We Need Change

Talk about a 180 degree turn of events. Canada's doctors declare that change is needed in healthcare, only it's government healthcare that needs the change. "In other words, Ouellet believes there could be a role for private health-care delivery within the public system." Imagine that... medical professionals in a government healthcare system calling for change. Makes a person sort of wonder, doesn't it?

******

Overhauling health-care system tops agenda at annual meeting of Canada's doctors
By Jennifer Graham (CP) –

SASKATOON — The incoming president of the Canadian Medical Association says this country's health-care system is sick and doctors need to develop a plan to cure it.

Dr. Anne Doig says patients are getting less than optimal care and she adds that physicians from across the country - who will gather in Saskatoon on Sunday for their annual meeting - recognize that changes must be made. "We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize," Doing said in an interview with The Canadian Press. "We know that there must be change," she said. "We're all running flat out, we're all just trying to stay ahead of the immediate day-to-day demands."

The pitch for change at the conference is to start with a presentation from Dr. Robert Ouellet, the current president of the CMA, who has said there's a critical need to make Canada's health-care system patient-centred. He will present details from his fact-finding trip to Europe in January, where he met with health groups in England, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands and France.
His thoughts on the issue are already clear. Ouellet has been saying since his return that "a health-care revolution has passed us by," that it's possible to make wait lists disappear while maintaining universal coverage and "that competition should be welcomed, not feared." In other words, Ouellet believes there could be a role for private health-care delivery within the public system. (entire article at The Canadian Press)

******

For even more info concerning the Canadian system, surf over to the Frugal Cafe Blog Zone. I note that some comments to the post are favorable to the Canadian system. I am sure that it is helpful to some, just as our system provides the healthcare needs of many. When the medical profession begins having second thoughts on the system, maybe we should pay a little attention to them. Just as we should listen to our own medical professionals in America concerning ideas for improvement.

Sunday Funnies

Well, today's (8/16/09) Sunday comics picked on libs. Conservatives, too, a little, but the heaviest humor was directed toward libs.

"Pearls Before Swine," far from one of my favorites, was a parody of a professor who could not be arrested because he was tenured. Reminiscent of a recent event with a professor?

"Get Fuzzy" had a great line: "If a tree falls in the woods, how many liberals would it take to fund the therapy for all the trees around it?"

Then the coup de grace... "Doonesbury." I guess Garry Trudeau finally realized how dull and boring he was becoming. A car dealer receives a request from a valued customer to add a GPS to the sale price. The dealer makes a series of phone calls, the final one being, "Mr. President! Sorry to bother you, but... Yes, I tried your task force." To which the customer is shown walking away, saying, "Never mind."

Poor libs get parodied. Heh-heh.

Learned a New Trick

Given all the serious stuff going on, I thought I'd try something a bit on the lite side. Besides, I have always been about sharing new insights I've been privileged to pick up along the way, and this is one of them.

No doubt like many of you, I have been using aluminum foil, saran wrap, and other products that come on a roll for decades. So there have been plenty of times when you're pulling on the stuff and the whole roll leaps out of the box. Just last night on Wheel of Fortune, I discovered how to prevent that from happening. This had to be Providential, since I do not watch the Wheel with regularity. In fact, I was actually waiting for another program and was just "channel surfing."

Anyway, here's the "secret:" On the ends of the boxes of rolls of foil and plastic wrap are perforated tabs that you can push on which bend inward. Once you do that, the roll is kept in place by that tab. I never knew that until Pat Sajak revealed it last night, and I learned a new trick.

So, go ahead and laugh at me if you want for not already knowing this, but if you did know it, why didn't you tell me? Think of all the frustration & aggravation I could have saved myself all these years!

What Would Reagan Say?

What would Reagan say? Well, let's find out. The more things change, the more they remain the same...



Still an American hero with excellent insight.

Here Is What the Left Calls Honesty

As usual, those living in the land of left-believe learn that their ideologies fail in honest, open debate on the issues. This is why they must resort to deception. Their consciences must be closed to any type of ethical principle.



Thanks, Skyepuppy, for having this posted at your place!

Reality Then & Now

According to our many Democrat friends, those opposing the government health care plan (aka Obamacare) are: Nazis, racists & bigots, members of the KKK, "Washington insiders," and/or "well-financed special interests." This is the respectful consideration being paid by the left to their fellow American citizens. This is the "unity" being brought about by "hope and change."

Of course, there is the land of left-believe... and then there is reality.

History lesson time! I learned this as I grudgingly watched a documentary that my lovely wife wanted to watch. Little did I know the gem I would discover in the History Channel presentation of Jim Jones and the People's Temple. Thank you, sweetheart!

Guess which political party would call upon Jim Jones for support in political rallies, elections, and media coverage? Aww, c'mon someone... take a wild guess! I know that it's an out-in-left-field shot, but let's take a wild swing at... the Democrat party.

Yep, I know it's a big surprise to everyone, but Democrats in San Francisco were enamored by the instant support they could get just by ringin' up good ol' Jimmy Jones. Have a political rally to fill up? Call Jim Jones. Have a protest march? Call Jim Jones. Need some extra votes? Call Jim Jones. Like a miracle (I don't know what term Democrats use since they are enamored with atheists, too), the streets and polls would be filled with willing souls from the Peoples Temple.

******
After the tragedy at Jonestown, Temple members revealed to the New York Times that the Temple arranged for "busloads" of members to be bussed from Redwood Valley to San Francisco to vote in the election.[41] A former Temple member stated that many of those members were not registered to vote in San Francisco, while another former member said "Jones swayed elections."[41] Another former Temple member stated of Jones that "he told us how to vote." [41] She stated that Temple members were required to produce booth stubs to prove that they voted, and members that could not produce such stubs were "pushed around, shoved and physically abused."[41] When asked how Jones could know for whom they voted, the member responded "You don't understand, we wanted to do what he told us to."[41] ("Peoples Temple in San Francisco" -- much more content to read there)
******

Jim Jones' political fans included Jimmy & Rosalynn Carter, Willie Brown, George Moscone, Harvey Milk, Walter Mondale, Jerry Brown, and others. Intriguingly, Jones also had relationships of varying degrees with the Symbionese Liberation Army, the Nation of Islam, Angela Davis, and the American Indiana Movement - all extremely radical 1960's groups & movements.

As we all know from history, Jones was completely psychotic or something. He was extremely good at luring folks into his cult, and he was extremely good at putting on a good front to gullible civic figures. His manipulation skills were remarkable. But that is not the major point.

The significant reality is that while Democrats at the local, state, and national levels could impress the press (another historical gem here) and boast of large numbers of supporters, what they really had were brainwashed "zombies" who were simply following the orders of their beloved leader to be wherever and to chant whatever. They had no vested interest in the issues in which it appeared they supported.

Now, today, the Democrat party has the gall to accuse Americans opposing this Orwellian health care of numbly and blindly following the "drum beating" of "talk show hosts," "well-financed special interests," or big pharmacy companies. Give me a break! These Democrat folks are calling in organized labor units, ACORN (or whatever they are now), and other "community organizers" to "keep the peace."

If Jim Jones was still around, guess who would be giving him a call, too?

Now We're KKK

Absolutely amazing! The only situations Rep. Dingell can recall where orchestrated protestors "created trouble" are civil rights debates with the KKK present. Wow! What a steel-trap memory this guy has.

On the Road

Time to take in ballparks my son & I have not visited, so will be a little slow with new posts. Especially when the room I am in right now charges for access in the room, but not in the lobby. So... cheapskate that I am, I lug my machine into the lobby. Oh well.

Gangster Government

Al Capone would be proud!

Organizing

Here is an idea of what the left - and Obama supporters in particular - think of national debate and dialogue over major issues...

******

Last fall, when swiftboaters and special interests attacked President Obama, folks like you came to his defense. We knocked on doors, talked to neighbors, and made our voices heard.Now, we need to do it again.

This time, he's under attack by Washington insiders, insurance companies, and well-financed special interests who don't go a day without spreading lies and stirring up fear. We need to show that we're sick and tired of the fear mongering.If you can join us at tomorrow's gathering, you'll find refreshments, the company of other local folks who are proud to stand up for President Obama and, most importantly, a chance to publicly show your support for the big changes the President is fighting for and this country needs.

http://in.barackobama.com/ElkhartRSVP

I hope you'll join us.Thanks,Nick

Nick Buis

Indiana State Director

Organizing for America

******

The community organizer keeps at it. He just has a little larger community to organize. What comes to mind is Mafioso-style organizing complete with slanders, threats, and extortion. I can hardly wait for the broken knee-cap phase, which will boost Obamacare proposals, of course. After all, who's going to turn it down when they need to get their busted knee caps fixed?

One big fallacy with the slanderous accusations issued above: whereas the great one has failed to read HR 3200, I have. (OK, OK, I've skimmed through it, meaning that I begin reading it and then, upon getting glassy-eyed, move through quite a bit faster). The TRUTH is that the so-called fear-mongers are telling the truth.

Of course, the bill does not outright state that there will be no private coverage; in fact, it says that there will be private coverage. Then it proceeds to impose such draconian regulations on private insurers that the bottom line will be... no private insurer can afford the regulations.

Of course, the bill does not outright state that healthcare rationing will take place; in fact, it states that healthcare will be available for all. Then it proceeds to outline affordable healthcare and how it will be allocated. Bottom line, well... you tell me. If you haven't figured it out yet, let me tell you straight up: liberal ideology means the end of American liberty and selective death.

That's organizing.

Branding

I know that my memory powers are extremely fallible, but I cannot bring to mind ANY recent American president or politician who has worked so diligently on universally branding himself/herself. Here is President Obama, however, plastering his personal logo everywhere. He shows up in front of the cameras over and over and over. Images of Barack H. Obama abound like no other American politician in recent memory.

What does come to my mind is under what circumstances a political figure's image and other unique branding symbology becomes a part of the culture in other countries. Consider, shall we say, Cuba where beloved leader and president-for-life Fidel Castro has posters of himself plastered all over the place and where he gets to thrill crowds with his rhetoric for hours on end. Then there is Venezuela and our good bud Hugo Chavez. How many posters and statues of Saddam Hussein were torn down after his demise? Ditto for Lenin and Stalin, et. al. How self-serving can these guys get? And who can forget Adolf Hitler's branding campaign utilizing the swastika?

I wonder in which nationally funded public park an Obama statue will pop up first. The White House lawn, perhaps? The lengths this guy goes to toot his own horn is astounding... and frightening.

One of my personal criticisms about former President Bush was that he was too low-key. I don't think he should have "built himself up," that part of his character I appreciated. I think that he could have used more publicity time to demonstrate highlight America's victories, similar to FDR. He was good at this during major events like the State of the Union address; I wish he had been similarly proactive at other times.

As far as face-time goes, President Barack Hussein Obama has more than made up for any lack of it by the previous administration. Too bad that it is all about him and the "changes" he plans for America.

America a Stupid Country?

Want to know what libs think of Americans? Here is everything you need to know...


Bill Maher says America is a Stupid Country

(photo: Bill O'Reilly [just using graphic; there is no O'Reilly video to play. Click the Maher link for video])

Why Can't They Tell the Truth for Once?

Once again, the truth is exposed that liberals must deceive in order to make their policies palatable to Americans. A single payer (ie, government) health insurance system is going to make us serfs to our own government like nothing we have witnessed to date. Policy making libs know this, so they openly lie about it now in order to get it passed. And they also know that they will exempt themselves from the policies that the American masses will be herded into.

Watch the short video, and then you decide who is telling the truth in this debate.

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 10:30 PM
Subject: Another BHO Lie Exposed

Isn't it wonderful when the truth exposes those who lie. It is very disturbing when it comes from BHO. We must pray and vote responsibly in 2010. Click on video below.

http://www.breitbart.tv/uncovered-video-obama-explains-how-his-health-care-plan-will-eliminate-private-insurance/

Reduce Carbon Dioxide Emissions

In response to the published column by a Kokomo High School biology teacher declaring that cap-and-trade is a necessity (Rick Parsons, "Cap-and-trade program is needed," Kokomo Tribune, 8/3/09, p. A4), I wrote the following...

******
Dear Editor,

To what extent will government global warming policies intrude into our private lives? Plenty, if global warming alarmist-activists have their way. According to The Natural Resource Defense Council and Green peace (“Cultural Diversity,” KT, 8/3/09, p. A8), Americans’ use of ultra-soft and quilted toilet paper “imposes more costs on the planet than do gas-guzzling cars.” If they have their way, and they have mounted campaigns to have their way, then we can expect to be told what kind of toilet paper we can get and how much we can use.

In the same issue, Mr. Rick Parsons wrote that the cap-and-trade program is necessary and vital to combat global warming. Allow me to make the inaccurate assumption that there are absolutely no climatologists, other legitimate scientists, or high school biology teachers who question the methodology or conclusions of global warming studies, and that all scientists are in complete agreement with the resource recommendations Mr. Parsons provides. Applying this assumption, we can declare with alarm that the earth is in serious trouble and that, as Mr. Parsons writes, we must make drastic carbon dioxide emission reductions in order to save the planet. Since this is the case, then Mr. Parsons must be thrilled with my last two published letters concerning steps to take that curb carbon dioxide emissions. I noted in my first that those alarmed over global warming need to live like me. If anyone needs a reminder of the specifics, the editor can pull my letter from the archive or I can resubmit. In my second letter, I recommended that all available public transportation in Kokomo and surrounding areas be thoroughly utilized. I see no need for high school parking lots to be filled with students’ vehicles when there is a school bus transportation system available. Perhaps Mr. Parsons should take away grade points from those students refusing to comply; call it grade-and-trade or something. And perhaps Mr. Parsons should recommend to his school board that a public transportation system be arranged for teachers and administrators as well. I hope that Mr. Parsons sees fit to join me in this crusade. We are, after all, out to save the planet.
******

Additional suggestions are welcome. I want to ensure that Mr. Parsons has all the available tools at his disposal to save the planet.

Media in the Bag

It must be terrific to have Big Media in your hip pocket, especially when you are the President of the United States of America. I don't see how Big Media can sell themselves out any more than they have. Here is the latest evidence, provided by USAToday. Notice the headline, then the actual text...

******

Obama signs new G.I. Bill for 'all who serve'
11:26 AM

President Obama saluted the extension of G.I. Bill education benefits to post-9/11 veterans on Monday, saying they sacrificed abroad while others back home sought to make money or play politics.

...President Bush actually signed the new G.I. Bill last year, but it did not take effect until last Friday. It basically gives college financial assistance to veterans of the war on terrorism, post 9/11, including those who served in Afghanistan and Iraq and their families. The bill also covers reservists and National Guard members. (USAToday, 8/3/09)

******

That little tidbit about the former president showed up six paragraphs into the article. I don't know why they bothered to include it at all.

Watchdog media? More like lapdog.

How to Expand the Economy

I firmly believed that the "cash for clunkers" program was a clever way that our beloved government could say that they were taking action without having to take action because I thought that their definition of a "clunker" eliminated about everyone. It turns out, instead, that there are a lot of "clunkers" out there that do qualify and people are cashing in.

Our liberal pols are probably getting a few bruises from all the congratulatory and self-congratulatory pats on the back they have been passing around. Wonderful, successful program they are all saying.

I say, "Great!" Glad they are so successful. So why not expand the basis behind the program to the entire economy and see what happens? "Cash for clunkers," along with the first-time homebuyer credit, is a targeted tax rebate. In effect, it allows people to do what tax cuts do: keep more of their own money and use it as they see fit. If these limited, targeted tax breaks are so great for the automotive and housing sectors of the economy, then why not maintain low tax rates, expand tax cuts where they can be made, and watch the economy really expand? I think that this is a grand idea, so while your liberal Congress-folk are home, why not ask them what they think?

Sadly, the real liberal story is already leaking out...

******
President Obama may have to break his campaign pledge and raise taxes on middle-class Americans to pay for public health care and the growing deficit, an eventuality that administration officials touched lightly on Sunday as they promoted an economy emerging from recession.
With an expected deficit next year of $1.8 trillion, and spending still being planned for a $1 trillion, 10-year health care reform, officials say something will have to be done to prevent further erosion of the economy.
"We will not get this economy back on track, recovery will be not strong and sustained, unless we ... can convince the American people that we're going to have the will to bring these deficits down once recovery is firmly established," Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said on ABC's "This Week."
Asked point blank whether it was right to suggest it is a matter of when, not if, taxes will be raised, Geithner responded, "It is absolutely right." ("Obama Officials Don't Dismiss Possibility of New Taxes," FoxNews, 8/2/09)
******

See Congress? See Congress raise taxes? See the economy tank?

Enemies of the State

From the Rush in a hurry e-mail:

******
Obama said today that the government will bundle payments to doctors based on how well the doctors are doing their job. Who is he to "reward" doctors? They work and they get paid!

"In whose polluted mind are doctors the enemy? They sure appear to be with this man. He wants people to think greedy doctors and super-greedy insurance companies are the problem." -Rush

"The State-Run Media is already on board with the whole notion that the obese are villains who are damaging the rest of us, and have to be dealt with by taxing their food. Here's how the obese will beat the fat tax: the fat guy will find a skinny kid to go in and buy his Big Mac, McNuggets, and fries. In exchange, the fat guy will go to the liquor store and buy the kid's booze." -Rush

"Obama says we have to rush and do health care right now 'cause he's getting letters. Of course, he never got a letter telling him to leave it alone. He only gets demands for government-run health care. My question is when does Obama have time to read all this fan mail?" -Rush
(Rush Limbaugh, 7/28/2009)

******

Liberals Set on Life Reduction Policies

Bryan Alexander over at his "Right Thinking" blog, posted an excellent write up about Supreme Court Ruth Bader Ginsburg's recent comment: "“Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of."

"Populations that we don't want to have too many of?" What is that all about? Ah, yes, those huggable, loveable liberals and their life reduction policies. Read it all at "A Look Behind Ginsburg's Words."

Poor Trudeau

Since cartoonist Garry Trudeau refuses to treat the Obama administration like he did the Bush administration, his "Doonesbury" comic strips have been rather dull and boring lately. Poor Garry Trudeau. So sad.

Speaking of Arrested

I don't seem to recall any charges of racism, racial profiling, or any other sort of racial travesty being raised by press or president when this black man was led away in handcuffs.

******

Former Illinois U.S. Senate candidate Alan Keyes and 21 other protesters were arrested this morning when they refused to leave the Notre Dame campus during a protest of President Obama's upcoming commencement address there, authorities said.Keyes and the others were arrested on trespassing charges when they refused to leave campus, a university spokesman said. All 22 were being held in the St. Joseph County Jail on misdemeanor criminal trespass charges, in lieu of $250 bond each, said St. Joseph County Sheriff's Sgt. Bill Redman.
Keyes was among a group of 26 protesters, some of them pushing baby carriages with dolls covered in fake blood, who entered the campus and were greeted by Notre Dame police, said university spokesman Dennis Brown. (ChicagoBreakingNews, 5/8/09)

******

(Photo: the arrest of Alan Keyes)

Living the Dream

“[President Obama] doesn't know the facts, he wasn't there, he pops off, just exactly as he would back in Chicago in the community organizing days. He goes off about racial profiling, all the rest. Based on what? A limited amount of information about a single incident where he's quick to condemn the cop, the whole police department, and white America. Mr. President, you are not a victim. You are, in fact, the president of the United States. You went to private school. You went to Ivy League schools. You are a millionaire. You have a charmed life. Congratulations. You're living the American dream. Stop pretending otherwise. If anybody behaved stupidly yesterday it was the president, in even taking the question.” -- Rush Limbaugh, 7/23/09

Well, Mr. Obama is living the American dream. I wish that he would stop racing to take away that opportunity from the vast majority of America's citizens.

Racism Charges Bogus

The issue surrounding the arrest of Dr. Louis Gates, Jr., has escalated beyond reason. Big Media get to report the story any way they want, and they want to make sure that virtually everything points to racist profiling by police brutes. Except CNN's report yesterday already disclosed some details about the incident. I notice that tonight's photos are carefully cropped for the television audiences, showing a white police officer arresting a distressed black man. But look at the wider view taken from the CNN account. Sgt. Crowley is far from the only police officer present, and not all of them are white.

******

Gates had just returned from a trip to China when a police officer responded to a call about a potential break-in at his home that was phoned in by a white woman. According to the police report, Gates was in the foyer when the officer arrived.

The officer asked Gates to "step out onto the porch and speak with me," the report says. "[Gates] replied, 'No, I will not.' He then demanded to know who I was. I told him that I was 'Sgt. Crowley from the Cambridge Police' and that I was 'investigating a report of a break in progress' at the residence.

"While I was making this statement, Gates opened the front door and exclaimed, 'Why, because I'm a black man in America?' "

According to the report, Gates initially refused to show the officer his identification, instead asking for the officer's ID. But Gates eventually did show the officer his identification that included his home address.

"The police report says I was engaged in loud and tumultuous behavior. That's a joke," Gates told The Root. "It escalated as follows: I kept saying to him, 'What is your name, and what is your badge number?' and he refused to respond. I asked him three times, and he refused to respond. And then I said, 'You're not responding because I'm a black man, and you're a white officer.'" -- CNN, 7/22/09

******

Big Media makes a big deal out of the typical stuff: Mild-mannered black university professor & family man hounded and handcuffed by big, bad police. What they conveniently leave out are picky things like: Why should Sgt. Crowley know or recognize who Professor Gates is? No police officer knows who is going to pull out a weapon - age and location of the suspicious person does not necessarily have a bearing. Why didn't Professor Gates simply cooperate from the start? After all, the Cambridge Police were there on the basis of thwarting a crime. Is that such a terrible thing? Especially since it was Professor Gates's home they were ultimately protecting?

Maybe folks (no race attachment) who exhibit unwarranted, arrogant, provocative behavior against the police should be put on a do-not-respond list for a couple of months, during which time the local police department get to ignore any calls for assistance to that residence. They don't want to stir a riot, after all.

(Photo: the arrest of Professor L. H. Gates, Jr.)

Yet Another Creepy Lib

Today must just be the day for me to run across all those anti-death-penalty, daisy peddlin,' love everyone, tree huggin' liberals who want to kill off major segments of population. I caught some of this on Peter Heck's show last week (or week before?), but it jumped up at me again in a Fox news headline today.

Turns out our beloved president's science czar (that's creepy right there, don't you think?), John Holdren, was co-author of a 1977 science textbook in which compulsory abortions and other draconian, malthusian measures were recommended (in a science textbook) to shrink the population. That's HUMAN population, folks.

******
But many of Holdren's radical ideas on population control were not brought up at his confirmation hearings; it appears that the senators who scrutinized him had no knowledge of the contents of a textbook he co-authored in 1977, "Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment," a copy of which was obtained by FOXNews.com. The 1,000-page course book, which was co-written with environmental activists Paul and Anne Ehrlich, discusses and in one passage seems to advocate totalitarian measures to curb population growth, which it says could cause an environmental catastrophe.

The three authors summarize their guiding principle in a single sentence: "To provide a high quality of life for all, there must be fewer people."

As first reported by FrontPage Magazine, Holdren and his co-authors spend a portion of the book discussing possible government programs that could be used to lower birth rates. Those plans include forcing single women to abort their babies or put them up for adoption; implanting sterilizing capsules in people when they reach puberty; and spiking water reserves and staple foods with a chemical that would make people sterile.

To help achieve those goals, they formulate a "world government scheme" they call the Planetary Regime, which would administer the world's resources and human growth, and they discuss the development of an "armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force" to which nations would surrender part of their sovereignty. -- "Obama's Science Czar Considered Forced Abortions, Sterilization as Population Growth Solutions," Fox News, 7/21/2009
******

Holdren is denying that he has supported such ideas and has expressed righteous anger that sources like FrontPage, Fox News, et. al. would dare conjure up such slander based on his contributions to a science textbook published in 1977. (Quick aside: ya' know, it's funny how libs get all upset when no one takes them seriously, but are then so quick to deny everything they have ever said and written when they are taken seriously. It's all so confusing. Do they want me to help them spread their liberal ideas or don't they?)

Folks, it gets clearer and clearer that Americans have allowed the inmates to create and then run the asylum.

I have a unique idea! Why don't all these malthusian wing-nuts get themselves together and drink their own tainted kool-aid (with apologies to a fine brand name)? They would be doing that which they believe everyone else should be doing: dying for population control. It makes wonderful sense to me.

Oh, wait. Whattya mean they've got "elitist" tatooed on their foreheads?

Obama Not Familiar With House Plan

In response to my earlier blog & e-mail, "Liberal Policy-Makers & Healthcare," Raleigh sent an article from The Heritage Foundation. I include the text in its entirety below. Go to the website, if interested, by clicking here: "Obama Not Familiar with House Bill."

While looking for the article Raleigh sent me, I ran across another alarming one: "Should Government Determine the Value of Human Life?" Peter Singer, Princeton bioethics (using the term "ethics" loosely) professor & philosopher, wrote an article for New York Time's Magazine, "Why We Must Ration Health Care." (Singer also advocates infanticide, proposing that abortion be made legal for 28 days after birth, in order to allow parents to decide whether to keep an "imperfect" child.)

When I began sending various e-mails, it was for the tongue-in-cheek purpose of getting the liberal message out since they believe that that is what is holding them back from greater political success. I contend that getting the liberal message out will generate the opposite effect, so I am happy to help them out.

But it is not all fun and games. Combatting the left is not a hobby; it is a fight for life!

Keep the message going!


----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 11:14 AM
Subject: RE: Liberal Policy-Makers & Healthcare

Chuck, What is scary is Obama of his own admission isn't aware of what is in his health bill. Ouch! SEE Below. Raleigh

Obama Admits He’s “Not Familiar” With House Bill
With the public’s trust in his handling of health care tanking (50%-44% of Americans disapprove), the White House has launched a new phase of its strategy designed to pass Obamacare: all Obama, all the time. As part of that effort, Obama hosted a conference call with leftist bloggers urging them to pressure Congress to pass his health plan as soon as possible.

During the call, a blogger from Maine said he kept running into an Investors Business Daily article that claimed Section 102 of the House health legislation would outlaw private insurance. He asked: “Is this true? Will people be able to keep their insurance and will insurers be able to write new policies even though H.R. 3200 is passed?” President Obama replied: “You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about.” (quote begins at 17:10)

This is a truly disturbing admission by the President especially considering that later in the call, Obama promises yet again: “If you have health insurance, and you like it, and you have a doctor that you like, then you can keep it. Period.” How can Obama keep making this promise if he is not familiar with the health legislation that is being written in Congress? Details matter.

We are familiar with the passage IBD sites, and as we wrote last week, the House bill does not outright outlaw private individual health insurance, but it does effectively regulate it out of existence. The House bill does allow private insurance to be sold, but only “Exchange-participating health benefits plans.” In order to qualify as an “Exchange-participating health benefits plan,” all health insurance plans must conform to a slew of new regulations, including community rating and guaranteed issue. These will all send the cost of private individual health insurance skyrocketing. Furthermore, all these new regulations would not apply just to individual insurance plans, but to all insurance plans. So the House bill will also drive up the cost of your existing employer coverage as well. Until, of course, it becomes so expensive that your company makes the perfectly economical decision to dump you into the government plan.

President Obama may not care to study how many people will lose their current health insurance if his plan becomes law, but like most Americans, we do. That is why we partnered with the Lewin Group to study how many Americans would be forced into the government “option” under the House health plan. Here is what we found:

Approximately 103 million people would be covered under the new public plan and as a consequence about 83.4 million people would lose their private insurance. This would represent a 48.4 percent reduction in the number of people with private coverage.

About 88.1 million workers would see their current private, employer-sponsored health plan go away and would be shifted to the public plan.

Yearly premiums for the typical American with private coverage could go up by as much as $460 per privately insured person, as a result of increased cost-shifting stemming from a public plan modeled on Medicare.

It is truly frightening that the President of the United States is pressuring Congress in an all out media blitz to pass legislation that he flatly admits he has not read and is not familiar with.

President Obama owes it to the Americans people to stop making promises about what his health plan will and will not do until he has read it, and can properly defend it in public, to his own supporters.

Truly, Ignorance Is Bliss

Ya' know, I am actually jealous of my fellow Americans who have nothing more to be concerned about than how well President Obama tossed the ceremonial first pitch at the All-Star game or how he was attired while doing it.

******

One might have thought that the most cringy part of President Barack Obama's performance on the mound before last week's All Star game was that his delivery of the first pitch had absolutely no mustard on it. At least he didn't bounce it to the plate.
But now the controversy is not about his weak-sauce sinker, but his baseball attire. The fashion community, and by that we mean anyone wearing clothes, says the president was wearing mom jeans — high-waisted, baggy demin favored by, moms? Actually, they didn't seem that bad — no pleats or elastic waist band, anyway. But when the president felt compelled to address the pressing matter Tuesday, he issued no apologies. (Jeff Thomas, "The Star Report," Silicon Valley Mercury News, 7/21/09)

******

With economic upheavals, a government spinning & spending out of control, North Korea & Iran promising to nuke their favorite enemies, all kinds of policy-makers threatening the planet with forced abortion & euthanasia, and every other type of apocolyptic scenario imagineable unfolding, it must be nice to blissfully ignore all that and, instead, express such concern over a ceremonial pitch and clothing.

Alas, I am cursed: I am not ignorant enough.

Liberal Policy-Makers & Healthcare

I have had supporters of government healthcare criticize me and other conservatives for describing the probable negative results: higher taxes, fewer personal choices and freedoms, poorer care, rationed care, and so on. "Fear mongering exaggerations!" the libs like to respond, indicating once again how well-researched their conclusions usually are. So I have an idea: let's skip the conservative "fear mongering tactics" and jump right over to the liberal poicy-makers themselves...

******
Discrimination against the elderly when it comes to healthcare is not discrimination — at least not to a key member of the Barack Obama administration. Ezekiel Emanuel is director of the Clinical Bioethics Department at the U.S. National Institutes of Health and an architect of Obama's healthcare reform plan. He is also the brother of Rahm Emanuel, Obama's White House chief of staff.
Express Riders, the blog of conservative businessman and philanthropist Foster Friess, reports that Ezekiel Emanuel has written that health services should not be guaranteed to "individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens." He also stated, "An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia," according to Friess' site.
Friess also points to an equally troubling article co-authored by Emanuel, which appeared in the medical journal The Lancet in January. It read in part: "Unlike allocation [of healthcare] by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination. Every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years. Treating 65-year-olds differently because of stereotypes or falsehoods would be ageist; treating them differently because they have already had more life-years is not."
Friess asks: "Are these the values we want undergirding our healthcare system?" ("No Health Services for Dementia Patients?" Newsmax, 7/20/09)
******
Whether we want these values or not, these are the values we will get. The liberal policy-makers are telling us plainly themselves. What is there not to believe? But I'll bet that if President Obama is ever asked about this in a press conference, he would look into the cameras with his straight, "trust me" face and tell every American watching and listening that denying care to anyone will never happen.

So who are you going to believe?

Bumper Sticker Conservatism - Health Care

Source: www.PatriotDepot.com

WWSD?

What would Sotomayor do (WWSD)?

In 1844, the $7 million estate of Stepehn Girard (a French deist) was to be used to establish an orphanage and school in Philadelphia with the stipulation that no religious influence be allowed. The city rejected the proposal. Their lawyers declared, "The plan of education proposed is anti-christian, and therefore repugnant to the law... The purest principles of morality are to be taught. Where are they found? Whoever searches for them must go to the source from which man derives his faith - the Bible... There is an obligation to teach what the Bible alone can teach, viz. a pure system of morality."

The case went before the U.S. Supreme Court, Vidal v Girard's Executors, 43 U.S. 126, 132. Unanimous decision: "Christianity... is not to be maliciously and openly reviled and blasphemed against, to the annoyance of believers or the injury of the public... It is unnecessary for us, however, to consider the establishment of a school or college, for the propogation of... Deism, or for any other form of infidelity. Such a case is not to be presumed to exist in a Christian country... Where can the purest principles of morality be learned so clearly or so perfectly as from the New Testament? ...It is also said, and truly, that the Christian religion is a part of the common law of Pennsylvania."

Blows you away, doesn't it?

WWSD?

Media Favoritism

What a difference Big Media favoritism can make. It has been a long time since Big Media has offered up such glowing recommendations for a Supreme Court nominee. Perhaps if they had not already crowned Hillary Clinton with the title, Sonia Sotomayor just might be the "smartest woman in the world." Even without this accolade, however, Big Media paints their nominee as brilliant for her responses to this tough confirmation process.

Now this would be just peachyif it were not for Big Media's clear hypocrisy. Sotomayor is just glowingly brilliant for her abilities to not answer specific questions about potential future legal rulings. According to legal experts I have read, and judges I have heard, this is appropriate. How impartial can a judge be if he/she indicates predetermined judgments before hearing a case? So I can understand the nature of Sotomayor's answers and comments. (Although, I also comprehend that judges must rule on established law, so some cases are going to be pretty much predetermined anyway. And certainly Sotomayor could indicate clearly whether she is going to apply constitutional law or not, which is the point of the Supreme Court. Besides, I can probably already guess what her ruling is going to be on certain cases without her premature declarations. I doubt that her ideology is going to shift any moving from the Appellate Court to the Supreme Court.)

An Associated Press article from 7/15/09 reads, "The appeals court judge, 55, avoided weighing in on any major issue that could come before her as a justice, instead using legal doctrine, carefully worded deflections and even humor to ward off efforts to pin her down." Brilliant! Remarkable! Applaudable! What a judicial heroine we have on our hands.

Except - and here is where just a wee, tiny bit of hypocrisy creeps in - every Supreme Court justice nominee has necessarily done the same thing! As indicated by those in the system, it is the proper thing to do. Yet, when the most recent nominees have done it, Big Media has gone ballistic. "They're not qualified! They can't render legal decisions! They are incompetent! They won't answer a straight question!" Ad nauseum. But not this time. This time, the nominee is just brilliant as she deflects those specifics that should not be declared without a real case.

Amazing! Simply amazing!

Need to Choose Sides

"America was founded by people who believed that God was their rock of safety. I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side, but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side." - Ronald Reagan, Second Inaugural Address, 1/25/1984

National Emergencies

Except for a brief period following September 11, 2001, liberals and Democrats (if there is any real distinction) combined to protest about every action proposed to defend the nation against further attack. Remember how the obvious reality that America faced a national emergency was derided, and reasonable steps taken to safeguard our shores were challenged every step of the way? Not even a national emergency of 9/11 magnitude warranted "threats" to what the liberal-Democrat establishment perceived as constitutional freedom.

That was then, this is now.

National emergencies are now in style and responding to them as such is the current fashion. Government cannot do enough to stare down our national emergencies, and every policy enacted is welcomed with open arms by the left. Case in point... After listing how the BHO administration is standing up to every special interest group - owners, stockholders, bondholders, Wall Street "vultures," car dealers, suppliers, pensioners, environmentalists, and labor - Tom Walsh of the Detroit Free Press applauds the actions that have been taken to save the auto industry. Why? Well, in his own words...

*****
So Obama's auto rescue commandos have proven to be pragmatic, tough, nonideological. God figure. And if at times they seem callous and a bit pushy, think of this as a national emergency, equivalent to a major war. During World War II, U.S. citizens put up with things we'd never tolerate in peacetime. Today, in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, we can tolerate a lot, too - assuming things revert to "normal." (Tom Walsh is an auto columnist for the Detroit Free Press)
*****

And then there is Professor Al Gore comparing the fight to stop the global warming threat to World War II. National emergency.

Economy: national emergency. Global warming: national emergency. Government must do anything and everything, irrespective of Constitutional boundaries, to face these national emergencies head on. Islamic terrorist threats capable of massacring thousands of American citizens in one stroke? Naw, no national emergency there. Not even a war; just a series of legal actions to be handled in some court rooms.

Fascinating.

Health Care Flow Chart

Here it is... the liberal Democrat health care plan explained*. Aren't you glad that our federal government is fixing our ["broken"] health care system? I just cannot wait for its implementation in the USSA.

Click here for a PDF version. At least the graphic will be clearer.

* Flow chart provided by the ranking House Republican, Rep. Kevin Brady.

Corporate Green

This has been - and still is - my suspicion about all the "green" talk coming from most corporations. I certainly do not mind businesses responding to customer wants & needs, nor do I mind businesses that try to be the best stewards possible, but I do hate to see everyone merely steamrolled by the dangerous political nonsense called global warming.

The Logic of Dems

Great observation from my brother, Douglas. So sadly true.


******
Mind boggling. :-)

Here is a quote from the *mayor* of Boston with regards to the *governor* cutting funds for the *Boston* zoo."This is just another bad decision on budget cuts,” Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino told the Globe. “It's a great resource for the community. The zoo is an inexpensive place to spend a day in tough economic times."

So, let me rephrase what he is saying to make it crystal clear how he thinks..."This is just another bad decision on state budget cuts made by the governor of the state," Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino told the Globe. "The Boston zoo is a great resource for the Boston community (and not necessarily for the other residents of our state). The zoo (with state wide funds provided by the other residents of our fine state who never get the chance to enjoy our zoo) is an inexpensive place for Bostonians to spend a day in tough economic times (as long as it is paid for by the rest of the citizens of Mass. in these tough economic times, they don't deserve a break)."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,531650,00.html?test=latestnews

******

Mind boggling, indeed. Thanks, Douglas!

Using Public Transportation

I just submitted my latest thoughts on saving the planet to some of my local newspapers. Maybe my readers here can use the idea...

******

Dear Editor,

As a new school year rapidly approaches, I have been thinking of sacrifices we must make in order to save the planet. What better places to begin than in our schools? Advocates of policies that reduce global warming have been calling for mandatory use of public transportation for some time now. We have a lack of this in our smaller towns and communities, except in the area of public school transportation. Therefore, it logically follows that private student vehicles be prohibited on campus and that all students be required to ride the school bus provided, thus eliminating needless carbon emissions. In light of the alarms being raised by Professor Al Gore and others, it is critical that we make such sacrifices.

“Wait a minute!” I can hear readers exclaim. “They can’t tell me what to do!” I beg to differ. If we allow our Senators to pass the cap-and-trade bill that has already made it through the House, we are inviting our federal government to tell us: what cars to drive, where to set our thermostats, when to run our heat and a.c., what energy sources to use, what food to eat and how to cook it, and other areas of our lives I have yet to contemplate or that they have yet to add to this growing bill. Representative Nancy Pelosi (D - Calif.) has let Americans know that “every aspect of our lives must be subjected to an inventory” in order to combat global warming. Based on their promises, I would say that telling us what to do is exactly what our government has in mind.

By the way, area students, I doubt that any of you will be considered elitist enough to be allowed to escape the consequences of cap-and-trade and other global warming legislation. This isn’t Hollywood, you know.
******

Sacrifice is what it's all about!

The American Pied Piper

'A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.' -- Thomas Jefferson

What Happened to Moral Relativism?

Every informed conservative across America knew what was going to happen as soon as SC Gov. Mark Sanford admitted to an adulterous affair: every liberal across the fruited plains would be pointing out the devastation of his immorality. Well, the governor should suffer devastating consequences. His action was immoral and unconscionable.

However, when conservative-bashing columnists like Leonard Pitts, Jr., go to great pains to express moral outrage, it is little more than laughable hypocrisy. Liberals are the kings & queens of moral relativism. What basis do they have to judge Sanford? He was pursuing, after all, the course of action that seemed right to him. After all, this has been the course pursued by Clinton, Edwards, et. al.

Now, however, a politician engaging in an affair, deception, lies, and whatever other moral impropriety is a problem to liberal journalists, columnists, & bloggers who are now calling for his removal from office. We can only speculate why that would possibly be.

Nevertheless, Sanford still has potential in his political life. He can always move into the Democrat party where, as Limbaugh fondly observes, immorality becomes a resume enhancer.

Remembering Our Foundation

"Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us."

"By renouncing the Bible, philosophers swing from their moorings upon all moral subjects... It is the only correct map of the human heart that ever has been published."

"The only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid in religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty."

-- Benjamin Rush (1746-1813), physician & political leader, member of the Continental Congress, & signer of the Declaration of Idependence

Glorious Fourth!

Once again we have the joyful privilege to celebrate our nation’s heritage of independence, freedom, and liberty. Every time I study the events surrounding our nation’s founding, I grow more and more amazed at the wisdom and foresight of our Founders. Instead of establishing yet another monarchy or some such form of intrusive government, they handed the power of government to the citizens of this land. They did this with stern warnings that the government they established could be sustained only to the extent that the citizens honored the foundation upon which they built this Constitutional Republic. That foundation is the moral law of the Judeo-Christian faith. The notion of the kind of “separation of church and state” being promoted in our day was completely foreign to our wise Founders. Referring to the day that the Continental Congress approved the wording of the Declaration of Independence, John Adams wrote to his wife: “The second day of July, 1776, will be a memorable epoch in the history of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to Almighty God. It ought to be solemnized with pomp, shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of the continent to the other, from this time forward forever.”

To a person, our Founders predicted what would happen to this grand republic if the foundation upon which it is laid is removed. As it is dismantled bit by bit, we see the accuracy of their predictions taking place in our own day. I do not suggest that my fellow Americans who are atheist or some form of secular humanist are inherently evil people. Most are great folks with extremely decent character. But they have no basis for moral discernment. They do make moral discernments, but when they do, they must necessarily borrow from the same moral law upon which our Founders built this republic. Even then, however, we continue to see their moral relativism side more and more with the immoralists who seek to dismantle the fabric that has kept us together as a nation that prizes the value of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Still, as long as we have a bit of our foundation left, we are able to commemorate the Fourth of July as a glorious day of deliverance. With this, I wish my fellow patriots a most Glorious Fourth!

Ahmadinejad Thanks Obama for Not Interfering

President Obama, the glorious leader of the free world, has been so careful to side step support for those risking their lives in protest against their totalitarian state and to make certain that the world knows that he is not interfering in Iranian affairs and handing Iranian leaders propoganda fodder, that the landslide-winning Iranian president has now come out and expressed his appreciation:

******
"I hope that you (Obama) will stop interfering in Iran's affairs and ask for forgiveness so that the Iranian people know," Ahmadinejad was quoted by the agency as saying, adding: "Mr. Obama made a mistake when he said that...We would like to know why he has fallen into the same trap by saying the same thing [former U.S. president George] Bush said." (The Financial, 6/26/09)
******

Yes, Mr. Obama deserves everyone's appreciation for keeping America safe from undeserved criticism. Saaalute!

Con Games

State Attorney General offices alert their citizens to con games and scams and provide educational material aimed at helping their citizens recognize some warnings that a solicitation might be a scam. Consider some of the red flags:

Con artists pressure potential victims to make a decision right away with no time to think it over. If you hesitate, the opportunity will be lost with no second chance.

Con artists pressure potential victims into paying for the service and/or providing sensitive personal information without providing a written contract.

Con artists deliver high pressure offers that promise high returns for no risk.

As BHO, his administration, and our Democrat Congress pitch their health care, climate change, and economic recovery proposals to the American people, do their techniques have a familiar ring to them?

The Indiana Attorney General site warns, "If you have any doubts, or if the offer made to you seems too good to be true, trust your instincts. Decline the offer and hang up immediately."

How Will You Pay for It?

"How will you pay for it?" This is the question I am going to ask each and every Congress person in my state concerning any proposed nationalized healthcare plan (ie, Obamacare). Before any of my elected representatives agree to any Obamacare plan, I want each and every one of them to explain to me the cost and how it will be paid for. And I want an answer that is clear, concise, and comprehensive. Think that's even remotely possible?

Here's what prompted me to think of this:
Overspending May Block Obamacare

Here is the text of my letter to my Congress-people:

*****

Dear (Senator)/(Representative):

Once again, my government is in a head-over-heels hurry to pass massive, expensive, and liberty limiting legislation and policy without allowing adequate time for vigorous debate. This time, it is health care legislation. I have three simple questions for you concerning health care legislation.

(1) How much will this health care legislation cost?

(2) How do you propose the cost of this health care legislation will be covered?

(3) Are you going to forego your current health care plan and join the one mandated for most Americans by the health care proposals being initiated and pushed by this administration?

Sincerely,

*****

Use it as you see fit.

Let Freedom Ring

Liberal freedom fighters (an obvious oxymoron as we shall see), led by supreme commander Obama, refrain from condemning the Iranian mullah regime and distinguishing good from evil in this clash between totalitarianism and dissent because they are not certain how this "vigorous debate" will all "play out." Here's a clue, folks: The brutalization of the protestors will continue to escalate until the dissent will be bloodily put down. And those brave, daring Iranians who have put their lives on the line will wonder in sad, dispirited amazement how the world's leading free nations abandoned them to the ravages of totalitarianism.

Moral relativists like Stephen Dick cower behind their supreme commander and support his every nuanced move. Writes Mr. Dick, "In the US, President Obama has taken a measured approach. He has questioned the results of the election but not separated the protestors and the mullahs into good and evil... Last week, the Republicans in the House offered up a useless resolution to back the Iranian protestors, but it served as a political thumb in the eye to Obama who wants to open up a dialogue with Tehran." (Kokomo Tribune, 6/25/09, p. A4) Later in his article, Mr. Dick goes on to make the typical liberal rant that this all America's fault anyway because we helped Mohammad Reza Pahlavi ascend to power in 1953 - all for nasty oil, of course. The lack of logic by those like Mr. Dick amazes me: Today's events in Iran are "America's fault," but we dare not intervene because they are Iran's problems, not ours.

This president, along with his adoring minions, is determined to ally himself with brutal totalitarian regimes and turn his back on allies and devoted freedom fighters. In just as confusing, tenuous, threatening times, an oppressed people rose up against their oppressors. The leader of the free world then did not fail them. Polish leader Lech Walesa writes, "When talking about Ronald Reagan, I have to be personal. We in Poland took him so personally. Why? Because we owe him our liberty. This can't be said often enough by people who lived under oppression for half a century, until communism fell in 1989." (Freedom Eden) He also said, "The Polish people, hungry for justice, preferred 'cowboys' over Communists."

Mr. Obama certainly does not have to worry about being mistaken for a "cowboy" as he stands on the sidelines waiting for it all to "play out."

(BTW, google has some of the lamest images of the Iranian protests imagineable. Amazing.)

Stop the Hate Crimes Bill

I have recently received warnings about the status of S. 909, "The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act." Although the actual bill no longer exists because it could not be passed in its existing form, there is concern that the legislation will be added as an amendment to another necessary bill. (Even though S. 909 does not exist as a formal bill, I will refer to this bill number simply for ease of reference).

There are two very major concerns about S. 909 legislation. First, it includes protection for "sexual orientation" but does not define what that means. For this reason, the bill was dubbed "the pedophile protection act." CitizenLink, a publication of Focus on the Family, notes, "Also concerning is the fact that House Democrats voted down an amendment to their bill that would have excluded pedophilia from the definition of 'sexual orientation.'"

Second, the broad, unspecific language of this legislation raises concerns that any speech, especially religious, that criticizes or condemns particular sexual behaviors will become treated as "hate speech." More info on these concerns is available at Operation Save America.

Members of leftist organizations are howling at such accusations and concerns, of course. Child molestation will never be legal and free speech will never be threatened, they tell us. I invite any interested reader to consider the track record of liberal "promises" when it comes to violating established moral and ethical boundaries. What they seek is a start so that they can continue to push their immoral agendas further and further into our lives. For instance, abortion began with emotional pleas about protecting innocent victims from having to bear a child resulting from rape or incest (which will likely become protected through "hate crime" legislation). It began with promises that abortions would be limited to the first trimester. Flash forward to the present: abortion is now demanded as a right for any woman at any time up to and including post-birth (infants born alive following an abortion attempt have been allowed to die through intentional neglect).

The last time I was privileged to host the Peter Heck Radio Talk Show, I raised the issue that the very arguments used to justify the legal standing of homosexual behavior would eventually be used to justify the legal standing of pedophile behavior and any form of adult-child sexual relationship. It does not seem possible to reasonable Americans, but this is exactly the tact being taken by those who are pressing their agenda through a variety of means. I invite you to read the responses of "porlaverdad3" at the MorganWrites blog.

Our Senators need to know that giving legal status to deviant sexual behavior is not acceptable. I urge you to contact your Senators about this. I include my draft of a letter that you can use below. You can find contact information for your Senator at senate.gov. Please take action.

*********

Dear Senator:

I request that you OPPOSE AND FILIBUSTER ANY "HATE CRIMES" AMENDMENT, which was until recently labeled S. 909. The original bill was so dangerously crafted that it could not be passed standing alone; instead, indications are that it will become a hidden amendment to another "must-move" bill.

This so-called "Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act" must be defeated. This amendment will mirror the House bill passed as H.R. 1913, which makes "sexual orientation," "gender," and "gender identity" federally-protected classes under the law, and thereby codifies protection of up to 547 types of sexually deviant behaviors, including but not limited to:

Incest - sex with one's offspring (a crime, of course)
Necrophilia - sexual relations with a corpse, also a crime
Pedophilia - sex with an underage child, another crime
Zoophilia - bestiality, a crime in numerous states
Voyeurism - a criminal offense in most states
Fronteurism - a man approaching an unknown woman and rubbing against her buttocks
Coprophilia - sexual arousal from feces
Urophilia - sexual arousal from urine

This legislation also begins to lay the legal foundation and framework to investigate, prosecute, and persecute anyone whose religious or secular speech and thought is based upon and reflects the truths found in religious texts or medical, psychiatric, and psychological studies.

S. 909 broadly defines "intimidation," thus a pastor's sermon or a doctor’s recommendation could be considered "hate speech" under this legislation if heard by an individual who then acts aggressively against persons based on any "sexual orientation." Prosecution could be based upon "conspiracy to commit a hate crime."

If you vote for this bill, you will be responsible for elevating pedophiles and other bizarre sexual orientations to unprecedented and unwise levels of protection. I believe that violence against another person should be prosecuted in accordance with appropriate law, BUT SEXUALLY DEVIANT BEHAVIOR SHOULD NOT BE ELEVATED AND PROTECTED BY LAW. Please OPPOSE AND FILIBUSTER any amendment similar to S. 909.

Sincerely,

[YOUR NAME]
[ADDRESS]

[CITY], [STATE] [ZIP]

*********

Assimilating Big Media

Government and Big Media are one. How nice that after eight years of adverarial relationship with the White House, Big Media can now cuddle up with an administration. I wonder what kind of floral arrangement they'll bring for the Mrs.?

"ABC turns programming over to Obama"