that different from his "National Treasure" series or even perhaps "The Da Vinci Code" as from advertisements the story appears to center around an aged parchment with a series of numbers scribbled across it that seemingly predicts a series of disasters. However, by the film's conclusion, the apocalyptic symbolism alluded to is much more complex and potentially confusing than one might initially suspect.
After a series of catastrophes Cage’s astrophysicist character witnesses as a result of deciphering the cryptic document, one begins to get the impression that the transcendent presence guiding events is more of a tangible one rather than a force in the background. Hints of this are introduced when mysterious figures reminiscent of less than normal looking versions of Men In Black begin to stalk Cage’s son as well as the granddaughter of the character who wrote down the prophetic string of numbers in a flashback set fifty years in the past.
In most films one usually gets a distinct impression as to the forces overseeing mankind’s eschatological destiny. Usually they are traditionally supernatural or more in the vein of what moviegoers would consider extraterrestrial or interplanetary. Seldom do I remember a film where the distinctions were blurred or melded to such a degree as in "Knowing".
For example, viewers were first given a hint of this as Cage and one of the adolescents come across an illustration depicting Ezekiel's wheel within a wheel. The overt supernatural overtones continued to increase with interactions with the Men In Black, especially when a blinding lights emanates from one of their mouths when confronted by Cage and as Cage's partially deaf son picks up a message over his hearing aide from the "whispering people". read more »
A rant on the current climate of We The People.
Health care is an important issue right now and I am against any move to a socialized health system. The turnout for the meetings and town halls has been great and an impact is being made. But just so everyone knows, it is about much more than that. Politicians, TV news, and other mainstream media outlets are focusing on health care because it is happening now. What they do not get or see is that the excessive growth of government has been happening for quite some time now. With the initial bailout at the end of 2008, tarp and the stimulus, cap and trade, and now the health care bill, people are at the point where they are not going take it anymore. That is why there are record numbers of people speaking out, attending these town halls, and just getting involved and informed.
Both parties, the democrats and republicans, are to blame and we all know it. People are getting more informed and they are paying attention now. Be sure to know, politicians, none of your job's are safe. We are going to and will continue to keep a close watch on you. We want and need people in office that will fight for us. People that will take a stand and not back down. It isn't about compromise. It is about the Constitution of the United States. It is about downsizing and limiting the Federal government as prescribed by the Constitution. It is about standing up for what our Founding Fathers envisioned and gave all they had to create. It is about Freedom and Liberty. It is about getting government out of every aspect of our lives. This is the key to it all.
In anticipation of the humiliating defeat of their socialized medicine scheme, Democrats are feverishly working to get their legislation passed by cheating.
Their plan, known as “budget reconciliation,” works as follows: (1) have Senate committees expand Medicaid, cut Medicare, force individuals to buy and businesses to offer insurance, give subsidies to low-income people and tax credits to small businesses, levy new taxes, and do everything else Democrats wanted to do in their health care bill but knew would never pass; (2) lump it all into a budget reconciliation bill; and (3) pass it with 50 votes and no filibuster.
The bill would also contain language to support enactment of a health care overhaul, but because provisions unrelated to the budget cannot legally be included, the Senate parliamentarian will likely strike these from the bill. According to the New York Times, which favors the reconciliation swindle, it is unclear whether two key elements will be allowed in the bill: the requirement that insurance companies accept all candidates and charge the same regardless of condition, and the creation of a government health insurance exchange.
The Times eggs Democrats on to declare that these two provisions, while irrelevant to the budget, “are so intertwined with other reforms that they are [necessary] for other provisions that do affect spending or revenues.”
If that ruse doesn’t work, the Times notes, then the process could “leave the reform package riddled with holes—perhaps providing subsidies to buy insurance on exchanges that do not exist, for example.” In this eventuality, Democrats would pass a second bill, subject to filibuster, that fills in gaps where budget-irrelevant provisions were removed. read more »
The setup: Akron, Ohio, 2004. A costly and messy divorce, with a five-year-old child caught in the middle. She, Victoria Douglas, says he, Rodd Sutton, sexually abused their daughter. Victoria prints out and distributes flyers with his name and address and the words "CHILD RAPIST. BE ALERT! PROTECT YOUR CHILDREN."
Akron city police investigate and find no evidence of abuse. Nearby Springfield township police investigate and find no evidence of abuse. Akron City Hospital investigates and finds no evidence of abuse. Summit County Children Services investigate and find no evidence of abuse.
Victoria Douglas, with custody of the child, gives her house to her mother to avoid losing it in the legal fallout, and flees with the child to Florida.
Fast forward to August 2009, when a jury decides Victoria Douglas should pay $1.2 million in damages for defamation, invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress, including $136,000 for the value of the house. Sutton's lawyers doubt that he will be able to collect the damages.
So this woman (and I use the word begrudgingly) ruins this man's life; steals his child through completely false allegations; defames him with flyers that all but beg the public to break into his house and rough him up (or worse); forces a hospital, two police agencies and the Children Services board to spend who-knows-how-much on investigating her wild claims, taking those investigators, doctors and social workers away from their actual duties where they could be helping people... and she basically gets away scot-free. She has custody of the child, she's living it up in Florida, and he probably won't see a dime of the settlement. My only hope is that he pursues this and uses this judgment to get custody of his child away from that nutcase. read more »
The new test of liberal political ideology seems to be, not whether you favor Obama’s health care plan, but how long it takes you to realize what a disaster it is.
The American people were, as usual, first out of the gate to demonstrate their common sense. Although a slim majority voted for Obama in November, a growing preponderance has been telling pollsters they disapprove of Obama and his handling of health care. On Sunday, Rasmussen reported that Obama had reached a new low in their Presidential Approval Index, with health care one of his lowest-rated issues.
Like a teacher indulging a failing student’s pleas to find a way to give him extra points on his test, the Congressional Budget Office has spent all summer admonishing Obama for presenting legislation that will be more expensive than advertised, produce no savings, and yield expanding and unsustainable deficits for the next 10 years. (“Now, Barry, we’ve already given you all the credit we can—next time you’ll just have to try harder.”)
The Mayo Clinic, which Obama cites as a model for cost-cutting measures, called the Medicare payment model proposed by Congress a “catastrophe.”
Seven state medical associations banded together with private medical societies and two previous American Medical Association presidents in a letter to the President opposing the legislation. The American Hospital Association is imploring hospital directors to counter Congress’s bill, as are specialty associations such as the American College of Physicians. read more »
Americans in their stupidity and apathy have really done it this time. Americans have turned the keys to the kingdom over to leftist radicals. The pot smoking, make love not war, blame America first crowd are now in total control. They immediately began to implement their egalitarian welfare society. Obama has nationalized private industries. His next big take over will be health care. Big Brother is alive and well and intends to control us from cradle to grave. Wake up America!Leftists began their attack on America decades ago. The intent of the Founding Fathers was for the "people" to always be in control of government. This intent was honored for many years after our founding. The tide began to shift during the War of Northern Aggression with Abe Lincoln becoming a dictator. It was in 1913, when an income tax was implemented by congress, that the power shift really kicked in.
American citizens today are at the mercy of the federal government. When the government has usurped the power to confiscate property at will, when the government determines how much of your paycheck you are allowed to keep, you are little more than slaves.Liberals have destroyed the family. Families are the backbone of civilization. By making men irrelevant to the family structure they have established government as Big Daddy. Women will have child after child with no husband in sight because they know government will feed, clothe, and house them.Obama must be stopped. He is a Marxist and his agenda is to destroy capitalism. Obama has America on the highway to hell.
With Obama seeming to withdraw the so-called "public option" from the healthcare reforms being considered by Congress, many will assume that the battle is now over. However, things may be more dangerous than ever before.
Up for consideration are so-called "healthcare cooperatives" that will attempt to blend aspects of public and private systems, no doubt with the care and responsiveness that homeowner associations have become renowned for. What is to prevent companies from eliminating their insurance programs and pushing their employees into these?
This is what Walmart-types are drooling for in the propaganda where they say they won't be happy until everyone is insured. What they are really hoping for is the opportunity to drop the coverage of their own employees.
The Libyan responsible for the bombing of PAN AM Flight 103 has been set free. Since the terrorist is dieing of cancer, Scottish officials claim that he was released in compliance with the nation's values.
And what might those be; pandering to radical Islamists? No wonder the country is renowned for men who wear dresses. It is because of this spinelessness that Western Europe totters on the edge of the garbage can of history.
If someone has a life sentence or a certain amount of time left on their term, prison is where they ought to die. Isn't one of the reasons we have a CIA is to make sure human scum like this meets with a mysterious end?
I am tired of the Internet ads reading something like "Obama Asks Moms To Return To School". Especially creepy is the one with the two women marching with a brainwashed look plastered across their faces. read more »