Free JavaScripts provided
by The JavaScript Source

AMERICA~LAND OF THE FREE~

AMERICA~LAND OF THE FREE~

MY RANTINGS AND RAVINGS ABOUT MY COUNTRY & OTHER THINGS GOING ON IN THE WORLD TODAY. ENJOY AND FEEL FREE TO COMMENT,OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, BUT IF YOU LEAVE BS IT WILL BE DELETED. THANKS FOR READING & LOOKING & HAVE A GREAT DAY! BLESS YOU ALWAYS.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Tuesday, August 11, 2009

Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, Waxman, ARE UN-AMERICAN NAZIS !



Hey, Nancy,Steny Hoyer,Henry Waxman,You want Swastika's, I will give you a Swastika. You communist pigs. The only UN-AMERICANS I SEE ARE "YOU" AND ALL YOUR DAMN CRONIES IN CONGRESS.
People will not stop expressing themselves, THIS IS A FREE COUNTRY, AND WE HAVE THE FREEDOM ON SPEECH TO EXPRESS OURSELVES.
You will nto take that away ! Not now, not ever ! You forget who you work for !!! America does not belong to you glorified creeps In Washington DC. American belongs to US...THE PEOPLE !

Nancy, YOU need to resign and take all your croonies with you.
You are slime. You do not care about America or its people. You are a sick indiviual, an old hippie with burned out brain cells from smoking too much pot and taking too many drugs. I bet you are on Prozac now ! WITH ALL THAT BOTOX IN YOUR UGLY FACE THAT WE THE TAXPAYERS HAVE PAID FOR IT'S NOT WONDER YOU NEED PROZAC.

You are obcessed with bringing down AMERICA ! WHY ????
You are 70 years old and it time for you to retire and get out of our lives.
You are the sorriest speaker America has ever had ! Obama is bad enough but YOU Nancy take the cake.
If you think for one minute that WE THE PEOPLE are going to sit back and let 535 MEMBERS OF CONGRESS Take over our lives then you have another thought coming women !! Americans are speaking out. And...it sure as hell not in favor of you.

This country is for the people, and by the people, and of the people, not for the congress and by the congress. You only represent us as citizens and if you cannot represent what the people want from their government and only what YOU want.
Get the hell out of government as you do not belong there.
YOU ARE SCUM !!!!






Labels: , ,

Sunday, August 09, 2009

OBAMA'S DEATH BILL~JUST SAY NO TO OBAMA AND HIS CRONIES












This health care bill sux ! It is totally disgusting that people in congress put such shit together like this. Unreal.
Obama and his cronies are heartless scum.
Rationing and more. CALL IT THE DEATH BILL !

READ THE BILL. READ THE BILL. SEE LINK BELOW.

Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!

Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!

Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)

Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.

Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.

Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.

Page 167: Any individual who doesn’t have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.

Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." Yes, it really says that.

• Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing.

Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?

• Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.

Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.

Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.

Thus far, the proposed legislation makes no mention of "Soylent Green", but congress still has some tinkering to do before the final product is ready

READ THE ENTIRE BILL THUS FAR HERE: Read it ! AND WEEP.
http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf

Labels: , , , , ,

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

OLD FOLKS NEED TO HURRY UP AND DIE, SO OBAMACARE CAN HELP YOUNGER FOLKS, SAYS NEW YORK TIMES









Is NYT Encouraging Old Folks to Give up and Die to Help Pay for Obamacare?

Hey, grandma, hurry up and die so that Obamacare can pay for healthcare for more worthy, younger folks. That seems to be the message that The New York Times is selling in order to smooth the waters for the nationalized healthcare system that president Obama is trying to peddle to us all.

The Times is running a series titled "Months to Live" in order to help spread the sort of end of life issues that are helpful to Obama's healthcare agenda, one of which seems to be the idea that elderly should forgo any sort of heroic measures to keep them alive so as not to waste those resources that might be able to go to younger, more vital patients.

In a July 8 article reporting on the end of life care afforded Catholic Nuns in Pittsford, New York, the Times hailed the "dignified" way that nuns end life there with particular emphasis on how many of them refuse extraordinary efforts to keep themselves alive. Apparently, the Times thinks we should emulate the nuns and just let ourselves die without trying too hard to keep on living.

But, even in its first few paragraphs the Times displayed several conflicting talking points one being that the nun that serves as the article's initial subject may be uninterested in life saving procedures, but her sister is definitely not of that same opinion. This tends to show that not everyone wants to just wither way and die without fighting to stay alive as the Times seems to be suggesting we should be.

The Times also tries to make a point on how many elderly people "are often overmedicated" and showcases how this nun refused most of the "23 medications not essential for her heart condition," but then adds that these medications were winnowed by a geriatrician. So, was she prescribed these medications or not? It isn't quite clear. This makes a poor case for the claim of overmedication and seems more like an assertion by the writer that is not germane to the case.

The Times goes on to describe how the sisters and several priests along with the church pay for this hospice-like care of those at the end of their lives, the story making it all seem like the perfect system. But one cannot help but realize that we are talking about a system built to serve a small handful of people with the support of the church behind them. How this financial burden can be translated to 300 millions of citizens is never addressed.

Misleadingly, the Times also tries to make it seem as if the church system being described quells any talk of both rationing of care and euthanasia of the elderly.

Laura L. Carstensen, the director of the Center on Longevity at Stanford University, says the convent setting calms the tendency for public policy discussion about end-of-life treatment “to devolve into a debate about euthanasia or rationing health care based on age.”

“Every time I speak to a group about the need to improve the dying process, somebody raises their hand and says, ‘You’re talking about killing old people,’ ” Dr. Carstensen said. “But nobody would accuse Roman Catholic sisters of that. They could be a beacon in talking about this without it turning into that American black-and-white way of thinking: Either we have to throw everything we’ve got at keeping people alive or leave them on the sidewalk to die.”


The problem with this rhetoric is that it denies the simple fact that should these concepts become federalized in a national healthcare system, then the patient's choice in the matter will be summarily dispensed with as rules and regulations prescribing procedures will take over.

In short, the second these ideas become the norm, government MUST by necessity of control begin to determine which citizens are "worth" saving and which aren't worth the efforts and should be denied services. And from there it won't be long before prescriptions of euthanasia for those "not worth" the costs of government largess will become de rigueur everywhere.

So, while the process of dying practiced by these nuns described in the Times might have something going for it, translating it to a nationalized healthcare system is fraught with eugenics styled evils.

But, if it soothes suspicions about Obamacare, why the Times is happy to oblige.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2009/07/13/nyt-encouraging-old-folks-give-die

Labels: , , , , , ,

Friday, October 17, 2008

VOTE NO TO OBAMA~PLEASE THINK BEFORE YOU VOTE~THIS IS DANGEROUS!

I can only hope and "pray" really hard that when people go to the polls on November 4the, 2008 that they ill think really hard about what is a stake in this very important election. It is not a white or black issue, it is a moral issue.

I know that the majority of Americans surely have to have some kind of normal brain up there. I know that all the worshippers of Obama are not the kind of folks that use the one God gave them. They are either blacks, nut cases or followers of one another...Like you know, just because he is black is why they are voting for him, or they are either, very uneducated or white trailer trash and are looking for a handout so they want have to get off their fat sorry asses and get a damn job.
You know the kind. Food stamps, welfare checks, WIC. Oh and the one ones that take kids in their homes as foster kids and get money from the government or the ones that keep having kids out of wedlock so they can get a larger welfare check every month. You get my point. It goes on and on and there are many. If any of this makes you mad then I am sorry. It is the truth. PROVE ME WRONG.!!

The house and the senate are totally out of control and they need to all be replaced.
If people would vote against every incumbant that they know to be corrupt it would be a much better group of people for a while at least until they get corrupted. LOL.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html
In the Wall Street Journal today.

A Liberal Supermajority
Get ready for 'change' we haven't seen since 1965, or 1933.

If the current polls hold, Barack Obama will win the White House on November 4 and Democrats will consolidate their Congressional majorities, probably with a filibuster-proof Senate or very close to it. Without the ability to filibuster, the Senate would become like the House, able to pass whatever the majority wants.

Though we doubt most Americans realize it, this would be one of the most profound political and ideological shifts in U.S. history. Liberals would dominate the entire government in a way they haven't since 1965, or 1933. In other words, the election would mark the restoration of the activist government that fell out of public favor in the 1970s. If the U.S. really is entering a period of unchecked left-wing ascendancy, Americans at least ought to understand what they will be getting, especially with the media cheering it all on.

The nearby table shows the major bills that passed the House this year or last before being stopped by the Senate minority. Keep in mind that the most important power of the filibuster is to shape legislation, not merely to block it. The threat of 41 committed Senators can cause the House to modify its desires even before legislation comes to a vote. Without that restraining power, all of the following have very good chances of becoming law in 2009 or 2010.

- Medicare for all. When HillaryCare cratered in 1994, the Democrats concluded they had overreached, so they carved up the old agenda into smaller incremental steps, such as Schip for children. A strongly Democratic Congress is now likely to lay the final flagstones on the path to government-run health insurance from cradle to grave.

Mr. Obama wants to build a public insurance program, modeled after Medicare and open to everyone of any income. According to the Lewin Group, the gold standard of health policy analysis, the Obama plan would shift between 32 million and 52 million from private coverage to the huge new entitlement. Like Medicare or the Canadian system, this would never be repealed.

The commitments would start slow, so as not to cause immediate alarm. But as U.S. health-care spending flowed into the default government options, taxes would have to rise or services would be rationed, or both. Single payer is the inevitable next step, as Mr. Obama has already said is his ultimate ideal.

- The business climate. "We have some harsh decisions to make," Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned recently, speaking about retribution for the financial panic. Look for a replay of the Pecora hearings of the 1930s, with Henry Waxman, John Conyers and Ed Markey sponsoring ritual hangings to further their agenda to control more of the private economy. The financial industry will get an overhaul in any case, but telecom, biotech and drug makers, among many others, can expect to be investigated and face new, more onerous rules. See the "Issues and Legislation" tab on Mr. Waxman's Web site for a not-so-brief target list.

The danger is that Democrats could cause the economic downturn to last longer than it otherwise will by enacting regulatory overkill like Sarbanes-Oxley. Something more punitive is likely as well, for instance a windfall profits tax on oil, and maybe other industries.

- Union supremacy. One program certain to be given right of way is "card check." Unions have been in decline for decades, now claiming only 7.4% of the private-sector work force, so Big Labor wants to trash the secret-ballot elections that have been in place since the 1930s. The "Employee Free Choice Act" would convert workplaces into union shops merely by gathering signatures from a majority of employees, which means organizers could strongarm those who opposed such a petition.

The bill also imposes a compulsory arbitration regime that results in an automatic two-year union "contract" after 130 days of failed negotiation. The point is to force businesses to recognize a union whether the workers support it or not. This would be the biggest pro-union shift in the balance of labor-management power since the Wagner Act of 1935.

- Taxes. Taxes will rise substantially, the only question being how high. Mr. Obama would raise the top income, dividend and capital-gains rates for "the rich," substantially increasing the cost of new investment in the U.S. More radically, he wants to lift or eliminate the cap on income subject to payroll taxes that fund Medicare and Social Security. This would convert what was meant to be a pension insurance program into an overt income redistribution program. It would also impose a probably unrepealable increase in marginal tax rates, and a permanent shift upward in the federal tax share of GDP.

- The green revolution. A tax-and-regulation scheme in the name of climate change is a top left-wing priority. Cap and trade would hand Congress trillions of dollars in new spending from the auction of carbon credits, which it would use to pick winners and losers in the energy business and across the economy. Huge chunks of GDP and millions of jobs would be at the mercy of Congress and a vast new global-warming bureaucracy. Without the GOP votes to help stage a filibuster, Senators from carbon-intensive states would have less ability to temper coastal liberals who answer to the green elites.

- Free speech and voting rights. A liberal supermajority would move quickly to impose procedural advantages that could cement Democratic rule for years to come. One early effort would be national, election-day voter registration. This is a long-time goal of Acorn and others on the "community organizer" left and would make it far easier to stack the voter rolls. The District of Columbia would also get votes in Congress -- Democratic, naturally.

Felons may also get the right to vote nationwide, while the Fairness Doctrine is likely to be reimposed either by Congress or the Obama FCC. A major goal of the supermajority left would be to shut down talk radio and other voices of political opposition.

- Special-interest potpourri. Look for the watering down of No Child Left Behind testing standards, as a favor to the National Education Association. The tort bar's ship would also come in, including limits on arbitration to settle disputes and watering down the 1995 law limiting strike suits. New causes of legal action would be sprinkled throughout most legislation. The anti-antiterror lobby would be rewarded with the end of Guantanamo and military commissions, which probably means trying terrorists in civilian courts. Google and MoveOn.org would get "net neutrality" rules, subjecting the Internet to intrusive regulation for the first time.

It's always possible that events -- such as a recession -- would temper some of these ambitions. Republicans also feared the worst in 1993 when Democrats ran the entire government, but it didn't turn out that way. On the other hand, Bob Dole then had 43 GOP Senators to support a filibuster, and the entire Democratic Party has since moved sharply to the left. Mr. Obama's agenda is far more liberal than Bill Clinton's was in 1992, and the Southern Democrats who killed Al Gore's BTU tax and modified liberal ambitions are long gone.

In both 1933 and 1965, liberal majorities imposed vast expansions of government that have never been repealed, and the current financial panic may give today's left another pretext to return to those heydays of welfare-state liberalism. Americans voting for "change" should know they may get far more than they ever imagined.

Labels: , , , , ,

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Fed takes fresh steps to battle credit crisis

Fed takes fresh steps to battle credit crisis
Action intended to ‘expand significantly’ the availability of cash


Sept. 29, 2008
WASHINGTON - The Federal Reserve and foreign central banks moved Monday to pump billions of dollars to cash-strapped banks at home and abroad in a dramatic bid to break through a credit clog and spur lending.

The Fed said the action is intended to “expand significantly” the cash available to financial institutions, its latest effort to relieve the worst credit crisis since the Great Depression.

The goal is to boost the amount of quick cash available to banks and other financial institutions so that they’ll feel more confident and inclined to lend not only to each other but also to people and businesses.

Credit is the economy’s lifeblood. The global credit clog — which started a year ago and grew much more severe in the past few weeks — has made it increasingly difficult for people and businesses to borrow money. The crisis — if it persists — could plunge the economy into a recession, President Bush and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke have warned.

The Fed action came hours before the House defeated a $700 billion financial bailout plan, ignoring urgent pleas by Bush and Bernanke to move swiftly.

The plan was designed to break through a dangerous credit clog that has threatened to freeze up the entire financial system and throw the economy into a recession. At the heart of the plan, the government would buy bad mortgages and other dodgy debts held by banks and other financial institutions. By getting those rotten assets off their books, financial institutions should be in a better position to raise capital and boost lending, supporters contend.

The Fed’s action on Monday expands programs already in place. It is unclear whether it will break through the credit bottlenecks. Its previous actions — including steps along these lines — have provided relief, but haven’t halted the crisis.

Against this backdrop, central banks will continue to work closely and are prepared to take “appropriate steps as needed” to ease the crisis and get banks lending again, the Fed said.

On Wall Street, stocks dropped sharply even after the Fed’s announcement. The Dow Jones industrials plunged 777 points — their largest point drop ever — or almost 7 percent. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index declined 8.51 percent and the technology-heavy Nasdaq composite index fell 9.14 percent.

Under one new step, the Fed will boost the amount of 84-day cash loans available to U.S. banks. The Fed is increasing the amount to $75 billion, up from the current $25 billion starting on Oct. 6. Banks bid on a slice of the loans at an auction.

That move will triple the supply of 84-day loans to $225 billion, from $75 billion, the Fed said.

Meanwhile, the Fed will continue to make $75 billion worth of shorter, 28-day loans available to banks.

All told, the total amount of cash loans — 84-day and 28-day — available to banks will double to $300 billion from $150 billion, the Fed said.

Moreover, the Fed made an extra $330 billion available to other central banks. That boosted to $620 billion the total amount available to the central bank through currency “swap” arrangements, where dollars are traded for their currencies. That total is up from $290 billion previously being made available through such arrangements.

The Bank of Canada, the Bank of England, the Bank of Japan, the European Central Bank, the Swiss National Bank and the central banks of Denmark, Norway, Australia and Sweden are involved in those swap arrangements.

“We are experiencing a massive credit implosion,” said T.J. Marta, a fixed-income strategist at RBC Capital Markets.

The move comes as the U.S. financial meltdown’s tendrils have ensnared banks in Britain, the Benelux and Germany.

By pledging to provide “a very large” cash infusion, the Fed hopes the actions will “reassure financial market participants.”

Labels: , , ,