UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES

Oops! Bet you didn't see this one coming!

This is another example of the Chaos Theory in action. The majority of those that supported the health care bill also support abortion "rights". They did not intend for the bill to fuel the fires of anti-abortion activities but God works in mysterious ways.

So what other effects will we see from the bill, regardless of the intentions of its writers?

"Dozens of states are passing or debating new restrictions on abortion, a trend fueled in part by passage of the nation's new health care law.

Both sides of the hot-button issue are seeing new approaches to reduce abortions.

...A debate in Congress over abortion coverage through insurance sold in future government-run health marketplaces — called exchanges — nearly derailed passage of the health care law. Even though President Obama issued an executive order stating that no public funds would go for abortions, several states are seeking to ban abortion coverage from plans sold through their exchanges.

Tennessee lawmakers last week passed a bill that would ban abortion coverage in any plan sold through its exchange. It applies even if premiums were paid with private funds because public funds would help run the exchange, said the bill's sponsor, Republican Sen. Diane Black. Mississippi, Missouri, Louisiana and Oklahoma are considering similar bills. "I think you'll see a lot more next year," said Spaulding Balch."
USA Today

HEALTH CARE KILLS

As the cost of medical care here in the U.S. is shifted to the public sector decisions will be made; not on the basis of good medicine but on the basis of cost. It isn't a very long walk at all to get from abortion to euthanasia. And, even though I know that no one wants to hear this, the journey began at contraception. It is absolutely logical to believe that, if we have the right to control the creation of life we also have the right to control the end of it.

Compassionately ending the suffering of those that really have outlived their usefulness anyway is the fruit of this Satanic train of thought. Welcome to our "Brave New World" of publicly funded health care and our "right" to be murdered

"Concern is growing that the United Kingdom's Liverpool Care Pathway, intended to ease the comfort of patients whose death is inevitable, is being misused to railroad elderly patients onto a path toward early death.

"While we've been preoccupied with the moral pluses and minuses of living wills, assisted suicide and euthanasia, legalized execution of some of society's most vulnerable has become available, most probably at a hospital near you," writes Telegraph columnist Liz Hunt. "How did we let this happen?"

The Liverpool Care Pathway, which has been endorsed by the British government and adopted by 900 different hospitals and nursing homes across the country, allows a patient's care staff to remove invasive or uncomfortable medications or devices from a patient they have unanimously judged to be close to death, with no hope of recovery. Controversially, this allows medical staff to deprive patients of food or water or to sedate them continuously until they die. Recently, a group of British medical experts objected that these procedures can mask signs that a patient is actually recovering."
Natural News

IT TAKES A VILLAGE-OR-NEVER INVITE A VAMPIRE INTO YOUR HOUSE

SEC. 1904. GRANTS TO STATES FOR QUALITY HOME VISITATION PROGRAMS FOR FAMILIES WITH YOUNG
CHILDREN AND FAMILIES EXPECTING CHILDREN.
Part B of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 621–629i) is amended by adding at the end the following:
‘‘Subpart 3—Support for Quality Home Visitation Programs
‘‘SEC. 440. HOME VISITATION PROGRAMS FOR FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN AND FAMILIES EXPECTING CHILDREN.
‘‘(a) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this section is to improve the well-being, health, and development of children by enabling the establishment and expansion of high quality programs providing voluntary home visitation for fami1lies with young children and families expecting children.

Wasn't that fun, kids? You can read the rest of this here if you can stand it. A friend of mine e-mailed me a link to CPS Corruption, the blog site that directed me to the above. I'm going to post an excerpt from this blog below:

"The proposed Obama government healthcare bill has a government snitch network built into it, allowing social workers to gain access to your home under the pretext of checking on your new baby, or soon-to-be-born baby. It will result in many many more children being taken from families by state Child Protective Services agencies.

This is the fulfillment of a long-held dream by child protection agencies to gain access to homes, without first getting a report of abuse or neglect, as currently required by law. Mandated visits to homes by government agents has been a favorite cause of Hillary Clinton, and of the radical bureaucrats running the U.S. Administration of Children and Families.

This "home invasion" program is found on page 838 of the lengthy bill, in Section 1904, and it is called the "Home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children." The pretext on which the state agents would enter the home would be to "to improve the well-being, health, and development of children by enabling the establishment and expansion of high quality programs providing voluntary home visitation for families with young children and families expecting children." It sounds pretty innocuous, but based on my 15 years of fighting these bureaucrats in court on behalf of innocent families, it can be predicted that the way it will work in real life will be much more sinister.

Visits from the bureaucrats are voluntary in theory. (However, so are income taxes.) Here is how it will work: after your first appointment with your OB/GYN to confirm a pregnancy, the doctor will be required to report it to the leviathan healthcare bureaucracy. If you somehow fall through the cracks during the pregnancy, the birth hospital will do the honors of reporting you to the state. Then, chirpy social workers will show up at your house one day, and pressure you to allow them to come "voluntarily" into your house. These people are so-called "mandated reporters," who must report any abuse or neglect or potentially face fines and jail."

This is just one example of the insidious nature of the health care bill. It establishes systems of government control that will just be humming away in the background, unnoticed and innocuous until the day the agent of the state shows up at your door. A simple visit to your doctor or a conversation with someone at a store can set off a chain of events that will end with your freedoms in tatters and your life ripped apart by the state.

Dogs and people react in ways that are quite similar to each other. When you get a dog it has a certain sense of freedom and resists the commands of its master. Usually most dogs can be trained to follow orders with a firm hand on the leash and a reward for good behavior. Some dogs, though, will continue to resist. This may require a choke chain and a firmer hand still, maybe even a swat across the nose. For most dogs, this will be sufficient to break their spirit and to get them to obey. Some dogs, when choked and swatted will bite and snarl. Those dogs won't submit to their masters wishes and will continue to fight for freedom. Those dogs generally end up in the pound or shot.

This home visitation crap is the beginning of the training. We'll be offered a treat and a smile, a reassurance that letting the government into your home is the best thing for the child. After all, who better to manage the growth of a child, the parent or a qualified, degreed and oh so concerned professional bureaucrat?

When we refuse this benevolent guidance from our government the choke chain will be slipped around our neck. After all, you must remember the I.R.S. is the enforcement arm of the health care bill. And I'm sure that along with the power to enter your home the benevolent bureaucrat will also be armed with the power to threaten removal of your child.

When we still refuse, when we decide to exercise our God given right to privacy and to raise our kids as we see fit, what choice will we have left our benevolent masters? For the good of the children and society we will be separated from our kids. They will be sent to others that will raise them properly and educate them in the goodness and supremacy of the state while we will be sent somewhere else to be reeducated or shot.

You say that this can't happen, that this is just more right wing paranoia. I say Russia, Cuba, China, Venezuela, North Korea and Vietnam along with most of the Muslim countries thrown in to boot. Don't tell me this can't happen here.

It has already begun. Don't invite the vampire in.

WHEN WILL THE BISHOPS ACT?

They have been credited with “a critical demonstration of support” for the health bill that will cost the lives of innocent unborn children. And yet, not a whisper, a whiff, a murmur or a hint of canonical action against these "sisters".

So where are you bishops? This is an American group under your authority.

WHERE ARE YOU??!!

"Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards has praised the Catholic religious sisters who endorsed the Senate health care bill, claiming they deserve gratitude for making “a critical demonstration of support” for a bill that significantly increased coverage of “reproductive health care.”

Writing for the Huffington Post Wednesday in her capacity as president of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Richards claimed that it was Catholic nuns who “most importantly broke with the bishops and the Vatican to announce their support for health care reform.”

“This brave and important move, demonstrating that they cared as much about the health care of families in America as they did about church hierarchy, was a critical demonstration of support.”

BISHOP CHAPUT AND HEALTH CARE

"...The bad law we now likely face, we owe in part to the efforts of the Catholic Health Association and similar “Catholic” organizations."
Archdiocese of Denver

This sentence comes from an article by Archbishop Chaput, a man that I respect. However, even he doesn't seem to understand what the real underlying problem of the health care bill is. The problem is in the understanding of our right to health care. It appears that Bishop Chaput has bought into the lie that the USCCB has been foisting on the Catholics in America. This lie is that our right to health care is something more than it really is.

Until the bishops stop pushing this Marxist vision of government down our throats we will never get the type of health care reforms needed. I take that back. Until everyone, bishops, politicians and the man on the street accepts the plain fact that health care is a good, just like property and that our real right to health care does not give us permission to take the rights of someone else away from them, we cannot have a resolution to this. If the bishops can find a way to make the argument that I have the right to someone else's property to exercise my right to health care, let them.

They won't because they can't and it is this very inability to make their argument logical or just that has made this bill so divisive. The people sense that health care, with or without abortion attached to it, is not a right in the same sense as say, speech or liberty. We know when we are being lied to.

So while I agree that this "bad law we now likely face" is partially the responsibility of rogue Cathoilc politicians and bogus health organizations it is more the fault of leadership inside the Church in America that have tried to sell the people a bill of goods to satisfy their own Progressive political desires.

THOMAS MORE LAW CENTER FILES SUIT

Funny isn't it, that the bishops in America just can't see this. Sure, they're against abortion, and it does have the first place in any discussion of the health care bill, but what about the rest of these issues? Do they think it's right that the government can steal our property? Do they think it's right that the government can mandate that we must buy a product from a private corporation as a condition of our citizenship? Do they believe the government has the power to override our Constitution, a document created by the people through a free will act, a document that created the very government that now seeks to claim it's preeminence over it? Isn't an all powerful state bent on the redistribution of wealth a Marxist state? Do the teachings of the Popes and the Magisterium have no bearing at all on this subject?

The bishops aren't answering these questions because if they do they will be bound to stand up to this corrupt government and it's leaders. They will be forced to confront Marxism head on which will bring into the open their cooperation, through support of the Democrat party and all of the various "social justice" groups, in bringing this evil to power.

They've been bought and paid for. It will take an act of extreme courage for most to speak the truth because it will cause them great loss.

Pray for the bishops that they will die to themselves and put the Church and the people ahead of ambition and avarice.

"Parallel to the actions of 13 states’ attorneys general, the Thomas More Law Center has filed a lawsuit challenging the health care reform bill. The suit argues that it is unconstitutional to force someone to purchase health care coverage and to force those who object to pay for abortions.

...According to the complaint, filed in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, because of their “deeply held religious beliefs” the plaintiffs object to “being forced by the federal government to contribute in any way to the funding of abortion.” Abortion funding is contrary to their First Amendment rights of conscience and free exercise of religion, the complaint continues.

The lawsuit also charges that the health care reform law imposes unconstitutional government mandates on citizens. It challenges Congress’ authority under the Commerce Clause to pass the law, and claims violations of the Tenth Amendment which reserves power for the states and the people.

“Let’s face it, if Congress has the power to force individuals to purchase health insurance coverage or pay a federal penalty merely because they live in America, then it has the unconstrained power to mandate that every American family buy a General Motors vehicle to help the economy or pay a federal penalty,” Thompson argued.

He commented that Americans agree on the need for reform of health care, but said they do not want reform “by trampling on our Constitution.”

Attorneys general from 13 U.S. states have also filed a lawsuit charging that the Constitution “nowhere authorizes the United States to mandate, either directly or under threat of penalty, that all citizens and legal residents have qualifying health care coverage."
EWTN News

A TALE OF TWO TRINKETS

Anyone that has read Dante's classic, "The Inferno", has a picture in their mind of the clever torments inflicted upon sinners in all the various levels of Hell. The torments are always directly related to the sin and incredibly clever in their application. I wonder what use he would have found for these pens?

On a shelf in my parents house sits a beer mug. It was removed from a dead German soldier during WWII. The artwork on it is a depiction of people working in the death camps with the slogan "Arbeit Macht Frei" shown above the gates. Like the pen given to Sister Kehaan this mug memorialized this soldiers participation in a Holocaust. Like the Sister he was part of the political machine that had as it's goal and made possible the deaths of millions because they were inconvenient, sick, poor or a thousand other reasons.

I pray for Sister Kehaan and that dead German soldier. Honestly though, I wouldn't want to die with either the pen or the stein and what they both signify attached to my immortal soul.

"Sister Carol Kehaan, President of the Catholic Health Association, has been awarded with one of the 20 pens used by President Barak Obama on Tuesday to sign the health care bill.

...Sister Kehaan, who strongly supported the controversial health care bill despite the opposition of the US Bishops, was joined in receiving presidential pens by some of the most strongly pro-abortion members of the Congress and the Senate: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid; Senator Dick Durbin, majority whip; Max Baucus, chairman of the Finance Committee; Senators Tom Harkin and Christopher Dodd; House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer; James Clyburn, majority whip; George Miller, chairman of the Education committee; Henry Waxman, chairman of Energy and Commerce; Sander Levin, chairman of the Ways and Means Committee; John Dingell; and Charles Rangel, former chairman of the Ways and Means Committee."
Catholic News Agency

WHO'S REALLY TO BLAME

ARE YOU HAPPY, BISHOPS?

Now that health care has been signed into law I've got a question for all of the Catholic bishops that have gotten in bed with the Progressives over the years; are you happy? You have supported spiritually, monetarily and politically legislation that will cause the deaths of unborn children. Yeah sure, you said that you didn't want it passed with the abortion funding intact. OK, fine. You made a valiant effort after the bill was a fait accompli. But because you got in bed with the devil you will be held accountable. Your actions assisted the Progressives in achieving their ends.

Somehow you thought that you could control the process. You thought that the power you possess in the Church would transfer to the world of politics. You thought that the years of working with the government to get funding for your charities, your schools and your pet causes had established some sort of mutual friendship. You believed that you were using the government as your soldiers in the war on poverty. You believed they were on your side.

It looks like you were played. It looks like you were the ones that were used. You've accepted restrictions on religious belief as part of your deal with the Devil. You've accepted medical staff into Catholic Hospitals that recommend contraception and abortion. You made the cause of socialism your cause. You've twisted authentic Catholic teaching to suit your "friends" political agenda. And because of all of this you ceded the moral high ground and lost your way.

The government has replaced God as the final arbiter of right and wrong. We turn to the government to solve the problems that were once handled in the Church, such as poverty and sickness. Attendance at Mass has fallen precipitously while more Americans would rather seek pleasure at a sporting event than truth in front of the Eucharist.

Bishops, in as far as you have cooperated with the Progressives to see this Satanic bill passed you are guilty and accountable. We're going to see all kinds of efforts to cover your trail but we know. We are quite aware of what you've done and why you've done it. And somehow, someway we are going to see that this doesn't happen again.

ARCH. CHAPUT AND HEALTH CARE

Archbishop Chaput, thank you for the truth regarding these "Catholic" groups. Now for my question: what are you going to do about it? In your Archdiocese where you hold extraordinary power as Bishop. What are you going to do?

The Church is structured in such a way as to give Bishops control of their diocese and responsibility for what happens there. You have the power to silence, censure, and drive out any group in your diocese using the Church for it's own political gain. You can deny communion to members and I think even excommunicate those that obstinately refuse to accept lawful Church authority. Look to the actions of Archbishop Burke regarding St. Stanislaus while here in St. Louis.

I know that you can affect change. So, what are you going to do? Subsidiarity demands that we start at the bottom to solve our problems; we can't look to Rome. We're here to support you, believe me. There are many, many loyal, orthodox Catholics out here waiting for a leader to stand up. Are you that man?

What are WE going to do?

"...Fourth, self-described “Catholic” groups have done a serious disservice to justice, to the Church, and to the ethical needs of the American people by undercutting the leadership and witness of their own bishops. For groups like Catholics United, this is unsurprising. In their effect, if not in formal intent, such groups exist to advance the interests of a particular political spectrum. Nor is it newsworthy from an organization like Network, which – whatever the nature of its good work -- has rarely shown much enthusiasm for a definition of “social justice” that includes the rights of the unborn child.

But the actions of the Catholic Health Association (CHA) in providing a deliberate public counter-message to the bishops were both surprising and profoundly disappointing; and also genuinely damaging. In the crucial final days of debate on health-care legislation, CHA lobbyists worked directly against the efforts of the American bishops in their approach to members of Congress. The bad law we now likely face, we owe in part to the efforts of the Catholic Health Association and similar “Catholic” organizations."
Archdiocese of Denver

GAME OVER-STUPAK ON BOARD

"House Democrats have picked up critical health reform “yes” votes from a group of anti-abortion lawmakers, including Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak, according to senior Democratic aides. Democrats believe a breakthrough with Stupak's group - based on the promise of an executive order to be issued by President Barack Obama reinforcing a ban on federal funding for abortion - will help give them the 216-vote majority needed to pass reform on Sunday."
Politico

EXECUTIVE ORDER TO BE USED TO OUTLAW ABORTION FUNDING

If you believe this I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you. It looks like they finally found the lie that everyone can agree to hide behind. If the pro-life Democrats roll over on this it says all I need to know about where their loyalty lies; it's not with the murdered babies.

The Democrats have the votes to overturn the executive order, otherwise it wouldn't be offered.

"House Democratic leaders are struggling to gain the 216 votes they need to win a healthcare vote on Sunday.

House Democratic leaders struggling to gain the 216 votes they need to win a healthcare vote earned two more crucial supporters on Sunday.

Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) announced she’d support the bill, saying she was convinced it would prevent federal funds from being used for abortion services.

Separately, MSNBC reported that Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) would vote for the bill.

Stupak earlier on Sunday had said he was close to a deal with the White House on an executive order on the abortion issue. The order would specify there would be no public funding for abortions in the healthcare bill.

“We are close to getting something done,” Stupak said in an interview with MSNBC.
The Hill

WHORES, LOGIC AND HEALTH CARE

I'll preface this by saying that if you and someone else want to have sex and money changes hands, I don't care. That's between you and God. If the transaction furthers the criminal activities of others or causes harm to others in any way, that's a different story.

We live in a society of laws. Laws are necessary to the furtherance of society. They should be minimal and they should serve the common good. They also need to be respected and justly enforced. If society begins to believe that laws are enforced unjustly, any law and for whatever reason, the efficacy of all law will be called into question.

Prostitution, "the act or practice of engaging in promiscuous sexual relations especially for money", is illegal in California. I don't know why and I don't really care. What I do care about is the fact that in a state where some poor lug, drunk and stupid on a Saturday night, can get arrested for following his base instincts, but not really hurting anybody, an entire industry based on the same act is allowed to thrive.

How can state regulators establish safety regulations for an illegal act? This is like saying that the get away car in a bank robbery must have seat belts! It seems as though, since prostitution is illegal that instead of checking the fit on somebodies rubber maybe they should be arresting some whores!

Because the porn industry pays taxes and lines the pockets of some politicians and cops, the fact that it is prostitution is overlooked. Because it is a source of revenue to the government it stands above the law. If the government doesn't respect the law why should anyone else?

There is no reason in our country any longer; no logic and no sense. Whether whores or politicians, bankers or lawyers, thieves or priests; the law has become a plaything. It isn't used to further the common good, just the personal power of the people that write it.

And so, tomorrow will see the health care bill passed.

PROSTITUTION:
the act or practice of engaging in promiscuous sexual relations especially for money.
Merriam-Webster

"In California, Prostitution is a crime that falls under the category of Disorderly Conduct. Solicitation for Prostitution (also known as either Solicitation or Prostitution) is charged as a misdemeanor, while Pandering or Pimping is charged as a felony. According to the California Penal Code, Solicitation, Prostitution, Pandering, and Loitering are defined as follows:

Solicitation - Also known as Solicitation for Prostitution, the act of directing or asking someone to exchange money for sexual activity is defined under Section 647(b) of the California Penal Code.
Prostitution - The act of exchanging money for sexual activity is known as Prostitution and defined under Section 653.20(a) of the California Penal Code.
Pandering - The crime committed by a "pimp", Pandering is defined under Section 266(i) of the California Penal Code and is best described as:
Solicitation of customers for prostitution services
Recruitment of prostitutes for hire
Loitering - Defined under Section 653.20(c) of the California Penal Code, Loitering means to linger without a lawful reason for the purpose of committing a crime or engaging in prostitution. Loitering is a "non-priorable" and lesser charge crime which means it is not subject to Jail Enhancement Penalties."
LA Criminal Defense Attorney

"State regulators are expected to vote Thursday on a petition asking them to require porn industry performers to use condoms and to take other safety measures. The six-member California Division of Occupational Safety and Health standards board appears likely to create an advisory committee to report back on whether the law should be changed and how it could be accomplished.

The board, appointed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, has up to six months to act on a Dec. 17, 2009 petition filed by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation that seeks to change state law to require safe-sex protections for adult-film workers, including mandatory condom use and more stringent safety training and testing for sexually transmitted diseases."
LA Times

WALMART, COLLUSION AND THE COLLAPSE OF THE FREE MARKET

Walmart plans to cut food prices and damage the already teetering grocery industry. Is this healthy competition, allowing one company, by virtue of size alone, to dominate any market to such an extent that it can destroy all its competition? Is this a free market?

Is it any surprise then that Walmart, along with SEIU and The Center for American Progress, backs the health care bill? Walgreens has already announced in Washington state that it will no longer fill new Medicaide prescriptions because it can't afford the loss in profit.

Walgreens is a pharmacy that sells other goods. Walmart, on the other hand, is a general retailer that also has a pharmacy on the premises. Walmart is happy to take a small lose on drugs because it can spread the cost around to other items due to its size.

Walmart is happy to collude with the government because this collusion will increase it market share. So I have a question. Where are all the people on the left that are always screaming about how unfair Walmart is to its workers? People like SEIU. And where are all the activists that are always screaming about Walmart destroying local economies? WHERE ARE YOU??!!

The ends justify the means.

"Wal-Mart Stores Inc will cut food prices and mount a new ad campaign over the next six weeks, a threat to other U.S. grocers that sent an industry shares index down more than 2 percent on Friday.

A Morgan Stanley analyst first reported the world's largest retailer's plan, calling it a major setback for other U.S. grocers, and the company confirmed the promotions in an email.

"While this helps address Walmart's traffic woes, we view this as a major setback for the grocery stocks, which have been rallying on hopes of a return to more rational pricing," Morgan Stanley analyst Mark Wiltamuth wrote in a note on Friday.

The Standard & Poor's Food Retail Sub-Industry Index closed down 2.2 percent.

Walmart has used aggressive pricing in grocery and other units to bring shoppers into its stores. The grocery business is particularly pressured by such pricing, as its profit margins are already low."
Reuters

"As health care reform enters the next phase, we came together at this point in the debate to add our combined voices to the momentum building behind reform. We believe the time for comprehensive reform is now. The present system is not sustainable. The status quo is not an option.

"We applaud the bipartisan efforts in Congress to craft and pass legislation.

"We are pleased that Walmart, Service Employees International Union and Center for American Progress can support three essential elements that should be included in any health care reform legislation--an employer mandate, strong efficiency provisions and a 'trigger' mechanism to ensure cost reductions."
Walmart


"Walgreens has told state officials that as of April 16, it no longer will fill prescriptions for new Medicaid patients at its 121 Washington pharmacies because it isn't being reimbursed enough by the state.

In a news release, the Deerfield, Ill.-based drugstore chain said it will continue to serve its existing Medicaid patients, but it can't take on additional losses due to reductions in the state's payments.
Walgreens had planned to stop filling Medicaid prescriptions in February at 64 of its stores in Washington, but held off while negotiations with the state Department of Social and Health Services continued.

The chain said the state reimburses it at less than its cost to break even on nearly 95 percent of brand name medications it dispenses to Medicaid patients.
"Obviously, we're disappointed that the alternatives we've suggested have failed to achieve a compromise," said Kermit Crawford, Walgreens executive vice president of pharmacy. "We intend to continue our commitment to serving our existing patients, but we simply cannot take on additional losses."
Bellingham Herald

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

If the healthcare bill passes, which I'm sure it will, what is the next step? The courts? And then what?

We're crossing uncharted waters.

"...The Slaughter Solution is a poisoned chalice. By drinking from it, the Democrats would not only commit political suicide. They would guarantee that any bill signed by Mr. Obama is illegitimate, illegal and blatantly unconstitutional. It would be worse than a strategic blunder; it would be a crime - a moral crime against the American people and a direct abrogation of the Constitution and our very democracy.

It would open Mr. Obama, as well as key congressional leaders such as Mrs. Pelosi, to impeachment. The Slaughter Solution would replace the rule of law with arbitrary one-party rule. It violates the entire basis of our constitutional government - meeting the threshold of "high crimes and misdemeanors." If it's enacted, Republicans should campaign for the November elections not only on repealing Obamacare, but on removing Mr. Obama and his gang of leftist thugs from office.

It is time Americans drew a line in the sand. Mr. Obama crosses it at his peril."
Washington Times

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
Declaration of Independence

WALGREENS IN SEATTLE REFUSES MEDICAIDE

If health care passes, this is our future. This is what happens when the free market is removed from the system. We will end up with government stores selling only the drugs that the government allows. So we'll have very little selection and the corruption bred by government involvement will cause the few we have to be of low quality, limited supply and high price. Of course, we won't see the price because the bills will be paid in Washington. Our money will be used to line the pockets of the chosen few. Isn't this exactly what the Progressives say is happening now?

"Effective April 16, Walgreens drugstores across the state (Wahington) won't take any new Medicaid patients, saying that filling their prescriptions is a money-losing proposition — the latest development in an ongoing dispute over Medicaid reimbursement.

The company, which operates 121 stores in the state, will continue filling Medicaid prescriptions for current patients.

In a news release, Walgreens said its decision to not take new Medicaid patients stemmed from a "continued reduction in reimbursement" under the state's Medicaid program, which reimburses it at less than the break-even point for 95 percent of brand-name medications dispensed to Medicaid patents."
Seattle Times

PRAY FOR REP. STUPAK

More love and understanding from the party of tolerance.

The telephone lines in his Washington and district offices have been “jammed” and he’s gotten more than 1,500 faxes and countless e-mails — most of which he says don’t come from his constituents.

The fight has taken a toll on his wife, who has disconnected the phone in their home to avoid harassment.

“All the phones are unplugged at our house — tired of the obscene calls and threats. She won’t watch TV,” Stupak said during an hourlong interview with The Hill in his Rayburn office. “People saying they’re going to spit on you and all this. That’s just not fun.”

Stupak has become a nationally known figure because of his demands for tough language in healthcare legislation to prevent any federal subsidies from being used for abortion services.
The Hill

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION?

If thirty eight states sign on to this you not only have the 2/3 of the states needed to call a Constitutional Convention, you also have the 3/4 of the states needed to ratify an amendment. If the push for the Tenth Amendment rights of the states is not recognized this is the next step; to call for a Constitutional Convention. The question is, can it be contained to just the health care debate or would it throw open the whole Constitution for reconsideration?

These are the times that try mens souls.

"Idaho took the lead in a growing, nationwide fight against health care overhaul Wednesday when its governor became the first to sign a measure requiring the state attorney general to sue the federal government if residents are forced to buy health insurance.
Similar legislation is pending in 37 other states.

Constitutional law experts say the movement is mostly symbolic because federal laws supersede those of the states.

But the state measures reflect a growing frustration with President President Barack Obama's health care overhaul. The proposal would cover some 30 million uninsured people, end insurance practices such as denying coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, require almost all Americans to get coverage by law, and try to slow the cost of medical care nationwide.
Democratic leaders hope to vote on it this weekend.

With Washington closing in on a deal in the months-long battle over health care overhaul, Republican state lawmakers opposed to the measure are stepping up opposition.
Otter, a Republican, said he believes any future lawsuit from Idaho has a legitimate shot of winning, despite what the naysayers say.

"The ivory tower folks will tell you, 'No, they're not going anywhere,' " he told reporters. "But I'll tell you what, you get 36 states, that's a critical mass. That's a constitutional mass."
AP

:...The second method prescribed is for a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States, and for that Convention to propose one or more amendments. These amendments are then sent to the states to be approved by three-fourths of the legislatures or conventions. This route has never been taken, and there is discussion in political science circles about just how such a convention would be convened, and what kind of changes it would bring about."
U.S. Constitution.net

OBAMA GIVES DEMOCRATS REASON TO VOTE AGAINST HEALTH CARE

Since the President has been the kiss of death for anyone he campaigns for and most Americans don't want healthcare, I'm thinking this statement from the President pretty much points to a no vote for any Democrat that wants to keep his job.

You do what your constituents want and you keep the President out of your district. Win-win!

"The president will refuse to make fund-raising visits during November elections to any district whose representative has not backed the bill.

A one-night presidential appearance can bring in hundreds of thousands of dollars in funds which would otherwise take months to accumulate through cold-calling by campaign volunteers.
Mr Obama's threat came as the year-long debate over his signature domestic policy entered its final week.

Mr Obama is personally telephoning congressmen who are still on the fence this week, in between several personal appearances devoted toward swinging public opinion."
Telegraph

"It may be only a matter of time before President Obama's invitations start to get lost in the mail.

In the most recent gubernatorial and Senate races, the president -- the man who swept to office on a raft of support from red and blue states alike -- has gone 0 for 3. He put his prestige on the line with campaign visits to Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts, only to see his party lose each race.

In the latest election, some have suggested Obama couldn't have saved Martha Coakley's Senate campaign in Massachusetts no matter how hard he tried. But strategists say the president's inability to turn that race or the two gubernatorial races around suggests Democrats in moderate states could be rolling up their welcome mats ahead of the midterm elections in November."
Fox News

STEALING IS GOOD- THE BISHOPS SAY SO

Archbishop Dolan is on the healthcare bandwagon along with many of the other Bishops. In his statement below, which of course I heartily disagree with, he states, "...Health care, we insist, has to be truly universal. That means everybody – the baby in the womb, his or her mother, the poor, the immigrant, and our elders until natural death.”

I'm going to make an assumption here based on the many other statements I've read from the USCCB that when he says immigrants he means illegal immigrants. I spent a good bit of time yesterday reading "Pacem in Terris", Pope John XXIII's 1963 encyclical regarding human rights. In it the Pope links rights and obligations. Our right to health care is linked to our right to life as an obligation upon others to, if it is within their power, supply us with life saving medical care. He makes the argument that the government has an obligation to the people to support their basic rights because the people support the government through their taxes (work). Basically, because the government is an extension of us it has the same obligations we do.

I agree with this. We lend the government some of our rights so that it has the authority necessary to govern. Logically then, if rights and obligations are inextricably bound to one another it would follow that our obligations transfer to the government along with our rights.

So then I have to wonder; since illegal aliens cannot, because they are not citizens, lend anything to the government, how is the government obligated to give them anything back? Further, since most illegals work outside the law, avoiding income tax, they are not supporting the government.

"...Since men are social by nature, they must live together and consult each other's interests. That men should recognize and perform their respective rights and duties is imperative to a well ordered society. But the result will be that each individual will make his whole-hearted contribution to the creation of a civic order in which rights and duties are ever more diligently and more effectively observed."
Pacem in Terris

If illegals are not performing their respective duties by avoiding the income tax how can the government (the people) be obligated to pay their health care costs?

Further, this womb to the tomb health care system being supported by the Bishops and our political leaders is not supported by the Church. Society is not obligated to provide this. Just as the government cannot possess rights that the people don't possess it follows that it cannot have obligations beyond those of the citizen.

Is there anyone out there that believes they have the moral obligation to steal the property of someone else to pay for the health care of a third party, for the rest of their natural lives? If there is please write me and explain how theft becomes the moral norm and expectation.

(And I wonder? As the Archbishop states, "“The bishops have been advocating universal health care for nearly a century." Is it any coincidence that, at about the same time as the Bishops started advocating this lie Saul Alinsky and the Progressives were working their way into the Church through the Bishops conference? I'm just asking.)

Archbishop of New York Timothy Dolan says the use of federal money for abortion remains a “grave concern.” He has argued that abortion funding is a threat to universal health care because it excludes unborn children from its scope.

Writing in a Monday post at his blog “The Gospel in the Digital Age,” Archbishop Dolan noted the “tough spot” of those who are enthusiastic about universal health care.

“The bishops have been advocating universal health care for nearly a century. So, we sure want to see it work, and appreciate the efforts of the president and both parties in Congress to bring it home.”

“On the other hand, we’re worried. Health care, we insist, has to be truly universal. That means everybody – the baby in the womb, his or her mother, the poor, the immigrant, and our elders until natural death.”
Catholic News Agency