Obama's latest redistributionist ~ By David Limbaugh

David's column deals with the sad fact that ObamaCare is the Socialist's dream, and it somehow passed, despite all of the lies about it's cost... along with about everything else in it.

And now we find out that Donald Berwick, who will run the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, is a radical, "an Ivy League academic who loves wealth redistribution and believes that health care is an ideal vehicle to achieve it." If that isn't a bit of hard medicine to swallow, what is? Welcome to Obamaland. Just sayin'...

But as bad as Obama's lies were about the costs of his plan, many of us warned that a greater evil in Obamacare was its guaranteed path to reducing our freedoms. Ronald Reagan was not just issuing platitudes when he said, "One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. ... From here, it's a short step to all the rest of socialism."

No truer words were ever spoken, and you can be sure that Obama believes it, too, which is exactly why he misrepresented almost every aspect of his plan in order to get it passed – and even then, just barely. His real purpose, as many of us have been telling you ad nauseam, is to greatly increase the size and scope of government and government control and, in the process, further radically redistribute wealth. He's a socialist. These aren't just words. He really is.

As it turns out, we don't have to wait any longer to prove we were correct about this, too. Obama has nominated Donald Berwick to run the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. l discovered in research on my upcoming book that experts believe that under Obamacare, the role of the CMS will be greatly expanded to define the quality of health care for every insurance plan, set reimbursement rates for physicians in Medicare and Medicaid and decide how valuable certain treatments are. According to Robert M. Goldberg of the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest, Berwick, essentially, "will get control of the practice of medicine."

By David Limbaugh

Posted: May 14, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

We knew Obama was prevaricating when he told us his purpose to cram through Obamacare was to provide universal access to coverage and reduce costs, but how many people did he manage to fool? How many are still fooled?

He repeatedly complained that America spent more on health care than other nations "but wasn't any healthier." He grossly distorted the numbers of chronically uninsured. He lied about his support for a single-payer plan and in denying that the "public option" was a Trojan horse for such a plan. He misled us concerning his intention to federally fund abortions and the coverage of illegals.

He deceitfully insisted that he wouldn't interfere with the patient-doctor relationship, that patients could choose to keep their own plans, that his plan wouldn't lead to rationing and that it would increase the quality of care.

Perhaps his most cynical fraud was his line that he would not sign a bill that would add one single dime to the federal deficit. Along with the uninsured canard, this was his biggest selling point for Obamacare: Health care costs were skyrocketing, and he had the magic bullet to remedy that.

Well, we already have objective proof (courtesy of a delinquent Congressional Budget Office pronouncement) that this, too, was a lie.

Obama and congressional Democrats moved budgetary mountains (in the way David Copperfield moves mountains onstage) to create the CBO-supported illusion that his bill wouldn't increase federal budget deficits. By asking the CBO to make absurd assumptions and by borrowing from other mythical funds (Medicare), Obamacrats were finally able to make the numbers balance, just long enough to give Obama cover to sign the bill.

But less than two months after he signed the bill into law, the CBO, in response to Rep. Jerry Lewis' request for a rescoring based on realistic assumptions instead of the bogus ones Democrats submitted, has already admitted its estimate didn't take into account "discretionary" expenditures that will add some $115 billion worth of costs.

With the publication of this news, the administration is now making noise, threatening not to fund the bill unless Congress finds sufficient savings elsewhere to nullify that "unexpected" cost increase. Give me a break. Just how stupid can these people think we are? They knew about these false assumptions before Obama signed the bill, and they're not about to withdraw their wholesale endorsement for Obama's crowning legislative "achievement."

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Profits derived from your purchases
will help me to attend tea party rallies!

I'm so sick of being right ~ By Patrice Lewis

I just don't know how Patrice is so consistently right, but I am glad she is. It only means that I am right, too, as I always agree with her! But, like Patrice, I'm also getting so sick of being right.

But despite the awakening of the sleeping giant, many worry that through a series of nefarious tricks, Obama will steal the 2012 election and remain in power.


Do I think this is possible? Well, it would require a complete disregard and disdain for the will of the people, the Constitution and the ideal of limited government that made America the greatest nation in the history of humanity.


Do I think it's possible? I'm so sick of being right. Let's pray I'm wrong about this one.

By Patrice Lewis

Posted: March 27, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

There's a scene in the movie "Galaxy Quest" in which actors on a distant planet are spying on cute alien creatures that resemble children. The cynical Guy says, "Sure, they're cute now. But in a second they're gonna get mean. And they're gonna get ugly somehow. Then there's gonna be a million more of them." The other actors think he's crazy, but sure enough the cute aliens suddenly get mean, ugly and numerous. As the actors flee from the pursuing creatures, Guy gasps, "I'm so sick of being right!"

Despite the dire predictions over the last few months, politicians inexplicably refused to heed the majority of voters and passed this farce called health-care reform. For the moment we're stuck with it. Like Guy, I'm so sick of being right when my predictions keep coming true.

Unsurprisingly, a recent survey showed the favorable ratings of Pelosi and Reid have never been lower – 11 and 8 percent respectively. But this survey was most worrisome for a different reason – 36 percent (Pelosi) and 50 percent (Reid) of those responding "haven't heard enough" to make an informed opinion about two of the most influential politicians behind the passage of Obamacare.

Translated, this means a vast number of people are so self-anesthetized sitting on their butts watching "American Idol" or "Survivor" that they are unaware and totally ignorant of the world around them.

This ignorance includes the implications of what will happen now that the current administration – starring the apparently little-known but dynamic duo of Pelosi and Reid – voted in socialism on March 21 to the applause of Fidel Castro.

But unfortunately, these people who "haven't heard enough" also vote, and I'm going to hazard that most of them voted for Obama. Probably they were swayed by our president's handsome exterior and glib promises. They don't care that what he promised can't possibly happen without causing the economic and political destruction of our country.

Decades of entitlement mentality and liberal indoctrination in public schools have produced millions of Americans who believe everything from food to housing to education to employment are "rights" and should be provided for "free." Having never studied economics, they haven't learned that nothing is free. Someone must bear the costs.

And now these supporters are slobbering and drooling at the passing of Obamacare because hey, they'll get something for free, right? They don't realize that medical services will decrease. Or that taxes will skyrocket. Or that our country will go bankrupt. Or – get ready for it – that it's flagrantly unconstitutional. No, all they can see is that they'll be getting something for (cough) nothing.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Obama: This is what change looks like

I found this at WorldNetDaily, and have decided to post the full transcript as shown. I have added graphics for effect. Folks, it's time for some more TEA Parties! Someone please bring plenty of tar and feathers: There's at least 219 representatives that now deserve it.

'When faced with crisis, we did not shrink from our challenge'

Posted: March 22, 2010 ~ 2:10 am Eastern

© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Note: The following are remarks by President Barack Obama, Sunday night, March 21, 2010, in the wake of House passage of health-care reform.

Good evening, everybody. Tonight, after nearly 100 years of talk and frustration, after decades of trying, and a year of sustained effort and debate, the United States Congress finally declared that America's workers and America's families and America's small businesses deserve the security of knowing that here, in this country, neither illness nor accident should endanger the dreams they've worked a lifetime to achieve.

Tonight, at a time when the pundits said it was no longer possible, we rose above the weight of our politics. We pushed back on the undue influence of special interests. We didn't give in to mistrust or to cynicism or to fear. Instead, we proved that we are still a people capable of doing big things and tackling our biggest challenges. We proved that this government -- a government of the people and by the people -- still works for the people.

I want to thank every member of Congress who stood up tonight with courage and conviction to make health care reform a reality. And I know this wasn't an easy vote for a lot of people. But it was the right vote. I want to thank Speaker Nancy Pelosi for her extraordinary leadership, and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn for their commitment to getting the job done. I want to thank my outstanding Vice President, Joe Biden, and my wonderful Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, for their fantastic work on this issue. I want to thank the many staffers in Congress, and my own incredible staff in the White House, who have worked tirelessly over the past year with Americans of all walks of life to forge a reform package finally worthy of the people we were sent here to serve.

Today's vote answers the dreams of so many who have fought for this reform. To every unsung American who took the time to sit down and write a letter or type out an e-mail hoping your voice would be heard -- it has been heard tonight. To the untold numbers who knocked on doors and made phone calls, who organized and mobilized out of a firm conviction that change in this country comes not from the top down, but from the bottom up -- let me reaffirm that conviction: This moment is possible because of you.

Most importantly, today's vote answers the prayers of every American who has hoped deeply for something to be done about a health care system that works for insurance companies, but not for ordinary people. For most Americans, this debate has never been about abstractions, the fight between right and left, Republican and Democrat -- it's always been about something far more personal. It's about every American who knows the shock of opening an envelope to see that their premiums just shot up again when times are already tough enough. It's about every parent who knows the desperation of trying to cover a child with a chronic illness only to be told “no” again and again and again. It's about every small business owner forced to choose between insuring employees and staying open for business. They are why we committed ourselves to this cause.

Tonight's vote is not a victory for any one party -- it's a victory for them. It's a victory for the American people. And it's a victory for common sense.

Now, it probably goes without saying that tonight's vote will give rise to a frenzy of instant analysis. There will be tallies of Washington winners and losers, predictions about what it means for Democrats and Republicans, for my poll numbers, for my administration. But long after the debate fades away and the prognostication fades away and the dust settles, what will remain standing is not the government-run system some feared, or the status quo that serves the interests of the insurance industry, but a health care system that incorporates ideas from both parties -- a system that works better for the American people.

If you have health insurance, this reform just gave you more control by reining in the worst excesses and abuses of the insurance industry with some of the toughest consumer protections this country has ever known -- so that you are actually getting what you pay for.

If you don't have insurance, this reform gives you a chance to be a part of a big purchasing pool that will give you choice and competition and cheaper prices for insurance. And it includes the largest health care tax cut for working families and small businesses in history -- so that if you lose your job and you change jobs, start that new business, you'll finally be able to purchase quality, affordable care and the security and peace of mind that comes with it.

This reform is the right thing to do for our seniors. It makes Medicare stronger and more solvent, extending its life by almost a decade. And it's the right thing to do for our future. It will reduce our deficit by more than $100 billion over the next decade, and more than $1 trillion in the decade after that.

So this isn't radical reform. But it is major reform. This legislation will not fix everything that ails our health care system. But it moves us decisively in the right direction. This is what change looks like.

Now as momentous as this day is, it's not the end of this journey. On Tuesday, the Senate will take up revisions to this legislation that the House has embraced, and these are revisions that have strengthened this law and removed provisions that had no place in it. Some have predicted another siege of parliamentary maneuvering in order to delay adoption of these improvements. I hope that's not the case. It's time to bring this debate to a close and begin the hard work of implementing this reform properly on behalf of the American people. This year, and in years to come, we have a solemn responsibility to do it right.

Nor does this day represent the end of the work that faces our country. The work of revitalizing our economy goes on. The work of promoting private sector job creation goes on. The work of putting American families' dreams back within reach goes on. And we march on, with renewed confidence, energized by this victory on their behalf.

In the end, what this day represents is another stone firmly laid in the foundation of the American Dream. Tonight, we answered the call of history as so many generations of Americans have before us. When faced with crisis, we did not shrink from our challenge -- we overcame it. We did not avoid our responsibility -- we embraced it. We did not fear our future -- we shaped it.

Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.

Be sure to check out johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Bloody Sunday, 2010: House OKs health bill

This is a very sad day, a Black Sunday in our history of this once free country. I can't believe that they are doing this to us. I know there will be many court cases, but I'm not holding my breath, folks. I know this could be the end of the Democrat majority come this November, but I'm not even sure that's will happen, either.

GOP: 'This is not about uninsured; it is about socialized medicine'

Leading up to today's vote, the legislation was widely and loudly opposed by a growing grassroots movement of Americans concerned that a government takeover of health care would violate both the U.S. Constitution and personal liberty.


Tens of thousands of people descended on Washington yesterday, lining up in circles around the Capitol, in protest of a President Obama's trillion dollar plan to take over health care across America.


Actor Jon Voight joined the protests and was blunt in his assessment of the plan and of Obama:


"It is a runaway train for him. And he has no way to put on the brakes. It is very clear that he will turn this country into a socialist America and his bullying and his arrogance can't stop," Voight said.

By Drew Zahn

Posted: March 21, 2010 ~ 10:45 pm Eastern

© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Democrats in the House needed 216 votes to pass the Senate's version of a sweeping health-care package Barack Obama has been pushing with all his presidential might.

They tallied 219.

Democrats hailed the vote as a landmark victory.

"Today is the day that is going to rank with the day we passed the civil rights bill in 1964," said Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich. "Today we're doing something that ranks with what we did with Social Security or Medicare. This is a day of which we can all be proud."

"This is an American proposal that honors the traditions of our country," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., summing up the initiative in one word: "opportunity."

Republicans in Congress, however, who voted in a solid block to oppose the measure that many argue grants the federal government far too much power at far too much of a cost, blasted the bill during the debate as the "mother of all unfunded mandates."

"The American people know you can't reduce health-care costs by spending $1 trillion or raising taxes by more than one-half trillion dollars. The American people know that you cannot cut Medicare by over one-half trillion dollars without hurting seniors," said Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich. "And, the American people know that you can't create an entirely new government entitlement program without exploding spending and the deficit."

Promoters of the bill have long touted the millions who will be added to health-care rolls and claimed that long-term, the trillion-dollar bill will eventually lead to deficit reduction.

Critics say that the bill's supporters have used accounting tricks to keep hundreds of millions of dollars in expenses out of the fine print. They cite several strikes against the reform attempt, from the cost of yet another taxpayer-funded entitlement to the general principle that nowhere in the U.S. Constitution – which sets limits on the federal government's powers – is there an authorization to force people to buy the health-insurance program a federal bureaucrat picks out.

Above all, Republicans countered Pelosi's contention that the health-care bill is "an American proposal that honors the traditions of our country."

"This debate is not about the uninsured; it's about socialized medicine," argued Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., on the House floor. "Your multi-trillion-dollar health-care bill continues the Soviets' failed Soviet socialist experiment. It gives the federal government absolute control over health care in America. … Today Democrats in this House will finally lay the cornerstone of their socialist utopia on the backs of the American people."

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Dawn of the Dems ~ By Erik Rush

It's incredible how much Erik and I think alike. I must say that I completely agree with what he has written about what the Democrats are doing to try to pass the ObamaCare legislation. It can NOT be for our own good, as they want people to believe. No, there is something very sinister about what has been going on in this last week. I really don't have any doubt about what I feel their plan is, but I will save that for a later post.

If we do not entirely lose our liberties over the next few years, eternal vigilance is the price we will have to pay to keep it; that and an abiding commitment to educating future generations as to how close we came to becoming the chattel of nidorous, amoral villains.

By Erik Rush

Posted: March 18, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

The desperation and mistrust currently observable amongst congressional Democrats would be pathetic if they did not actually wield substantial power. Like mindless creatures in a cult film featuring flesh-eating zombies, they are devouring their own, ritually sacrificing, extorting, bribing and bullying one another to pass the Senate health-care reform proposal, affectionately known as Obamacare.

Few Americans really understand that a bloodless coup is essentially taking place in Washington via these actions, nor how important this is to such as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and President Obama. Socialized medicine, this Foundation Stone of collectivism, is one they perceive will cement their power for all time.

While this is not entirely off the mark, its actualization is also far from guaranteed. The turmoil within their party – as opposed to the Republican opposition of which they have complained – still threatens to torpedo the legislation. Having passed, it is also eminently questionable as to whether it could survive the multitude of legal challenges that would be sure to arise.

The obsessive mania they are exhibiting is something I have seen before in drug addicts, every fiber of their being focused on obtaining the next fix.

Nancy Pelosi's consideration of the "deem-and-pass," or "self-executing rule," method of getting the health-care reform bill onto Obama's desk betrays her extreme distraction, and the fury with which Democratic leaders are pursuing passage of this obscenity in the face of overwhelming public opposition is the giveaway to their absolute fixation on it, as well as having abandoned all concern for the public trust and the constitutionality of their actions.

This sort of comportment, one may imagine, is not necessarily conducive to the most effective execution of design. In such frenzies, people can make mistakes. That addict might give his money to someone who wants to rip him off or harm him, or he might try to make a buy from an undercover cop. Such mistakes usually lead to decidedly undesirable outcomes.

Although President Obama is still having success in painting himself as a liberal Democrat who is merely advancing creative strategies for the good of all Americans, the scale of his deceptions continues to escalate. By his actions, he gave the lie to everything upon which he ran during his campaign; indeed, he is a master of fraud. To this columnist, it is truly remarkable that our president continues to be capable of standing before people, looking them in the eyes and twisting the most blatant, bizarre, iniquitous misrepresentations into practicable-sounding proposals – and doing so with a straight face.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Why I reject the government's 'help' ~ By Patrice Lewis

You know that Patrice is right on the money when you see that she quotes Ronald Reagan's quip about the nine most terrifying words in the English language: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help."

And I know that Patrice is right on the money, because I've had the "pleasure" to have to endure that wonderful, thoughtful, caring, loving government assistance back when my wife was sick.  One great example was one time when my wife had passed out, fell, and hit her head.  I called 911.  Police, fire, and ambulance arrived.  Wow, you wouldn't have believed the kind of questions and concern they had about "how" she fell. Fortunately, I had a witness there that could explain that my wife was in constant medical care, and passed out often. But the questions, the suspicions about me, and of course the fact that the emergency services involved all had to see our living room which was probably in need of cleaning at that time... So, I can easily relate exactly to what Patrice is discussing in this brilliant piece this morning. 

Yep, if you hear those words, "We're here to help," lock the doors or run!

We are decent, law-abiding, hard-working people. Our only crime is an intense mistrust of government (well-earned, I think) and a fierce desire to be left the hell alone. If we need help – and we sometimes do – we'll turn to those who are truly experts – family, friends, clergy and professionals. Not the government. Never the government.


I will never voluntarily allow a federal representative into my home to "help" me. But Obamacare can do the next best thing: seize control of my health care … and use it as a skeleton key to my front door.


Reagan perhaps said it best: The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help."

By Patrice Lewis

Posted: March 13, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Fourteen years ago, within a day or two of bringing our newborn first daughter home from the hospital, I received a scary phone call.

As with any new mother, having a baby took adjustment. I had a lot to learn. Fortunately my own mother was available to guide me through the maze of details. I also had the obligatory plethora of baby books, the advice of more experienced friends and a wonderfully supportive husband. All in all, I did fine.

Until the phone call.

At the time, we were a penniless, uninsured young couple struggling to start a home business. Our house was old (1875), our clothing and furnishing were second-hand, and our fiercely self-sufficient attitude raised a few eyebrows. But we were living the life we wanted – independent, rural and frugal.

In short, we were just the type of people the government finds suspicious.

The phone call that rocked my secure, happy little world was from a social worker inquiring how I was doing with our new baby. Upon hearing that I was fine, she asked if she could come over to show me proper parenting techniques and supply some helpful literature.

In a calm voice that disguised my pounding heart, I told her about the numerous baby-care books we owned, the helpful guidance I had from friends and family, and the breast-feeding support group I attended. When the social worker again offered to come over, this time to discuss post-partum depression and discipline techniques, I thanked her for her concern but politely declined.

I hung up and looked around our house, trying to see it from a stranger's viewpoint. We were apologetic enough with friends about the shabby condition of our home. What would a social worker think? Would she object to the lack of carpeting and the leaking roof? Would she dislike our wood stove (our only heat source) and complain about our single-pane windows? Would she question our decision to sleep with the baby? Would she approve of our plans to homeschool? Would she report to the authorities that we owned firearms?

I later learned it was standard practice for the hospital to ask social workers to check up on all new moms. Academically I appreciated the thought; but realistically I knew my husband and I had red flags all over us for being, well, different.

I don't like the idea of letting strangers into our home to "teach" me what they think I should know about raising kids. I didn't like it when we had our first baby, and I like it even less now. Our home life is our business, no one else's. Our children are healthy, happy, respectful and loving. We don't ask anyone to raise, educate or discipline them, just as we don't ask anyone to supply us with money, food or health care. All we ask is to be left alone.

But that's not what the government wants. The government wants to help. Purely from the goodness of its heart, don't you know.

We dodged the home-invasion bullet 14 years ago. But now we learn that helpful "home visitations" are part of the Obamacare package. This time the social workers won't be through our local hospital; they'll be federal bureaucrats who will judge whether we're living up to their requirements in raising our children and maintaining our health.

In other words, a bevy of perfect strangers will ask you to "voluntarily" allow them into the sanctity of your home to counsel you on how to live up to their standards rather than yours. Isn't that nice?

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Obamacare: Shortcut to socialism ~ By Henry Lamb

In this morning's commentary, Henry Lamb does an outstanding job explaining why ObamaCare is a shortcut to Socialism. Why do you think they want to get ObamaCare passed so quick? They know this could be their best chance, and maybe last chance, to "transform" America into a Marxist "utopia."

Perhaps the worst consequence of Obamacare is the expansion of a culture that depends upon government; that teaches that government can bestow rights, whether to health care, education, a living wage, or all the other so-called rights listed in the socialists' agenda.

Obamacare, if enacted, is indeed a shortcut to socialism.

By Henry Lamb

Posted: March 13, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

The official title is the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" (bill text here), popularly known as "Obamacare," passed by the Senate in the wee-hours of Christmas Eve. This 2,400-page monstrosity does what no enemy of America has ever been able to do: transform the land of the free into the home of the enslaved.

For the first time in the history of the nation, the federal government will force its citizens to purchase a product.

If Americans – through their elected officials – accept this principle, there is nothing to prevent the federal government from forcing its citizens to purchase any other product the government decides its citizens should have.

Nowhere does the Constitution authorize the federal government to require its citizens to purchase anything. The writers of this bill, however, conclude that even though insurance sales may be limited by each state, health insurance is still sold across state lines, and therefore is subject to federal regulations under the commerce clause, and that regulatory authority includes the authority to force citizens to purchase health insurance, whether they want it or not.

Individuals who fail to purchase the required insurance will be fined 1/12 of the annual cost of the required insurance with penalties "not to exceed 300 percent"(Chapter 48, Section 5000A, page 321 ff).

As bad as this legislation is, it is just the first step toward a much worse condition: government control of health care.

That's the plan.

Like a master snake-oil salesman, Obama loudly condemns the horrible insurance companies that increase rates and make profits, as the reason the government must act to provide relief to consumers.

He ignores the fact that increased rates are required to pay the increased costs of providing health-care service. He ignores the fact that much of the increased cost of service is the unintended consequence of government's involvement in health care.

There are two primary reasons why health care is unaffordable for some citizens: 1) the misguided belief of some that everyone has a "right" to health care; and 2) government's efforts to provide health care to everyone, including people who are in our country illegally.

In its effort to provide more health care to more people, the government has distorted the market, and the consequence has been removal of the cost factor from the consumer. In a free market, the consumer is king. It is the purchase that triggers the flow of money. Providers compete for the consumer's purchase by offering products and services at prices low enough to incite the consumer to act. Consumers shop and compare, denying dollars to providers whose price is too high or service is too low.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

A terrible dose of the wrong medicine ~ By Pat Boone

Pat Boone tells a story about his mama, a registered nurse, that took care of him and his siblings when they were kids. There were a few times the medicine wasn't even real medicine, and didn't work out too well. A good parody of the doctor-in-chief, President Obama, who has NO experience whatsoever.

And what are Dr. O's credentials? Medical experience? Zip. Economic expertise? Nada. Political experience? Precious little. Ever run a business? Nope. Brass and charm? Well, sure, he got elected president of the United States!

By Pat Boone

Posted: March 06, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Mama was a nurse. A registered, trained and able nurse.

When she married my Dad, she was doing what she loved, treating and helping sick and disabled people in Gainesville, Fla. Within seven or eight years after the marriage, she had a nursery full of her own kids to take care of – me, my younger brother, Nick, and sisters Margie and Judi.

Daddy moved the family to Nashville, and Mama became known throughout the community as the "go to" person in an emergency, even before a doctor or hospital was called. She kept the usual first-aid supplies on hand, and stayed attuned to the latest products and popular treatments. She was still a nurse – though freelance, and free to all.

I myself kept her pretty busy, in addition to all her household and motherly duties. Always athletic, I broke several bones, including my nose twice, and sometimes suffered from idiotic things kids come up with, like squatting for a minute or more, huffing and puffing, and then standing quickly, blowing air pressure against closed mouth and nose, hard, and seeing stars and crazy images–because of sudden pressure in the brain.

When I pulled that particular stunt, I was in our living room at home after school, and I fell to the floor in a violent seizure. Mama knew immediately I'd caused a small stroke, probably burst a (hopefully) little blood vessel in the brain, and that I needed to lie still and have cold compresses on my head. I recovered and went on my merry, adventurous way.

Another time, I fell out of a tree, about eight feet, landing on my back. It so knocked the wind out of my lungs that I thought for a couple of breathless minutes I was dying. My sisters screamed; Mama rushed to my side and pounded on my chest, getting heart and lungs operating again.

Brother Nick suffered painful burns when he sat on a "heat register," the grid through which the hot air flowed from the furnace, and another time when very hot soup fell in his lap. Sister Margie slipped off the fence over a hog pen we had and cut a gash over her eye; it scared all of us, but Mama quickly and expertly took care of it. Judi had her accidents too, but I've forgotten what they were. Our Mama was just a terrific nurse.

Still, even the best make errors in judgment sometimes. Mama was open to other people's theories, and several times when Nick and I had a serious flu, she made us take big tablespoons of a mixture of castor oil and turpentine. Somebody convinced her this was a strong healing agent, and somehow my brother and I both survived the flu and the medication.

Another time, I broke out in an itching rash all over my body. Mama diagnosed it as poison ivy and made me get into the bathtub, where she slathered my whole body with calamine lotion, a smelly, caking liquid – for . It was a tremendous ordeal for me, adding the foul mess to the unabated itching. And then we discovered I had three-day measles!

Here's my point. Our good Dr. Obama wants to take over the whole American health-care system, having come to his own diagnosis that we have a terrible, unacceptable mess … and he's Dr. Fixit. If it will cost trillions of dollars that we don't have and can never re-pay, so what? If the majority of our fellow citizens are happy with our present system, so what? If wealthy people from all over the world, who already have the health-care system Dr. O intends for us, go to great expense to fly here to get our medical care, so what? He knows what's best for us – and if he has to trample roughshod over Congress, ignore the economists and medical experts and the American citizens themselves, he's going to force this down our throats!

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

What part of 'Party of No' don't you understand? ~ By Ann Coulter

In her column, Ann Coulter explains why it is a great idea for the Republicans to be the party of NO! It is what the American people actually want, despite what Barack Obama is trying to say about it.

If Republicans were smart, they'd shock the world by sending in one of their most appealing members of Congress, who can speak clearly on health care – Sen. Jon Kyl, Rep. Steve King or Rep. Ron Paul.


Actually, if the Republicans were really smart, they'd send in 14-year-old Jonathan Krohn, who understands the free market better than most people in Washington. Of course, so does my houseplant.

By Ann Coulter

Posted: February 24, 2010 ~ 6:11 pm Eastern

© 2010

Inasmuch as Obamacare has a snowball's chance in hell of passing (but did you see how much snow they got in hell last week?), everyone is wondering what President Obama is up to by calling Republicans to a televised Reykjavik summit this week to discuss socializing health care.

At least they served beer at the last White House summit this stupid and pointless.

If the president is serious about passing nationalized health care, he ought to be meeting with the Democrats, not the Republicans.

Republicans can't stop the Democrats from socializing health care: They are a tiny minority party in both the House and the Senate. (Note to America: You might want to keep this in mind next time you go to the polls.)

As the Democratic base has been hysterically pointing out, both the House and the Senate have already passed national health care bills. Either body could vote for the other's bill, and – presto! – Obama would have a national health-care bill, replete with death panels, abortion coverage and lots and lots of new government commissions!

Sadly, as the president's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, has noted, the Democratic base is "@#$%^ retarded."

The reason massive Democratic majorities in Congress aren't enough to pass socialist health care is AMERICANS DON'T WANT SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!

In fact, you might say that the nation is in a boiling cauldron of rage against it. Consequently, a lot of Democrats are suddenly having second thoughts about vast new government commissions regulating every aspect of Americans' medical care.

Obama isn't stupid – he's not seriously trying to get a health-care bill passed. The whole purpose of this public "summit" with the minority party is to muddy up the Republicans before the November elections. You know, the elections Democrats are going to lose because of this whole health-care thing.

Right now, Americans are hopping mad, swinging a stick and hoping to hit anyone who so much as thinks about nationalizing health care.

If they could, Americans would cut the power to the Capitol, throw everyone out and try to deport them. (Whereas I say: Anyone in Washington, D.C., who can produce an original copy of a valid U.S. birth certificate should be allowed to stay.)

But the Democrats think it's a good strategy to call the Republicans "The Party of No." When it comes to Obamacare, Americans don't want a party of "No," they want a party of "Hell, No!" or, as Rahm Emanuel might say, "*&^%$#@ No!"

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Too proud for charity ~ By Patrice Lewis

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Patrice Lewis Posted: January 16, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 "Mom," asked my older daughter this week, "what does 'surreal' mean?" "It means something is so wild and crazy that it's hard to grasp," I replied, and used the following example to illustrate. A couple of weeks ago, I posted an article by James Turk on my blog that was one of the best analyses of socialism I've ever read. Ever. It was lean, no-frills, easy to understand, and absolutely true. The article prompted an English reader to post the following comment: "I am not sufficiently familiar with U.S. politics to know exactly what aspects are worrying James Turk. If he has in mind the president's proposals for health care, it is surely not 'socialism' to help poor people with insurance payments. I would call it charity." The comment left me sputtering. To me, this reader's definition of "charity" was surreal – something so wild and crazy that I could barely grasp how anyone could believe it. Naturally other readers couldn't let this comment go. "Charity requires the money being spent to be volunteered, not forcibly removed from the donators," someone replied. In other words, if a thug points a gun at you in a dark alley to steal your money for someone else, are we supposed to congratulate him on his charity because he didn't keep the money for himself? The English reader added: "I would say it is a democratically elected government acting charitably on your behalf. The population of the U.S. acted charitably en masse by voting in a government who had this particular policy. Don't you approve of democratic government?" (I feel compelled to point out that the U.S. is not a democracy, which is governed by mob rule; but a republic, which a smart reader defined as "a government of representatives of the people bound by a law higher than themselves." But don't worry, politicians don't know this either.) READ FULL STORY >

Dean is right: 'Kill the bill' ~ By Star Parker

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Star Parker Posted: December 19, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 When, earlier this year, the new Obama administration set health-care reform into motion, word was that they carefully studied the tactical failures of Hillarycare, with resolution to avoid the same mistakes. Ironically, but not surprisingly, they have repeated them all. That's not to say that the door has shut on Obamacare. Something still may pass. But the victory will be pyrrhic. The bills stink. Polling uniformly shows the public, for good reason, doesn't want them. And Democrats will pay a political price if they force their irresponsible concoction on the nation. What was supposedly the clever insight of the Obama team was to let Congress take ownership of health-care reform. Rather than piecing it together behind closed doors in the White House, as did Hillary Clinton, let the folks who will have to pass it put their necks on the line. But the elementary point overlooked was that it doesn't matter behind whose closed doors politicians hijack one-sixth of the American economy. I'm not going to do any better designing a space shuttle whether I do it in my kitchen or in my den. It's not my job, and I don't know how to do it. Yet, with a special brand of hubris, seasoned with a perverse sense of what making history means, a handful of Democrat power brokers have spent a good part of this year designing how hundreds of millions of Americans will, one by one, spend a few trillion dollars annually on health care. And they've done this with practically no genuine public debate and discussion. So how could the product not be garbage? Even as I write, as Sen. Reid tries to put together 60 votes for passage of his bill, most senators have no idea what's in it. Times are so strange that I find myself actually agreeing with former DNC Chairman Howard Dean, who has urged that the Senate bill be killed. Dean writes in the Washington Post, "… as it stands, this bill would do more harm than good to the future of America." He correctly identifies one key reason why the legislation is a dismal failure. It does nothing to increase competition in insurance markets. READ FULL STORY >

Less health care for more money: What's the catch? ~ By Ann Coulter

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Ann Coulter Posted: December 16, 2009 ~ 6:02 pm Eastern © 2009 The New York Times' Nicholas Kristof recently wrote a column about John Brodniak of Oregon, who developed a cavernous hemangioma, causing him great pain as blood leaks into his brain. According to Kristof, Brodniak can't get medical help because we don't have universal health care. Senators who vote against Obamacare, Kristof said, are morally equivalent to someone who would walk past a man "writhing in pain on the sidewalk." In another article in the Times, William Yardley wrote about Melvin Tsosies – also of Oregon – who ended up with $200,000 in medical bills after having a heart attack. As of March 2008, Yardley reported, Tsosies was waiting to find out if he would win the Oregon lottery for health insurance. But with 600,000 uninsured state residents and a "universal" health care program with only enough money to pay for about 24,000 of them, Tsosies is more likely to win a Powerball lottery. How can this be happening? Oregon already has "universal health care"! (Probably just a coincidence, but isn't Oregon also the only state with physician-assisted suicide?) Once again forgetting about the existence of the Internet, the Times neglects to mention its own erstwhile enthusiasm for Oregon's universal health-care plan, introduced back in 1990. Back then, the Times published an editorial titled "Oregon's Brave Medical Experiment," hailing this technocratic monstrosity as an example of "hardheaded compassion" designed to make "health coverage available to many more families." READ FULL STORY >

The end of freedom ~ By Joseph Farah

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Joseph Farah Posted: December 11, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 The end of freedom as we have known it is near. Soon, if the enemies of freedom and the proponents of government command-and-control economies have their way, this is what you can expect:

• A shortage of well-paying, productive jobs actually making things: This is because of a combination of environmental rules and regulations, government red tape and corporate taxes that make it easier to ship jobs overseas. If you think it's bad now, you ain't seen nothing yet. Americans also have to compete now with illegal aliens for employment because the government refuses to do something it actually has a responsibility to do – control the borders.

• You will be told what you can drive and what you can't: This is part of the government's power grab under the rubric of "climate change." Carbon dioxide, a naturally occurring gas vital to all living things, has been determined to be the biggest hazard on the planet – responsible for "global warming" apparently impossible to detect with thermometers, but only through computer modeling. A side effect of this plan is even fewer productive jobs.

• You will be told what medical procedures you can have and which you can't have: The government will soon be a middleman between you and your doctor. Even your hard-earned money, if you have any, will be useless in persuading doctors in this country to treat you.

• Your vote will be meaningless: Of course, systems like these cannot be mandated in a country in which politicians are accountable to the people, so the power of your vote will need to be watered down by giving amnesty to millions of illegal aliens who, in turn, will vote for their benefactors, returning them to office. In addition, criminal organizations like ACORN will be funded by the government and probably placed in charge of elections – if elections are permitted to take place at all.

• Your guns will be taken away: Tyrannical regimes can only survive in countries in which the government maintains a monopoly on force.

READ FULL STORY>>

When elites make our decisions for us ~ By Walter E. Williams

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Walter E. Williams Posted: December 02, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 The ultimate constraint we all face is knowledge – what we know and don't know. The knowledge problem is pervasive and by no means trivial as hinted at by just a few examples. You've purchased a house. Was it the best deal you could have gotten? Was there some other house you could have purchased that 10 years later would not have needed extensive repairs or was in a community with more likable neighbors and a better environment for your children? What about the person you married? Was there another person who would have made for a more pleasing spouse? Though these are important questions, the most intelligent answer you can give to all of them is: "I don't know." Since you don't know the answers, who do you think, here on Earth, is likely to know and whom would you like to make these decisions for you – Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, George Bush, a czar appointed by Obama or a committee of Washington bureaucrats? I bet that if these people were to forcibly make housing or marital decisions for us, most would deem it tyranny. READ FULL STORY >

We pay them to lie to us ~ By John Stossel

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By John Stossel Posted: November 25, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 When you knowingly pay someone to lie to you, we call the deceiver an illusionist or a magician. When you unwittingly pay someone to do the same thing, I call him a politician. President Obama insists that health-care "reform" not "add a dime" to the budget deficit, which daily grows to ever more frightening levels. So the House-passed bill and the one the Senate now deliberates both claim to cost less than $900 billion. Somehow "$900 billion over 10 years" has been decreed to be a magical figure that will not increase the deficit. It's amazing how precise government gets when estimating the cost of 10 years of subsidized medical care. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's bill was scored not at $850 billion, but $849 billion. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said her bill would cost $871 billion. How do they do that? The key to magic is misdirection, fooling the audience into looking in the wrong direction. I happily suspend disbelief when a magician says he'll saw a woman in half. That's entertainment. But when Harry Reid says he'll give 30 million additional people health coverage while cutting the deficit, improving health care and reducing its cost, it's not entertaining. It's incredible. The politicians have a hat full of tricks to make their schemes look cheaper than they are. The new revenues will pour in during Year One, but health-care spending won't begin until Year Three or Four. To this the Cato Institute's Michael Tanner asks, "Wouldn't it be great if you could count a whole month's income, but only two weeks' expenditures in your household budget?" To be deficit-reducers, the health-care bills depend on a $200 billion cut in Medicare. Current law requires cuts in payments to doctors, but let's get real: Those cuts will never happen. The idea that Congress will "save $200 billion" by reducing payments for groups as influential as doctors and retirees is laughable. Since 2003, Congress has suspended those "required" cuts each year. Our pandering congressmen rarely cut. They just spend. Even as the deficit grows, they vomit up our money onto new pet "green" projects, bailouts for irresponsible industries, gifts for special interests and guarantees to everyone. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

GOP's Boehner: Pelosi plans 'monthly abortion premium'

From WorldNetDaily

House minority leader says 2,032-page health-care takeover specifies payments Posted: November 05, 2009 ~ 12:01 pm Eastern By Bob Unruh © 2009 WorldNetDaily U.S. House Minority Leader Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, is warning voters across America that the "government takeover of health care" pushed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., contains a "monthly abortion premium" for participants of a proposed government insurance company. The issue of abortion funding in the Democratic plan has been contentious, with many moderate Democrats who recognize their constituents oppose mandating taxpayer funding for abortion concerned about the underlying support for the industry in the proposals. Members of the GOP largely have opposed the health-care plan for a multitude of reasons, including abortion funding. Today on his House blog, Boehner said the plan sets up funding for abortion-industry leaders that could include Planned Parenthood. "Health care reform should not be used as an opportunity to use federal funds to pay for elective abortions," Boehner wrote. "Health reform should be an opportunity to protect human life – not end it." But, he said, line 17 of page 110 of Pelosi's 2,032-page plan specifically states, "Abortions for which Public Funding is Allowed." [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Sunstein: Take organs from 'helpless patients'

From WorldNetDaily

'Though it may sound grotesque, routine removal would save lives' By Aaron Klein Posted: October 12, 2009 ~ 9:34 pm Eastern © 2009 WorldNetDaily TEL AVIV – President Obama's newly confirmed regulatory czar defended the possibility of removing organs from terminally ill patients without their permission. Cass Sunstein also has strongly pushed for the removal of organs from deceased individuals who did not explicitly consent to becoming organ donors. In his 2008 book, "Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth and Happiness," Sunstein and co-author Richard Thaler discussed multiple legal scenarios regarding organ donation. One possibility presented in the book, termed by Sunstein as "routine removal," posits that "the state owns the rights to body parts of people who are dead or in certain hopeless conditions, and it can remove their organs without asking anyone's permission." "Though it may sound grotesque, routine removal is not impossible to defend," wrote Sunstein. "In theory, it would save lives, and it would do so without intruding on anyone who has any prospect for life." Sunstein continued: "Although this approach is not used comprehensively by any state, many states do use the rule for corneas (which can be transplanted to give some blind patients sight). In some states, medical examiners performing autopsies are permitted to remove corneas without asking anyone's permission." Sunstein's example of medical examiners removing corneas, however, applies only to patients who are already declared deceased. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]