Ray Stevens’ Hit ‘We the People’ Becoming Anthem of Tea Party Movement

Ray Stevens has a new viral hit that is becoming an anthem of the Tea Party movement. With more than 1.4 million hits on YouTube, we think he has hit a chord that will vibrate right through November 2010.

The C-SPAN Lie: See 8 Clips of Obama Promising Televised Healthcare Negotiations

C-SPAN Challenges Congress to Open Health Care Talks to TV Coverage

"My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government."

~Barack Hussein Obama

The head of C-SPAN has implored Congress to open up the last leg of health care reform negotiations to the public, as top Democrats lay plans to hash out the final product among themselves.

C-SPAN CEO Brian Lamb wrote to leaders in the House and Senate Dec. 30 urging them to open "all important negotiations, including any conference committee meetings," to televised coverage on his network.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Ben Nelson's Purgatory

The Nebraska senator's health-care vote has killed him politically.

From The Wall Street Journal
By John Fund

The scriptures refer to reaping the whirlwind. That certainly describes Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson after the first state-wide poll since the controversial deal he cut in exchange for his deciding vote on the Senate health care bill.

A new Rasmussen Reports poll shows that if he were running for re-election today, Mr. Nelson would lose to Nebraska's GOP Governor David Heineman by a stunning 61% to 30%. Only three years ago, Mr. Nelson won his current term with a solid 64% of the vote.

Clearly, the senator's fall in public esteem is a direct reaction to his having voted for the health care bill as part of a deal in which Nebraska was exempted from the costs of new federal Medicaid mandates. The ObamaCare bill was already unpopular enough in Nebraska but became even more so when state residents discovered they would be saddled with it anyway, plus exposed to national ridicule over Mr. Nelson's sweetheart deal. Now 53% strongly oppose the bill, while another 11% somewhat oppose it. Only 17% favor the deal that Mr. Nelson struck in order to vote for the bill.

But the poll also shows a path to redemption. Asked how they would vote in the 2012 election if Senator Nelson changed his vote and prevented the health care bill from becoming law, Nebraska voters give Governor Heineman a lead of only 47% to 37%.

"The revote results are nothing short of amazing," says Democratic pollster Pat Caddell, who notes that simply reversing his health-care vote immediately reduces Mr. Nelson's deficit by two-thirds. "The poll suggests the anger of Nebraska voters is deep and unusually intense, and not likely to dissipate quickly."

No doubt it was precisely his concern about the unpopularity of the bill back home that prompted Mr. Nelson to hedge his bets when he announced he would support it -- he made clear at the time he might not vote for it again if the final compromise between House and Senate versions tilts too far to the left.

Given the shocking slump in his standing back home, Mr. Nelson might like to keep those remarks handy during the coming weeks as the two bills are hammered together. He may need to remind Majority Leader Harry Reid and President Obama of his hedged commitment -- if for no other reason than pure political survival.

'Tyranny Eve': Early Morning Christmas Eve Gathering on Capitol Hill to Protest Health Care Reform Bill

As the Senate prepares to vote on historic health care legislation on Christmas Eve morn, concerned citizens from across America organized through TyrannyEve.com will be gathering on the Capitol steps at 6:00am to peacefully protest the move by lawmakers to assume greater control of the private sector. "Tyranny Eve" -- a term meant to describe what's at stake with tomorrow's health care vote -- was coined by Peter Bradrick, a concerned North Carolina father who is spearheading tomorrows effort to assemble freedom loving Americans in Washington who oppose further statist encroachments into arenas beyond the governments rightful purview.

"Tomorrow, the day that the world celebrates as Christmas Eve, has been uniquely positioned to become 'Tyranny Eve,'" stated Peter Bradrick, founder of TyrannyEve.com. "Liberal lawmakers have scheduled two monumental votes on bills which, if carried into law, will propel us deeper toward statist socialism than many of us ever believed possible in America."

"While most citizens across America will be enjoying cozy pajamas and crackling fires, we call upon 'Sons of Liberty' to recognize this crucial moment -- to eschew comfort and stand with us on the Capitol steps," continued Bradrick. "To stand not only against socialistic health care and unlimited government spending, but for our children and their freedom."

Bradrick was compelled to launch TyrannyEve.com as he observed a change in public mood over the past few months from outspoken protests toward the health care bill in late summer to one of complacency in recent weeks as the legislation has moved through Congress. "Several months ago, town hall meetings across America pulsed with the outrage of concerned citizens who said 'enough is enough' with the government's attempts to encroach on our freedom by taking greater control over the private sector," Bradrick noted. "Now, on the eve of an historic vote on health care legislation in the Senate, that spirit has waned as the passage of this behemoth bill that will deprive us of liberties and bankrupt our children's future is considered inevitable. Now is not the time for apathy. Now is the time to stand."

Bradrick explained that, while others who have stood against the health care bill have gone home to be with their families, he believes it is vital for citizens to stand in Washington now as the critical vote in the Senate is put to the floor: "Why are we gathering while others have gone 'home for the holidays'? Because we believe that American patriots should not be lulled into easy peace while such a galactic blow to American Liberty is being dealt. The festive cheer of the season cannot mask the ugly reality that is being advanced on 'Tyranny Eve' by legislators drunk, not with spiked eggnog, but with the sense of unchecked power that is run amok."

Bradrick also indicated that his call for Americans to stand with him tomorrow was about much more than the health care debate; it is a battle over liberty.

"We are not gathering merely to protest these bills," remarked Bradrick. "We are gathering to oppose the idea that it is the government's place to solve our problems. We say with the founding fathers of America that it is not. The solution is in our homes, our businesses, and our churches across America. We affirm our constitution's bill of rights which states 'The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.'"

"Join us as we peacefully stand together to defy tyranny and proclaim our allegiance to the God who this nation was founded upon." Bradrick concluded.

"Stand with us as we proclaim to lawmakers in Washington DC that statist power grabs are not the solution. They are the problem."

For more information about the event or to interview Peter Bradrick visit: www.tyrannyeve.com.

Health Care Nullification: Who Will Begin the Process in South Carolina?

One can only wonder at what price Senator Ben Nelson sold his soul and his vote in agreeing to support ObamaCare. Or what threats of blackmail the White House thugs may have used on the pathetic Nelson; but his betrayal will only strengthen the much needed revolution underway. It is a revolution of resurgent states' rights and the refusal by every citizen to don shackles. We are beginning to learn that the exercise of Constitutional rights is their surest protection.

Who will begin the nullification process in South Carolina?

“The several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government.”

–Thomas Jefferson

From The Tenth Amendment Center
By Michael Boldin

For the past few days, I’ve received loads of emails urging me to get active regarding the healthcare vote – most of which had a subject line similar to: “Last Chance to Stop National Healthcare!”

Well, if you believe the only way to protect your rights is by begging federal politicians to do what you want, then these emails are certainly right. The vote went as expected, and so will the next.

So if you think marching on D.C. or calling your Representatives, or threating to “throw the bums out” in 2010 or 2012 or 20-whatever, is going to further the cause of the Constitution and your liberty – you might as well get your shackles on now. Your last chance has come and gone.

But, those of you who visit this site regularly already know that the Senate’s health care vote is far from the end of things – and you also know that even when it goes into effect (which I assume some version will), it’s still not the end of the road for your freedom.

The real way to resist DC is not by begging politicians and judges in Washington to allow us to exercise our rights…it’s to exercise our rights whether they want to give us “permission” to or not.

Nullification – state-level resistance to unconstitutional federal laws – is the way forward.

When a state ‘nullifies’ a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or ‘non-effective,’ within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as that state is concerned.

It’s peaceful, effective, and has a long history in the American tradition. It’s been invoked in support of free speech, in opposition to war and fugitive slave laws, and more. Read more on this history here.

Regarding nullification and health care, there’s already a growing movement right now. Led by Arizona, voters in a number of states may get a chance to approve State Constitutional Amendments in 2010 that would effectively ban national health care in their states. Our sources here at the Tenth Amendment Center indicate to us that we should expect to see 20-25 states consider such legislation in 2010.

20 States resisting DC can do what calling, marching, yelling, faxing, and emailing has almost never done. Stop the feds dead in their tracks.

For example, 13 states are already defying federal marijuana prohibition, and the federal government is having such a hard time dealing with it that the Obama administration recently announced that they would no longer prioritize enforcement in states that have medical marijuana laws.

Better yet, in the last 2+ years more than 20 states have been able to effectively prevent the Real ID Act of 2005 from being implemented. How did they do that? They passed laws and resolutions refusing to comply with it. And today, it’s effectively null and void without ever being repealed by Congress or challenged in court.

While the Obama administration would like to revive it under a different name, the reality is still there – with massive state-level resistance, the federal government can be pushed back inside its constitutional box. Issue by issue, law by law, the best way to change the federal government is by resisting it on a state level.

That’s nullification at work.

Over the years, wise men and women warned us that the Constitution would never enforce itself. The time is long overdue for people to start recognizing this fact, and bring that enforcement closer to home.

The bottom line? If you want to make real change; if you want to really do something for liberty and for the Constitution…focus on local activism and your state governments.

Thomas Jefferson would be proud!

Michael Boldin is the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center

What the Pelosi Health-Care Bill Really Says

Here are some important passages in the 2,000 page legislation.

From The Wall Street Journal
By Betsy McCaughey

The health bill that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is bringing to a vote (H.R. 3962) is 1,990 pages. Here are some of the details you need to know.

What the government will require you to do:

• Sec. 202 (p. 91-92) of the bill requires you to enroll in a "qualified plan." If you get your insurance at work, your employer will have a "grace period" to switch you to a "qualified plan," meaning a plan designed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. If you buy your own insurance, there's no grace period. You'll have to enroll in a qualified plan as soon as any term in your contract changes, such as the co-pay, deductible or benefit.

• Sec. 224 (p. 118) provides that 18 months after the bill becomes law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services will decide what a "qualified plan" covers and how much you'll be legally required to pay for it. That's like a banker telling you to sign the loan agreement now, then filling in the interest rate and repayment terms 18 months later.

On Nov. 2, the Congressional Budget Office estimated what the plans will likely cost. An individual earning $44,000 before taxes who purchases his own insurance will have to pay a $5,300 premium and an estimated $2,000 in out-of-pocket expenses, for a total of $7,300 a year, which is 17% of his pre-tax income. A family earning $102,100 a year before taxes will have to pay a $15,000 premium plus an estimated $5,300 out-of-pocket, for a $20,300 total, or 20% of its pre-tax income. Individuals and families earning less than these amounts will be eligible for subsidies paid directly to their insurer.

• Sec. 303 (pp. 167-168) makes it clear that, although the "qualified plan" is not yet designed, it will be of the "one size fits all" variety. The bill claims to offer choice—basic, enhanced and premium levels—but the benefits are the same. Only the co-pays and deductibles differ. You will have to enroll in the same plan, whether the government is paying for it or you and your employer are footing the bill.

• Sec. 59b (pp. 297-299) says that when you file your taxes, you must include proof that you are in a qualified plan. If not, you will be fined thousands of dollars. Illegal immigrants are exempt from this requirement.

• Sec. 412 (p. 272) says that employers must provide a "qualified plan" for their employees and pay 72.5% of the cost, and a smaller share of family coverage, or incur an 8% payroll tax. Small businesses, with payrolls from $500,000 to $750,000, are fined less.

Eviscerating Medicare:

In addition to reducing future Medicare funding by an estimated $500 billion, the bill fundamentally changes how Medicare pays doctors and hospitals, permitting the government to dictate treatment decisions.

• Sec. 1302 (pp. 672-692) moves Medicare from a fee-for-service payment system, in which patients choose which doctors to see and doctors are paid for each service they provide, toward what's called a "medical home."

The medical home is this decade's version of HMO-restrictions on care. A primary-care provider manages access to costly specialists and diagnostic tests for a flat monthly fee. The bill specifies that patients may have to settle for a nurse practitioner rather than a physician as the primary-care provider. Medical homes begin with demonstration projects, but the HHS secretary is authorized to "disseminate this approach rapidly on a national basis."

A December 2008 Congressional Budget Office report noted that "medical homes" were likely to resemble the unpopular gatekeepers of 20 years ago if cost control was a priority.

• Sec. 1114 (pp. 391-393) replaces physicians with physician assistants in overseeing care for hospice patients.

• Secs. 1158-1160 (pp. 499-520) initiates programs to reduce payments for patient care to what it costs in the lowest cost regions of the country. This will reduce payments for care (and by implication the standard of care) for hospital patients in higher cost areas such as New York and Florida.

• Sec. 1161 (pp. 520-545) cuts payments to Medicare Advantage plans (used by 20% of seniors). Advantage plans have warned this will result in reductions in optional benefits such as vision and dental care.

• Sec. 1402 (p. 756) says that the results of comparative effectiveness research conducted by the government will be delivered to doctors electronically to guide their use of "medical items and services."

Questionable Priorities:

While the bill will slash Medicare funding, it will also direct billions of dollars to numerous inner-city social work and diversity programs with vague standards of accountability.

• Sec. 399V (p. 1422) provides for grants to community "entities" with no required qualifications except having "documented community activity and experience with community healthcare workers" to "educate, guide, and provide experiential learning opportunities" aimed at drug abuse, poor nutrition, smoking and obesity. "Each community health worker program receiving funds under the grant will provide services in the cultural context most appropriate for the individual served by the program."

These programs will "enhance the capacity of individuals to utilize health services and health related social services under Federal, State and local programs by assisting individuals in establishing eligibility . . . and in receiving services and other benefits" including transportation and translation services.

• Sec. 222 (p. 617) provides reimbursement for culturally and linguistically appropriate services. This program will train health-care workers to inform Medicare beneficiaries of their "right" to have an interpreter at all times and with no co-pays for language services.

• Secs. 2521 and 2533 (pp. 1379 and 1437) establishes racial and ethnic preferences in awarding grants for training nurses and creating secondary-school health science programs. For example, grants for nursing schools should "give preference to programs that provide for improving the diversity of new nurse graduates to reflect changes in the demographics of the patient population." And secondary-school grants should go to schools "graduating students from disadvantaged backgrounds including racial and ethnic minorities."

• Sec. 305 (p. 189) Provides for automatic Medicaid enrollment of newborns who do not otherwise have insurance.

For the text of the bill with page numbers, see www.defendyourhealthcare.us.

Ms. McCaughey is chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a former Lt. Governor of New York state.

One Catholic Priest, and Eleven Other Pro-lifers Were Arrested for Tearing Up Nancy Pelosi's 'Health Care' Bill

From Christian Newswire

On Thursday Afternoon, November 5, 2009, 12 pro-lifers were arrested inside or outside in the hall at Nancy Pelosi's office at #235 Cannon office building.

They entered, with two complete copies of the bill - all 2,000 pages (4,000) - and proceeded to rip it up, page by page, and strew it on the floor.

Approximately 150 supporters were in the hall, chanting: "Kill the bill!" About 10 supporters of the bill chanted, "Health care for all!" Aprox 30 police were on site, arresting pro-lifers, one at a time. No supporters of the bill were arrested.

Among those arrested was pro-life legend, Father Norman Weslin, age 78.

Raw footage of the protest follows:

Obama: Legalize Illegals to Get Them Health Care

When Obama stated that illegals will not be covered under socialized Obamacare, did anyone not see this coming? Legalize the 20 to 40 million illegals -- problem solved.

Republicans see a backdoor move toward 'amnesty'


From The Washington Times
By Stephen Dinan

President Obama said this week that his health care plan won't cover illegal immigrants, but argued that's all the more reason to legalize them and ensure they eventually do get coverage.

He also staked out a position that anyone in the country legally should be covered - a major break with the 1996 welfare reform bill, which limited most federal public assistance programs only to citizens and longtime immigrants.

"Even though I do not believe we can extend coverage to those who are here illegally, I also don't simply believe we can simply ignore the fact that our immigration system is broken," Mr. Obama said Wednesday evening in a speech to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute. "That's why I strongly support making sure folks who are here legally have access to affordable, quality health insurance under this plan, just like everybody else.

Mr. Obama added, "If anything, this debate underscores the necessity of passing comprehensive immigration reform and resolving the issue of 12 million undocumented people living and working in this country once and for all."

Read the rest of this entry >>

Tens of Thousands to Protest Obamacare in Washington This Weekend

27 Hour Prayer Vigil Begins on Sunday

From LifeSiteNews
By Peter J. Smith

Americans converging on Washington for protests and rallies against President Obama's health-care reforms this weekend intend to fight like it all depends on them, and pray like it all depends on God.

Buses packed with protestors from around the nation, including those on the famous "Tea Party Express," are set to converge on Washington and march upon the nation's Capitol to express their collective dissent with Congressional plans to radically reform the health-care system in the United States. Estimates for the numbers of protestors expected to arrive number anywhere between 50,000 to 100,000.

But after this weekend's marching and meeting with public representatives in Washington is done, a group of pro-life, Christian, and other leaders will initiate a public vigil to pray that taxpayer funding of abortion will not end up the final version of the current congressional health care plans under consideration in Congress.

Twenty-seven hours of prayer will begin on Sunday, September 13 at 7:00 P.M. and will conclude on Monday, September 14 at 10:00 P.M.

"Our nation is in more than an economic crisis or a crisis over health care. We are in a spiritual crisis and the best way to address it, in fact the only way to address it is through prayer," said Rev. Rob Schenck, President of Faith and Action.

"Every American, no matter how young or old, can and must pray."

The current version of the Obama health-care plan in the House of Representatives includes a so-called "compromise" measure on abortion called the Capps Amendment, which pro-life advocates say does not eliminate public subsidies for abortion and is no compromise. Instead, they point out that, thanks to this amendment, H.R. 3200 now mandates that at least one insurance plan provide coverage for abortion in every area in the United States. The bill also creates new streams of revenue not restricted by current federal laws such as the Hyde Amendement, which can be used to subsidize abortions under the public option and go to subsidize insurance companies that cover abortions in the form of "affordability credits."

"In times of great challenge and crisis, Americans have always turned to God in prayer. We have set these 27 hours apart to seek God for his wisdom, direction and counsel for our nation. This is especially true concerning the national debate on health care," said Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition.

Mahoney said that the faith leaders will gather on the West Lawn of the United States Capitol to pray to God that public money is not used to subsidize abortion and that any health reform coming out of Congress will genuinely embrace "social justice and human rights." "We will be a bold public and prophetic witness that abortion is not health care and that health care reform should bring healing and compassion, not violence and brokenness. As people of faith, we do not have to sit on the sidelines and watch as events unfold on the world state," continued Mahoney. "Rather, through prayer, fasting and repentance we can help shape history."

The Audacity of Deceit: Day Gardner, National Black Pro-Life Union, Comments on Obama's Bold Faced Lies Concerning Abortion and Health Care Reform

Commentary by Day Gardner

Last night, President Barack Obama claimed that abortion will not be funded through the new health care legislation.

Shouting liar, liar pants on fire, may be politically incorrect, so I'll just say Mr. President you are wrong!

On July 30, the House Energy and Commerce Committee added to H.R. 3200 an amendment written by staff to Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Ca.) and offered by Rep. Lois Capps (D-Ca.), both of whom have consistently pro-abortion career voting records. This "phony compromise" explicitly authorizes the "public plan" to cover all abortions. This would drastically change long-standing federal policy which means that any citizen enrolled in the public plan will be compelled to purchase coverage for abortion on demand.

Let's follow the money... the federal agency will collect the premium money, receive bills from abortionists, and send the abortionists payment checks from a federal Treasury account.

Hmmm... that sounds like abortion funding to me, Mr. President. What say you?

As the Associated Press accurately reported in its August 5, 2009, analysis, "A law called the Hyde amendment applies the [abortion] restrictions to Medicaid... The [Obama-backed] health overhaul would create a stream of federal funding not covered by the restrictions."

It is paramount that language be added to the health care bill that will clearly restrict funding of any and all abortions. Members of both the Democratic and Republican parties have offered sensible amendments to the bill which you, Mr. President, have ignored.

So, President Obama, for the 29th time… abortion is not healthcare! Can you hear me now?

Day Gardner is the founder and President of The National Black Pro-Life Union and Director of Public Relations for NPLAC on Capitol Hill. She is also anchors a radio program for NPLR.net online and WCAR-1040AM, Detroit.

Democrats’ Health Care Bills Do Not Require Citizenship Verification

Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., watches President Barack Obama deliver a speech on health care reform at the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, Sept. 9, 2009. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

From Cybercast News Service
By Susan Jones

Rep. Joe Wilson’s shout-out Wednesday night came in response to President Obama’s claim that illegal immigrants would not be covered by the Democrats’ health care plan.

“There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants,” Obama said. “This, too, is false — the reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.”

"You lie!" Wilson (R-S.C.) yelled, drawing frowns from the podium.

Was Obama lying?

Republicans, in a post-speech “fact-check,” suggested that yes, Obama is stretching the truth:

“Nothing in any of the Democrat bills would require individuals to verify their citizenship or identity prior to receiving taxpayer-subsidized benefits—making the President’s promise one that the legislation itself does not keep,” the House Republican conference wrote in a “Myth vs. Fact” news release.

But Republican Sen. John McCain told NBC’s “Today” show on Thursday that Obama’s health care reforms do not apply to people who come to the United States illegally.

“They do not, as far as I can see, nor should they,” McCain said.

McCain also disagreed with his former running mate Sarah Palin that the president’s plan would create death panels.

”No, but there is a $500-billion ‘savings’ in Medicare which has seniors concerned, and in other countries, where they’ve cut back on spending on health care and then health care is rationed – then similar things have happened. Americans are concerned about that – they have a right to be concerned about it,” McCain said.

The senator also noted that Obama is counting on $500 billion in Medicare savings -- “without any meaningful medical malpractice reform.”

McCain dismissed Obama’s call for tort reform “demonstration projects” in the states. Those pilot projects would not be part of a health care reform bill. According to McCain, “We all know we need medical malpractice reform.”

Both McCain and the House Republican Conference disagreed with Obama’s contention that “nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have.”

If the government option is adopted by your employer, and you have employer-provided insurance, then you are not going to be able to keep your current coverage, McCain said. “So that’s false also.”

The House Republican Conference pointed to independent experts who have warned that the Democrats’ proposed legislation “would result in millions of Americans losing the coverage they have.” The Congressional Budget Office believes several million would lose their current coverage, while the Urban Institute puts the number at 47 million, and the Lewin Group says the number could total as many as 114 million.

On Wednesday night, Obama promised, “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits—either now or in the future. Period.”

But Republicans say Obama’s math does not add up.

“There is very little, if anything, in this package that calls for real spending reductions, and a trillion dollars is basically what it’s going to cost. -- and that’s according to the Congressional Budget Office,” Sen. McCain said Thursday morning.

“And finally, since the president has not argued against any of these pork barrel projects as he said he would, spending is way up over last year, and ear-marking and pork-barreling continues – his record so far does not indicate any fiscal discipline.”

House Republicans note that the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has found that H.R. 3200 would increase the budget deficit by $239 billion over ten years—and “would probably generate substantial increases in federal budget deficits” thereafter. The Peter G. Peterson Foundation released a study which found that in its second decade, H.R. 3200 would increase federal deficits by more than $1 trillion.

Obama Approval Numbers Still Dropping, While Petitions Mount Against Health Care Plan

From LifeSiteNews
By Kathleen Gilbert

A series of recent public opinion polls and anti-Obamacare petitions have shown that President Obama and his health care overhaul are continuing to decline in popularity at the end of a turbulent Congressional recess.

The public disapproval rating of Obama's handling of health care has jumped nine points since July to 52 per cent, according to an Associated Press-GfK survey released today. In the same poll, 49 said they disapproved of Obama's overall performance, up from 42 per cent in July.

The most recent Rasmussen Reports Daily Presidential Tracking Poll shows that 31 per cent of the nation's voters strongly approve of Obama's presidential performance, while 39 per cent said they strongly disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -8.

Scott Rasmussen noted in an August Wall Street Journal opinion piece that the polls indicate Obama's efforts to galvanize support for his plan have grim prospects of success: only 25 per cent of American voters strongly favor the health care reform, while 41 per cent strongly oppose it. Among independent voters in August, 60 per cent opposed the bill while 35 per cent were in favor, with 47 per cent strongly opposed and 16 per cent strongly favoring.

Obama is scheduled to speak today to a joint session of Congress, presumably the latest attempt to persuade reluctant bipartisan lawmakers to accept his health reform agenda.

A Zogby Interactive Survey released August 31 noted that the August drop in support ran across several of Obama's core constituencies. Democrats, liberals, African-Americans, and young voters in the survey who approved of Obama's job performance all showed a drop of about 8-9 points since July 24.

Meanwhile, an online petition this summer sponsored by Townhall.com called "Free Our Healthcare Now" has raced across the Internet, and now touts over 1.3 million signatures - which its sponsors say makes it the largest public policy petition ever delivered.

The anti-Obama group Grassfire.org claims that its own online petition against the health care overhaul has reached nearly half a million signatures.

Grassfire is also circulating a critique of the health care overhaul by ABC reporter John Stossel, republished by America's News Today on Youtube last month.

In the report, Stossel encapsulates many of the fears expressed by citizens across the country in townhall meetings by showing the pitfalls of government-run health care systems. Though President Obama has denied that he intends to bring about a single-payer health care system, the ABC report points to a video of then-Senator Obama specifically advocating for a "single-payer health care system."

Another video showing Obama advocating for a single-payer plan in 2003 and 2007, and linked by the Drudge Report, was blasted by the White House early last month as "taking sentences and phrases out of context and cobbling them together to leave a very false impression" of the president's stated position. The White House attempted to prove its position by showing more recent videos of Obama denying a future government takeover. However, the Drudge Report quickly linked to an uncut version of Obama's 2003 remarks that verified the message of the first video. The White House did not respond to the later video.

Listening to a Liar

From OneNewsNow
By Thomas Sowell

The most important thing about what anyone says are not the words themselves but the credibility of the person who says them.

The words of convicted swindler Bernie Madoff were apparently quite convincing to many people who were regarded as knowledgeable and sophisticated. If you go by words, you can be led into anything.

No doubt millions of people will be listening to the words of President Barack Obama Wednesday night when he makes a televised address to a joint session of Congress on his medical care plans. But, if they think that the words he says are what matters, they can be led into something much worse than being swindled out of their money.

One plain fact should outweigh all the words of Barack Obama and all the impressive trappings of the setting in which he says them: He tried to rush Congress into passing a massive government takeover of the nation's medical care before the August recess -- for a program that would not take effect until 2013!

Whatever President Obama is, he is not stupid. If the urgency to pass the medical care legislation was to deal with a problem immediately, then why postpone the date when the legislation goes into effect for years -- more specifically, until the year after the next presidential election?

If this is such an urgently needed program, why wait for years to put it into effect? And if the public is going to benefit from this, why not let them experience those benefits before the next presidential election?

If it is not urgent that the legislation goes into effect immediately, then why don't we have time to go through the normal process of holding congressional hearings on the pros and cons, accompanied by public discussions of its innumerable provisions? What sense does it make to "hurry up and wait" on something that is literally a matter of life and death?

If we do not believe that the president is stupid, then what do we believe? The only reasonable alternative seems to be that he wanted to get this massive government takeover of medical care passed into law before the public understood what was in it. Moreover, he wanted to get re-elected in 2012 before the public experienced what its actual consequences would be.

Unfortunately, this way of doing things is all too typical of the way this administration has acted on a wide range of issues.

Consider the "stimulus" legislation. Here the administration was successful in rushing a massive spending bill through Congress in just two days -- after which it sat on the president's desk for three days, while he was away on vacation. But, like the medical care legislation, the "stimulus" legislation takes effect slowly.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that it will be September 2010 before even three-quarters of the money will be spent. Some economists expect that it will not all be spent by the end of 2010.

What was the rush to pass it, then? It was not to get that money out into the economy as fast as possible. It was to get that money -- and the power that goes with it -- into the hands of the government. Power is what politics is all about.

The worst thing that could happen, from the standpoint of those seeking more government power over the economy, would be for the economy to begin recovering on its own while months were being spent debating the need for a "stimulus" bill. As the president's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, said, you can't let a crisis "go to waste" when "it's an opportunity to do things you could not do before."

There are lots of people in the Obama administration who want to do things that have not been done before -- and to do them before the public realizes what is happening.

The proliferation of White House "czars" in charge of everything from financial issues to media issues is more of the same circumvention of the public and of the Constitution. Czars don't have to be confirmed by the Senate, the way Cabinet members must be, even though czars may wield more power, so you may never know what these people are like, until it is too late.

What Barack Obama says Wednesday night is not nearly as important as what he has been doing -- and how he has been doing it.

More Bishops Criticize Government-Run Health Care; ‘Our Federal Bureaucracy Is A Vast Wasteland’

From Catholic World News

Drawing upon Catholic teaching on subsidiarity, an increasing number of US bishops are criticizing the concept of government-run health care. Bishop Samuel Aquila of Fargo has criticized the view that “the national government is the sole instrument of the common good.” Bishop Thomas Doran of Rockford adds:

As Catholic people, however, we are not allowed to wash our hands of it and to let things shake out as the federal government would have it. Our more than bicentennial experience with our federal government leads many to the conclusion that our government really does only one thing well: waging war. In every other area of life, when someone says, “I am from the government and I am here to help you,” our survival instinct tells us to run and hide. In the early ’90s when the health care scare was last put upon us, the opposition crowed: “If you like the postal service, you will love national health,” and that still seems to be the feeling of many …

The fourth principle is subsidiarity which commands us to seek the most effective approach to solving the problem. Our federal bureaucracy is a vast wasteland strewn with the carcasses of absurd federal programs which proved infinitely worse than the problems they were established to correct. It perhaps is too extreme to say that competent government is an oxymoron, but sometimes it seems that way. The moral principal of subsidiarity implies decreasing the role of government and employers in health care when lower order groups can better serve individuals and families. We need to think of health care as more of a market than a system …

It was observed by the ancients that usually the problem with totalitarian governments is not that they do not love their people; the problem seems to be that they love them too much — they just do not trust them. To establish control, these governments have always tried to control food. Remember why Jacob’s sons went down to Egypt in the Book of Exodus. But since homo sapiens is an omnivore, this proves increasingly difficult.

Modern socialist governments like to control not food but the means to protect and extend life. Some have called the current efforts of our federal government “senioricide” or “infanticide.” That perhaps is too severe, but we as Catholics should take care that health care does not morph into life control.

Source(s): these links will take you to other sites, in a new window.

• Catholic bishops question details of health care overhaul (AP)
• Concerns to take to heart in health care and proposed reforms (Rockford Observer)
• Kansas City bishops question centralized health-care system (CWN, Sep 2)
• Iowa bishop warns against healthcare rationing, ‘federal monopolization’ (CWN, Aug 28)

Health-Care Anger Has Deeper Roots

From The Wall Street Journal
By Janet Adamy and Jonathan Weisman

Recent town-hall uproars weren't just about health care. They were also eruptions of concern that the government is taking on too much at once.

That suggests trouble for the president and his party, and fears of losses in next year's midterm election are likely to shape the Democrats' fall agenda.

At August's town-hall meetings, voters often started with complaints about health care, only to shift to frustrations about all the other things President Barack Obama and the Democrats have done or tried to do since January. The $787 billion economic-stimulus package, the government-led rescue of General Motors Corp. and climate-change legislation all came in for criticism.

"A lot of the anxiety we face here has less to do with health care and everything to do with the overall state of the economy and government," said Rep. Anthony Weiner, a New York Democrat.

"I have seen a level of dissatisfaction and even anger that I haven't experienced in the years that I've been a member of Congress," Sen. John McCain, an Arizona Republican, told an audience at a health-care meeting in Kansas City on Monday.

Although the election is still far off, political forecasters predict that Democrats could run into trouble in the 2010 midterm vote.

"What we're seeing now, both in terms of numbers and the feel out there, this is how big waves feel early on," said Charlie Cook, editor of the Cook Political Report.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs dismissed any talk of political doom hanging over the president and his party.

"It would be like me predicting who's going to win the World Series, not in a few months but in a year and a few months," he said Monday, adding that he will leave "extremely smart prognosticators" to "their stately craft."

August, typically a sleepy month, dealt Democrats a tough hand this year.

Snafus in the federal "cash for clunkers" program -- which gave people rebates to trade in gas-guzzling cars for more fuel-efficient new vehicles -- highlighted how disorganization can hamper government plans. It was the bloodiest month for U.S. troops so far in the war in Afghanistan. Attorney General Eric Holder poked a potential hornets' nest by appointing a prosecutor to investigate Central Intelligence Agency interrogators. And White House budget forecasters said they now project $9 trillion of additional federal debt over the next decade, adding $2 trillion to an earlier estimate.

Last year's election gave Democrats a mandate for big changes that they feel still applies. They won seats by arguing that Republicans had failed to act to keep the housing market and financial system from crumbling.

Mr. Obama also inherited a large budget deficit and expanded it further with economic-stimulus spending.

Many town-hall attendees cite the deficit as a reason for holding off on health care, even though Mr. Obama and other Democrats say they won't pass a plan that adds to the national debt.

Current proposals would cost about $1 trillion over 10 years, mostly to expand coverage to the nation's uninsured. All proposals aim to be deficit-neutral, offsetting new spending with cuts and some new taxes.

Anger over financial bailouts, including the Troubled Asset Relief Program begun under the administration of former President George W. Bush, has been especially strong. At a meeting in Wheeling, W.Va., Democratic Rep. Alan B. Mollohan said a health-care bill was needed to help "folks in terrible situations." A member of the audience yelled out: "Use TARP funds!"

In South Sioux City, Neb., last week, Van Phillips took the microphone to ask Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson how America can pay for a health overhaul with all the other programs going on.

View Full Image

Getty Images

At town-hall meetings in August, such as this one in Reston, Va., voters often started with complaints about health care, only to shift to broader frustrations about actions by Democrats.

"We've got a pretty good chunk out there already in the stimulus. We just came back with the cash for clunkers," said Mr. Phillips, a retired superintendent of schools. "I guess I'm concerned -- how do we make all of this flow?"

Democrats concede they are fighting the perception that government is overstretched, though they say the economic stresses actually make a health-care overhaul more important because Democratic plans would help people who lose employer-provided health insurance.

Mr. Weiner said the crowded legislative calendar and a bruising battle in June over a climate bill narrowly approved by the House is wearing down Democrats, particularly those in the fiscally conservative Blue Dog coalition.

"We had a lot of House members who cast a tough vote on energy, and thought they could catch their breath, only to have health care bear down on them," he said.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D., Md.), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said, "I've warned our colleagues from day one back in January, this is going to be a very challenging cycle. You just have to look historically....We're pleased people are being shaken out of their complacency."

Other analysts think any forecast this early is overblown.

"A year is an eternity, maybe two eternities, in politics," said Nathan L. Gonzales, political editor of the Rothenberg Political Report.

But Mr. Gonzales agreed that skepticism about too much action in Washington can drive voters. Anger about the government led to broad Democratic gains in 2006 and 2008, and now that Democrats are running the government, activism has only increased, he said.

"What we're seeing here is this larger debate about what the role of government is," said William McInturff, a Republican pollster who conducts The Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll. "The health-care debate is at that fault line.

Louise Radnofsky and Neil King Jr. contributed to this article.

ABC, NBC Won't Air Ad Critical of Obama's Health Care Plan

Why don't these state propaganda organs admit that they are arms of the White House Press Office and apply for federal funding?

From Fox News
By Joshua Rhett Miller


The refusal by ABC and NBC to run a national ad critical of President Obama's health care reform plan is raising questions from the group behind the spot -- particularly in light of ABC's health care special aired in prime time last June and hosted at the White House.

The 33-second ad by the League of American Voters, which features a neurosurgeon who warns that a government-run health care system will lead to the rationing of procedures and medicine, began airing two weeks ago on local affiliates of ABC, NBC, FOX and CBS. On a national level, however, ABC and NBC have refused to run the spot in its present form.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Key Democrat Suggests Party Moderates 'Brain Dead'

From Breitbart
By Erica Werner, Associated Press Writer


A key House liberal suggested Thursday that party moderates who've pushed for changes in health care legislation are "brain dead" and out for insurance company campaign donations.

Moderate Blue Dog Democrats "just want to cause trouble," said Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., who heads the health subcommittee on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee.

"They're for the most part, I hate to say, brain dead, but they're just looking to raise money from insurance companies and promote a right-wing agenda that is not really very useful in this whole process," Stark told reporters on a conference call.

A spokeswoman for the Blue Dog caucus did not immediately respond to an e-mail request for comment.

Thursday's call was being hosted by the liberal group Campaign for America's Future to release a report making the case for a strong new public health insurance plan to compete with private insurers as part of any health overhaul legislation.

Read the rest of this entry >>

British Study Reveals 'Cruel and Neglectful' Care of One Million NHS Patients

A major report was released today on the abuse and suffering endured by patients under Great Britain's government-run national health service. It is a shocking glimpse of what Obama would impose on all Americans. The more than 100 comments that follow the linked story below shed even more light on a socialized medical system that The One holds up as a model.

One million NHS patients have been the victims of appalling care in hospitals across Britain, according to a major report released today.

From The Telegraph
By Rebecca Smith, Medical Editor

In the last six years, the Patients Association claims hundreds of thousands have suffered from poor standards of nursing, often with 'neglectful, demeaning, painful and sometimes downright cruel' treatment.

The charity has disclosed a horrifying catalogue of elderly people left in pain, in soiled bed clothes, denied adequate food and drink, and suffering from repeatedly cancelled operations, missed diagnoses and dismissive staff.

The Patients Association said the dossier proves that while the scale of the scandal at Mid-Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust - where up to 1,200 people died through failings in urgent care - was a one off, there are repeated examples they have uncovered of the same appalling standards throughout the NHS.

Read the rest of this entry >>

GOP Tees Up Medicare Manifesto

From The Wall Street Journal
By Neil King Jr.

The Republican Party issued a new salvo in the health debate Monday with a "seniors' health care bill of rights" that opposed any moves to trim Medicare spending or limit end-of-life care to seniors.

Intended as a political shot at President Barack Obama, the Republican National Committee manifesto marks a remarkable turnaround for a party that had once fought to trim the health program for the elderly and disabled, which last year cost taxpayers over $330 billion.

The Republican stance also underscores how tough it will be for Mr. Obama to find politically palatable savings to pay for new coverage while reining in spiraling health-care costs.

The Republicans said they aimed to "protect Medicare and not cut it in the name of health-care reform," in a statement and an accompanying op-ed written by RNC Chairman Michael Steele and published in Monday's Washington Post.

The party also vowed to oppose any Democratic effort to ration care or to insert the government between seniors and their doctors.

Read the rest of this entry >>