cj.myfreeforum.org Forum Index cj.myfreeforum.org
NEWS, prophecy, dreams, ZionsCRY, Bible, teaching, visions
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Join! (free) Join! (free)
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The free forums are now under new ownership, a full announcement will be made shortly
ObamaCare, RINO RyanCare
Page 1, 2, 3 ... 40, 41, 42  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    cj.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> HEALTH and Medical NEWS
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
CJ
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32147



PostPosted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:19 pm    Post subject: ObamaCare, RINO RyanCare  Reply with quote

               OBAMACARE  February 22,  2010

ObamaCare DETAILS and UPDATES in HEALTH section
http://cj.myfreeforum.org/about314.html

Govt-Run Health BACK from the DEAD
Obama Health Care, The bill from hell
THIS IS DEATH CARE - NOT HEALTH CARE


DEMONcratsTO RAHM-THROUGH  HELLthscare!
This bill is under 0bama's signature and there is NOTHING Republicans can do about it

February  22, 2010
 Obama to overhaul the health insurance system.
Americans Strongly Disapprove of 0bamacare by 41%
BUT - Dems will ram this thru with only 51 Senate votes.
This 0care bill will help no one, and HURT EVERYONE.
I dont know why those fools keep pushing something Americans have clearly told them LOUDLY that we DO NOT WANT.

Healthcare Funds will be transferred to the Social Security Trust if necessary.
0care uses the word 'TAX' 35 Times.
Increase in Fees on Brand Name Pharmaceuticals
Broaden Tax Base for High-Income Taxpayers
Tax on individuals if they choose not to become insured

BACK DOOR GOVT CONTROL
The plan has no public option, but this does not preclude a reconciliation vote on the public option later.
The bill nixes  Ben Nelson’s cornhusker kickback Nebraska deal and boosts Federal financing for Medicaid expansion in all states.

Obama creates a Federal panel to monitor and block exorbitant rate hikes and other unfair practices by the insurance industry.
The State now regulates insurance
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/health-care
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2...ma-propose-limits-insurance-rates
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-bri...-nelsons-cornhusker-kickback-deal


ObamaCare, Banks, Economy - 12 pages
http://cj.myfreeforum.org/about1237.html

ObamaCare details
http://cj.myfreeforum.org/about314.html


Financial collapse will occur after Obamacare is fully implemented.
Obamacare was never healthcare, its TOTAL KONTROL of Americans.
Financial collapse, Lindsey Williams
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Qu87Sfg7RZ4
http://www.lindseywilliams.net

How Much Time Do We Have
http://thegoldenreport.net/?p=1180

Obama Signs 'Health' * Lawsuits to REPEAL follow
http://cj.myfreeforum.org/about394.html

Gruber - page 26
http://cj.myfreeforum.org/ftopic294-300.php


ObamaCare DETAILS
ObamaCare was PLANNED to FAIL!!

http://cj.myfreeforum.org/about314.html

OBAMACARE was never about healthcare
http://cj.myfreeforum.org/about294.html

ObamaCare, Banks, Economy
http://cj.myfreeforum.org/about1237.html

Mandatory chip everyone in ObamaCare
666, Bitcoin
http://cj.myfreeforum.org/about3231.html


ObamaCare 2017 - GONE
Repealed and Replaced

http://cj.myfreeforum.org/ftopic294-0-asc-351.php

RyanCare defeated March 24, 2017 - GOOD!


         Posted   <*))))><   by  


ZionsCRY DAILY NEWS
NEWS and analysis you can TRUST
http://tinyurl.com/ZcryNEW


   


Last edited by CJ on Fri Mar 31, 2017 9:52 am; edited 25 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CJ
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32147



PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:35 am    Post subject: Abortion language in bill Reply with quote

Abortion language in bill
Page 11 on health care plan does NOT explicitly ban the use of federal funds for abortions.
Obama had promised no federal dollars would be used to kill babies.  

ANOTHER 0BAMA LIE?
The bill’s funding restriction allows insurance plans that cover abortions to receive federal subsidies.
http://whitehouse.blogs.foxnews.c...oposal-worries-some-in-washington


ObamaCare Closes pain-treatment program
Look what president's solution is doing to U.S. health centers


August 16, 2010
Obamacare has landed in Denver, where doctors at a pain-management clinic have been told they must stop treating patients with a
successful process that extracts their own adult stem cells, cultivates them and then reinjects them to stimulate growth in damaged limbs.
The word of the dispute comes from Dr. Christopher Centano of the Centano Schultz clinic, whose Regenexx, or Regenerative Sciences Inc.,
has been successfully treating patients with the process for several years.
Centano confirms his work provides a much less costly and significantly more convenient alternative to knee or hip joint replacement surgeries, which sometimes require a year or more of recuperation.

But the Food and Drug Administration, in the wake of the adoption of President Obama's plan to nationalize health-care decision making,
has ordered the company to halt, because the federal agency views the process as making "drugs."
The FDA announced Aug. 6 that it wanted an injunction in federal court against the company, alleging "violations of current good manufacturing practice."
"Regenerative Sciences' cultured cell product is not approved by the FDA, and no adequate and well-controlled studies have been done to demonstrate its safety or effectiveness for any indication," the federal agency announced.

Wake up, America! Your country is about to disappear!

Karen Midthun, acting director for the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said in the announcement,
"FDA recognizes the importance of the development of novel and promising new therapies.
However, when companies like Regenerative Sciences fail to comply with FDA laws and regulations, they put the public's health at risk."
An FDA spokeswoman provided the announcement to WND but did not elaborate.

The agency, in a 2008 letter to the company, said, "In order to introduce or deliver for introduction a drug that is also a biological product into interstate commerce,
a valid biologics license must be in effect. Such licenses are issued only after a showing of safety and efficacy for the product's intended use.
While in the development stage, such products may be distributed for clinical use in humans only if the sponsor has an investigational new drug application in effect as specified by FDA regulations.
The mesenchymal stem cells utilized in your Regenexx procedure are not the subject of an approved biologics license application (BLA)
nor is there an investigational new drug application (IND) in effect. Therefore, your implantation of the mesenchymal stem cells for which
a valid license or IND is not in effect appears to violate the Act and the PHS Act and may result in FDA seeking relief as provided by law."

Centano said despite the company's repeated efforts to obtain a resolution in the disagreement, the FDA continually declined to respond – until Obamacare was adopted.
Now the federal agency has moved to "enjoin" the company's operations, and Centano told WND his company will fight.

"I think what we're seeing is a massive federalist move here. I think this represents that [for] Obamacare to work there has to be strict federal control over medicine."
He said that until now, medicine has been provided by doctors and regulated at the state level.
That's not going to work under Obamacare. The government is trying to get more and more positive control over what your doctor does or doesn't do."

Centano said the process he uses doesn't create a drug, as the FDA claims.
It's not more complicated than the "blood-doping" process that athletes sometimes in the past have attempted to improve their performance.
And under the guidance offered by the FDA, a doctor who treats knee pain with a steroid and a painkiller should go through the
process of acknowledging he or she is making a "drug" because of the combination of medications, he suggested.  video
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=191177


8 States already plan to ignore ObamaCare
January 25, 2011  
What if states repudiated a law Washington DC made, and threatened to prosecute those enforcing it?
8 states consider a blanket nullification of the Obamacare nationalization of health-care in their legislatures.
"Thomas Jefferson advised, 'Whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers ... a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy,'" states the Tenth Amendment Center, which advocates a return to the constitutionally delegated powers for the federal government.
"When states pass laws to reject and nullify unconstitutional federal 'laws,' regulations and mandates – it's not rebellion ... it's duty," the organization states.

States already have been moving forward aggressively on several issues, with eight approving firearms freedom acts that reject some federal gun laws, 15 actively defying Washington on cannabis laws and seven passing acts that reject health-care mandates.

Now, however, they are moving a step beyond, according to center founder Michael Boldin.
7 states have introduced acts to nullify the federal health-care reform, including New Hampshire, Maine, Montana, Oregon, Nebraska, Texas and Wyoming.
A similar proposal is expected to be filed in Idaho
within a matter of days.

Obamacare already has been repealed in the U.S. House, where the vote was 245-189, which included 3 Democrats backing repeal.
While Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has promised to prevent the issue from coming up for discussion, Republicans say they will work on getting the Senate, which has a slight Democrat majority, to discuss the issue.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=253521


Judge rules healthcare reform unconstitutional

January 31, 2011  UPDATE - Obama ignored this
A judge in Florida on Monday became the second judge to declare President Barack Obama's healthcare reform law unconstitutional, in the biggest legal challenge yet to federal authority to enact the law.

U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson, appointed to the bench by President Ronald Reagan in 1983, ruled that the reform law's so-called "individual mandate" went too far in requiring that Americans start buying health insurance in 2014 or pay a penalty.
"Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire act must be declared void. This has been a difficult decision to reach, and I am aware that it will have indeterminable implications," Vinson wrote.

He was referring to a key provision in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and sided with governors and attorneys general from 26 U.S. states, almost all of whom are Republicans, in declaring it unconstitutional. The issue will likely end up at the Supreme Court.

The plaintiffs represent more than half the U.S. states, so the Pensacola case has more prominence than two dozen lawsuits filed in federal courts over the healthcare law.
The healthcare overhaul, a cornerstone of Obama's presidency, aims to expand health insurance to cover millions of uninsured Americans while also curbing costs. Administration officials insist it is constitutional and needed to stem huge projected increases in healthcare costs.

Two other federal judges have rejected challenges to the individual mandate.
But a federal district judge in Richmond, Virginia, last month struck down that central provision of the law in a case in that state, saying it invited an "unbridled exercise of federal police powers."

The provision is key to the law's mission of covering more than 30 million uninsured. Officials argue it is only by requiring healthy people to purchase policies that they can help pay for reforms, including a mandate that individuals with pre-existing medical conditions cannot be refused coverage.
http://www.reuters.com/article/20...dType=RSS&feedName=healthNews
.


Last edited by CJ on Tue Jul 02, 2013 5:43 am; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Poppajoe



Joined: 28 Sep 2009
Posts: 279



PostPosted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 12:54 pm    Post subject: Letter from a medical doctor to his Senator Reply with quote

Letter from a medical doctor to his Senator
I believe this a letter that everyone should be aware of:
This letter appeared in the Indianapolis Star (which is owned by the same people who own the Arizona Republic) and was sent to a very popular Indiana Senator.
This just goes to show everyone what pressure these Democrats are currently under, so continue to let them know how you feel about the healthcare bill.  
Bill Stough - Shock to NBC This morning.
   
An  Indianapolis doctor's letter to Sen. Bayh about  the Bill
( Note:   Dr. Stephen E. Frazer, MD practices as an  anesthesiologist in Indianapolis, IN  )  
Here is a  letter I sent to Senator Bayh. Feel free to  copy it and send it around to all other  representatives.   - Stephen  Fraser

Senator  Bayh,  
As a practicing  physician I have major concerns with the health  care bill before Congress. I actually have read  the bill and am shocked by the brazenness of the  government's proposed involvement in the  patient-physician relationship. The very idea  that the government will dictate and ration  patient care is dangerous and certainly not  helpful in designing a health care system that  works for all. Every physician I work with  agrees that we need to fix our health care  system, but the proposed bills currently making  their way through congress will be a disaster if  passed.
 
I ask you  respectfully and as a patriotic American to look  at the following troubling lines that I have  read in the bill.
You cannot possibly believe  that these proposals are in the best interests  of the country and our fellow citizens.

Page 22  of the HC Bill:  Mandates that the Govt  will audit books of all employers that  self-insure!!
Page 30 Sec 123  of HC bill:   THERE WILL BE A GOVT  COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits  you get.
Page 29 lines 4-16 in  the HC bill: YOUR HEALTH CARE IS  RATIONED!!!
 
Page 42 of HC  Bill:  The Health Choices Commissioner  will choose your HC benefits for you. You have  no choice!
Page 50 Section 152  in HC bill: HC will be provided to ALL  non-US citizens, illegal or  otherwise.              

Page  58 HC Bill:  Govt will have real-time  access to individuals' finances & a  'National ID Health card' will be  issued! (Papers  please!)
Page  59 HC Bill lines 21-24:  Govt will have  direct access to your bank accounts for elective  funds transfer. (Time  for more cash and carry)

Page 65  Sec 164: Is a payoff subsidized plan for  retirees and their families in unions &  community organizations:  (ACORN).
Page 84 Sec 203 HC  bill: Govt mandates ALL benefit packages  for private HC plans in the  'Exchange.'
 
Page 85 Line  7 HC Bill:  Specifications of Benefit  Levels for Plans -- The Govt  will ration your health  care!
Page 91 Lines 4-7  HC Bill: Govt mandates linguistic  appropriate services.  (Translation:  illegal aliens.)
Page 95  HC Bill Lines 8-18: The Govt will use  groups (i.e. ACORN & Americorps to sign up  individuals for Govt HC  plan.

Page 85 Line 7 HC  Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels  for Plans. (AARP members - your health care WILL  be rationed!)
Page 102  Lines 12-18 HC Bill:  Medicaid eligible  individuals will be automatically enrolled in  Medicaid.  (No choice.)

Page  12 4 lines 24-25 HC: No company can sue  GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review"  against Govt monopoly.
Page 127  Lines 1-16 HC Bill: Doctors/ American  Medical Association - The Govt will tell YOU  what salary you can make.
Page  145 Line 15-17: An Employer MUST  auto-enroll employees into public option  plan. (NO choice!)

Page  126 Lines 22-25: Employers MUST pay for  HC for part-time employees ANDtheir  families.  (Employees shouldn't get excited  about this as employers will be forced to reduce  its work force, benefits, and wages/salaries to  cover such a huge  expense.)

Page 149 Lines  16-24: ANY Employer with payroll 401k  & above who does not provide public option  will pay 8% tax on all payroll!  (See the  last comment in  parenthesis.)
Page 150  Lines 9-13: A business with payroll  between $251K & $401K who doesn't provide  public option will pay 2-6% tax on all  payroll.
 
Page 167 Lines  18-23: ANY individual who doesn't have  acceptable HC according to Govt will be taxed  2.5% of income.
Page 170 Lines  1-3 HC Bill: Any NONRESIDENT Alien is  exempt from individual taxes.  (Americans will pay.) (Like  always)

Page  195 HC Bill: Officers & employees of  the GOVT HC Admin..  will have access  to ALL Americans' finances and  personal records. (I guess  so they can 'deduct' their  fees)

Page 203  Line 14-15 HC: "The tax imposed under  this section shall not be treated as tax."   (Yes, it really says  that!) ( a  'fee' instead)
Page 239  Line 14-24 HC Bill: Govt will reduce  physician services for Medicaid Seniors.   (Low-income and the poor are  affected.)

Page 241  Line 6-8 HC Bill: Doctors: It doesn't  matter what specialty you have trained yourself  in -- you will all be paid the same! (Just TRY  to tell me that's not  Socialism!)

Page 253 Line  10-18: The Govt sets the value of a  doctor's time, profession, judgment, etc.   (Literally-- the value of  humans.)
Page 265 Sec 1131:  The Govt mandates and controls productivity for  "private" HC industries.
 
Page  268 Sec 1141: The federal Govt regulates the  rental and purchase of power driven  wheelchairs.
Page 272 SEC.  1145: TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS -  Cancer patients - welcome to  rationing!
 
Page 280 Sec 1151:  The Govt will penalize hospitals for whatever  the Govt deems preventable  (i.e...re-admissions).
Page 298 Lines  9-11: Doctors: If you treat a patient during  initial admission that results in a re-admission  -- the Govt will penalize  you.
 
Page 317 L 13-20:  PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. (The Govt  tells doctors what and how much they can  own!)
 
Page 317-318 lines  21-25, 1-3: PROHIBITION on expansion.  (The  Govt is mandating that hospitals cannot  expand.)
Page 321  2-13: Hospitals have the opportunity to apply  for exception BUT community input is required.   (Can you say  ACORN?)
 
Page 335 L 16-25 Pg  336-339: The Govt mandates establishment of=2  outcome-based measures. (HC the way they want --  rationing.)
Page 341  Lines 3-9: The Govt has authority to disqualify  Medicare Advance Plans, HMOs, etc.   (Forcing people into the Govt  plan)
 
Page 354 Sec 1177: The  Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of 'special needs  people!'    Unbelievable!
Page  379 Sec 1191: The Govt creates more bureaucracy  via a "Tele-Health Advisory Committee."   (Can you say HC by  phone?)
Page 425 Lines 4-12:  The Govt mandates "Advance-Care Planning  Consult."  (Think senior citizens  end-of-life patients.)
 
Page  425 Lines 17-19: The Govt will instruct and  consult regarding living wills, durable powers  of attorney, etc.  (And  it's mandatory!)
Page 425  Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3: The Govt provides an  "approved" list of end-of-life resources;  guiding you in death. (Also called 'assisted  suicide.')(Sounds  like Soylent Green to  me.)

Page  427 Lines 15-24: The Govt mandates a program for  orders on "end-of-life."  (The Govt has a  say in how your life  ends!)
Page 429 Lines 1-9: An  "advanced-care planning consultant" will be used  frequently as a patient's health  deteriorates.
 
Page 429 Lines  10-12: An "advanced care consultation" may  include an ORDER for end-of-life plans..   (AN ORDER TO DIE FROM THE  GOVERNMENT?!?)

Page 429  Lines 13-25: The GOVT will specify which doctors  can write an end-of-life order..  (I  wouldn't want to stand before God after getting  paid for THAT job!)  

Page 430  Lines 11-15: The Govt will decide what level of  treatment you will have at end-of-life!   (Again -- no  choice!)
Page 469:  Community-Based Home Medical Services =  Non-Profit Organizations.  (Hello?   ACORN Medical Services  here!?!)
 
Page 489 Sec 1308:  The Govt will cover marriage and family therapy.   (Which means Govt will insert itself into  your marriage even.)
Page  494-498: Govt will cover Mental Health Services  including defining, creating, and rationing  those services.

 Senator,  I guarantee that I personally will do everything  possible to inform patients and my fellow  physicians about the dangers of the proposed  bills you and your colleagues are  debating.
 
Furthermore,  if you vote for a bill that enforces socialized  medicine on the country and destroys the  doctor-patient relationship, I will  do everything in my power to  make sure you lose your job in the next  election.
 
Respectfully, Stephen  E. Fraser, MD

I urge you  to use the power that you were born with (and  the power that may soon be taken away) and  circulate this email to as many people as you  can reach.  The Power of the People can  stop this from happening to us, our parents, our  grandparents, our children, and to following  generations
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CJ
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32147



PostPosted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 12:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IRS   Shocked   to Get Massive New Powers Under Obamacare
March 19, 2010  The Internal Revenue Service would gain sweeping new powers under  Obama's healthcare reform proposals, in what Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee are calling a "dangerous expansion" of IRS powers.
That's according to a 9 page Republican report from the Committee on Ways and Means on Thursday. It's titled "The Wrong Prescription" Democrats' Health Overhaul Dangerously Expands IRS Authority."

Among the new powers the IRS would assume, the report says: The authority to confiscate tax refunds, to impose fines of over $2,200 per taxpayer, and to verify whether taxpayers' health insurance coverage is "acceptable."

One measure of the scope of the IRS' new responsibilities under the healthcare overhaul: The agency might have to hire as many as 16,500 additional auditors, agents, and other employees in order to administer the program, according to Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., the ranking Republican on the Ways and Means Committee.

"It is a very dangerous expansion of the IRS' power and reach into the lives of virtually every American," Camp said in a statement released Thursday afternoon.
The Ways and Means report portrays healthcare reform as having a wide-ranging impact on how the IRS operates, including:

   * IRS agents would be tasked with determining whether Americans had obtained the insurance coverage required under the individual mandate.
   * Individuals could be fined $2,250 or 2 percent of income, whichever is greater, if you are unable to prove you have "minimum essential coverage."
   * The IRS would be empowered to confiscate tax refunds if necessary.
   * Audits probably would increase as a result of the legislation's new requirements.
   * The budget for IRS operations will balloon by $10 in the next decade in order to administrate the new program.
   * Nearly half of the new individual mandate taxes will be paid "by Americans earning less than 300 percent of poverty, $66150 for a family of four.

A statement that Democrats are sure to dispute, the report, which Camp and fellow GOP Rep. Charles Boustany of Louisiana prepared, says healthcare reform would "fundamentally alter the relationship between the IRS and taxpayers."

Essentially, the Republicans state, the reform bill makes the IRS responsible for "tracking the monthly health insurance status of roughly 300 million Americans."
They express the concern that reform would alter the IRS' traditional mission of collecting revenue, and adding a social-program delivery function to its portfolio.
"This is an unprecedented new role for the IRS — one that will inject the IRS even further into the lives of American families," the report warns.

Ironically, two groups of residents would be declared exempt from IRS enforcement measures, according to the Republicans: One is illegal immigrants who aren't supposed to be included in the insurance exchanges in the first place. The other consists of people who are incarcerated.
http://newsmax.com/InsideCover/Ob...althcare-IRS/2010/03/18/id/353209

Obamacare is a TOTALITARIAN, HELL CONTROL bill
http://cj.myfreeforum.org/about314.html


Supreme Court asked to Strike Down Obamacare, they didnt
March 26,  2010
President Barack Obama is one of the worst presidents ever in terms of respecting constitutional limitations on government, and the states suing the federal government over healthcare reform "have a pretty strong case" and are likely to prevail, according to author and judicial analyst Andrew P. Napolitano.

In an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV's Ashley Martella, Napolitano says the president's healthcare reforms amount to "commandeering" the state legislatures for federal purposes, which the Supreme Court has forbidden as unconstitutional.

"The Constitution does not authorize the Congress to regulate the state governments," Napolitano says. "Nevertheless, in this piece of legislation, the Congress has told the state governments that they must modify their regulation of certain areas of healthcare, they must surrender their regulation of other areas of healthcare, and they must spend state taxpayer-generated dollars in a way that the Congress wants it done.

"That's called commandeering the legislature," he says. "That's the Congress taking away the discretion of the legislature with respect to regulation, and spending taxpayer dollars. That's prohibited in a couple of Supreme Court cases. So on that argument, the attorneys general have a pretty strong case and I think they will prevail.”

Napolitano, author of his just-released “Lies the Government Told You: Myth, Power, and Deception in American History” and a Fox News senior judicial analyst, is the youngest Superior Court judge ever to attain lifetime tenure in the state of New Jersey. He served on the bench from 1987 to 1995.
Napolitano tells Newsmax that the longstanding precedent of state regulation of the healthcare industry makes the new federal regulations that much more problematic.

"The Supreme Court has ruled that in areas of human behavior that are not delegated to the Congress in the Constitution, and that have been traditionally regulated by the states, the Congress can't simply move in there," Napolitano says. "And the states for 230 years have had near exclusive regulation over the delivery of healthcare. The states license hospitals. The states license medications. The states license healthcare providers whether they're doctors, nurses, or pharmacists. The feds have had nothing to do with it.

"The Congress can't simply wake up one day and decide that it wants to regulate this. I predict that the Supreme Court will invalidate major portions of what the president just signed into law…"
The judge also says he would rate Obama as one of the worst presidents in terms of obedience to constitutional limitations.

"I believe we have a one party system in this country, called the big-government party," Napolitano says. "There is a Republican branch that likes war and deficits and assaulting civil liberties. There is a Democratic branch that likes welfare and taxes and assaulting commercial liberties.

"President Obama obviously is squarely within the Democratic branch. The president who had the least fidelity to the Constitution was Abraham Lincoln, who waged war on half the country, even though there's obviously no authority for that, a war that killed nearly 700,000 people. President Obama is close to that end of lacking fidelity to the Constitution. He wants to outdo his hero FDR."
For those who oppose healthcare, the Fox legal expert says, the bad news is that many of the legal challenges to healthcare reform will have to wait until 2014, when the changes become fully operational.

Until then, there would be no legal case that individuals had been actually harmed by the law. Moreover, Napolitano says it takes an average of four years for a case to work its way through the various federal courts the final hearing that's expected to come before the Supreme Court.
"You're talking about 2018, which is eight years from now, before it is likely the Supreme Court will hear this," he says.
http://newsmax.com/Headline/Andre...barack-obama/2010/03/26/id/354008


EXAMPLE of life under Obamacare
I got this email March 22
In the aftermath of death and destruction, the US Government will not be able to meet the needs of the citizens.
Food and fuel shortages, inadequate medical care and medicines will cause the populace to take what they can just to survive.

Martial law is a natural dictatorial action to prevent total breakdown as history has demonstrated repeatedly.
I thought of a correlation with Obama's Health Care Plan.

Before I quit working at the factory, every office worker including myself had a mandatory percentage of
pay automatically taken out in order to fund the employee insurance coverage.
I disliked this very much, but it is standard procedure under a corporation.

Other than a lung test and two doctor's checkups in 1997, my only other
expenses were dental.
That means I paid many thousands of dollars into the insurance fund and received back very little!

Other employees were very happy under the insurance setup because they had major medical problems,
operations, maternity leave and other health illnesses. They were gladly using my money for their needs.
This was my financial penalty for remaining healthy! :- /

Under Obama's Health Care Plan, there will probably be larger mandatory deductions from workers' pay,
and workers have absolutely no say in the matter.
The US Government will take the money for the insurance companies.

Bond Markets Reflect True Cost of Obamacare     March 25, 2010
Not many people noticed amid the Democrats' struggle to jam their health care bill through the House, but in recent weeks U.S. Treasury bonds have lost their status as the world's safest investment.

The numbers are pretty clear. In February, Bloomberg News reports, Berkshire Hathaway sold two-year bonds with an interest rate lower than that on two-year Treasuries. A company run by a 79-year-old investor is a better credit risk, the markets are telling us, than the U.S. government.
Procter & Gamble, Johnson & Johnson and Lowe's have been borrowing money at cheaper rates than Uncle Sam.

Democrats wary of voting for the health care bill may have been soothed by the Congressional Budget Office's report that it would reduce federal deficits over the next 10 years. But bond buyers know that the Democrats gamed the CBO system to get a good score.

The realities, as former CBO Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin pointed out in The New York Times, are different. The real cost is disguised by the fact that the bill includes 10 years of revenue but only six years of spending. It includes $70 billion in premiums for long-term care that will have to be paid out later. It excludes $114 billion in discretionary spending needed to run the program. It includes nearly half a trillion dollars in unrealistic Medicare savings.

Holtz-Eakins's bottom line: The bill will not lower deficits, but will raise them by $562 billion over 10 years. Treasury will have to borrow that money — and probably pay much higher interest than it's paying now.
Moreover, once the bill is fully in effect, the Cato Institute's Alan Reynolds points out, its expenses are likely to grow at least 7 percent a year — significantly faster than revenues.
At that rate, spending doubles every 10 years.
No wonder that Moody's declared last week that the Treasury is "substantially" closer to losing its AAA bond rating
.

It's not only the federal government that is heading toward insolvency. State governments will have to spend more under the health care bill — $735 million in Tennessee alone, according to Democratic Gov. Phil Bredesen.

And state governments are already facing a huge problem called pensions. The Pew Charitable Trusts estimates that state government pensions are underfunded by $450 billion. My American Enterprise Institute colleague Andrew Biggs argues in The Wall Street Journal that the real figure is over $3 trillion.

The reason: State governments set aside cash to invest in pensions, but they typically assume that their investments will rise 8 percent a year indefinitely. They haven't been getting such high returns and are not likely to do so in the future. But they are under legal obligations, which courts won't allow them to escape, to pay the pensions. Retirees get paid off before bondholders, which means that states are going to have to pay more interest when they borrow.

Back in the 1990s, Clinton adviser James Carville said that if he was reincarnated he would like to come back as the bond market — "because you can intimidate everybody." Governments, like all organizations, need to borrow routinely. But investors won't lend unless they think they will be paid back. And they will demand higher interest rates as their loans become riskier.

Letter from JWR publisher
On Sunday, 219 House Democrats, soothed by their leaders' gaming of the CBO scoring process, voted in reckless disregard of what the bond market has been telling them. Some may share Speaker Nancy Pelosi's optimism that the government's looming fiscal disaster can be avoided by imposing a value-added tax — in effect, a national sales tax.

But, as we know from the experience of high-tax Western Europe and relatively low-tax America over the last three decades, higher taxes tend to retard economic growth. Lower economic growth means less revenue for government than in CBO projections. Less revenue means more borrowing — and at some point lenders are going to call a halt.

Barack Obama's project of transforming the United States into something like Western Europe is, according to the CBO, raising the national debt burden on the economy to World War II levels. I see train wrecks ahead — as the bond market forces huge spending cuts or tax increases first on states and then on the federal government. It will make what happened in the House Sunday look pretty.
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/michael/barone032510.php3


Last edited by CJ on Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:24 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CJ
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32147



PostPosted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 7:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ObamaCare - Day One
A woman told me she went to her doctor, and he said he cant afford to stay in business under Obama's new law, he is closing up his clinic.
I expect this will be repeated often


March 25, 2010
Companies are already warning about higher health-care costs.
DUMBocrats claim voters would like the plan once it passed. Let's see what they think when they learn their insurance costs will jump right away.

Even before Obama signed the bill into law March 23, Caterpillar said it would cost the company at least
$100 million more in the first year alone. Medical device maker Medtronic warned that new taxes on its products could
force it to lay off a thousand workers. Now Verizon joins the roll of businesses staring at adverse consequences.

In an email titled "Obama Signs Health Care Legislation" sent to all employees Tuesday night, the telecom giant warned that "we expect that Verizon's costs will increase in the short term." While executive vice president for human resources Marc Reed wrote that "it is difficult at this point to gauge the precise impact of this legislation," and that ObamaCare does reflect some of the company's policy priorities, the message to workers was clear: Expect changes for the worse to your health benefits as the direct result of this bill, and maybe as soon as this year.

Reed specifically cited a change in the tax treatment of retiree health benefits. When Congress created the Medicare prescription drug benefit in 2003, it included a modest tax subsidy to encourage employers to keep drug plans for retirees, rather than dumping them on the government. The Employee Benefit Research Institute says this exclusion—equal to 28% of the cost of a drug plan—will run taxpayers $665 per person next year, while the same Medicare coverage would cost $1,209.

In a $5.4 billion revenue grab, Democrats decided that this $665 fillip should be subject to the ordinary corporate income tax of 35%. Most consulting firms and independent analysts say the higher costs will induce some companies to drop drug coverage, which could affect about five million retirees and 3,500 businesses. Verizon and other large corporations warned about this outcome.

U.S. accounting laws also require businesses to immediately restate their earnings in light of the higher tax burden on their long-term retiree health liabilities. This will have a big effect on their 2010 earnings.

While the drug tax subsidy is for retirees, companies consider their benefit costs as a total package. The new bill might cause some to drop retiree coverage altogether. Others may be bound by labor contracts to retirees, but then they will find other ways to cut costs. This means raising costs or reducing coverage for other employees. So much for Mr. Obama's claim that if you like your coverage, you can keep it—even at Fortune 500 companies.

In its employee note, Verizon also warned about the 40% tax on high-end health plans, though that won't take effect until 2018. "Many of the plans that Verizon offers to employees and retirees are projected to have costs above the threshold in the legislation and will be subject to the 40 percent excise tax." These costs will start to show up soon, and, as we repeatedly argued, the tax is unlikely to drive down costs. The tax burden will simply be spread to all workers—the result of the White House's too-clever decision to tax insurers, rather than individuals.

A Verizon spokesman said the company is merely addressing employee questions about ObamaCare, not making a political statement. But these and many other changes were enabled by the support of the Business Roundtable that counts Verizon as a member. Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg's health-reform ideas are 180 degrees from Mr. Obama's, but Verizon's shareholders and 900,000 employees and retirees will still pay the price.

Businesses around the country are making the same calculations as Verizon and no doubt sending out similar messages. It's only a small measure of the destruction that will be churned out by the rewrite of health, tax, labor and welfare laws that is ObamaCare, and only the vanguard of much worse to come.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1...html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_opinion

Obamacare is a TOTALITARIAN, HELL CONTROL bill
http://cj.myfreeforum.org/about314.html

IRS control -  http://cj.myfreeforum.org/about368.html
15 new taxes - http://cj.myfreeforum.org/about388.html


ObamaCare just the beginning of total take over of America
America must not and will not become like the seduced German people in 1933.  
We will not stand by and watch Obama turn our country into Frankenstein’s laboratory,
shredding our constitution, bill of rights and freedom as Hitler did with his country.

Tyrants and Dictators are predictably similar in how they take over.  
They ride in as the savior of change and hope.  They offer health care,  jobs for all,  
a refreshed national identity and protection from danger and harm….that is danger and harm they usually create to blame on enemies.
you know those groups who didn’t vote for them.  
The rope circles around the seduced neck of the people only after the dictator bribes his way in or gets voted in.

One thing is for sure looking at recent history.  
Once a socialist/communist dictator gets into power, like terminal cancer, he and his administration
smother and take control of every aspect of the economy,  educational system,  health care system and military.  
They shred and control media, entertainment and religion.

In 1919,  Lenin wrote after his takeover of Russia that the way to control a country is to first take over the industry,
the land, and the banks.  
Lenin tricked and inspired millions and so did Hitler.  

These dictators didn’t come in appearing like monsters.  They were the messiahs of change and hope.  
Their exhaustive plans involved developing a huge and seduced ‘fan’ base at first while aggressively and
quickly finding and destroying anyone against them.

Kitty Werthmann was living in Austria when Hitler took over Germany next door.  
She recalls how deeply depressed Austria was in 1938.  Nearly one-third of their workforce was unemployed.  
They had 25% inflation and 25% interest rates on bank loans.

People were begging for food and bankruptcies were happening daily.  Austria was in a mess, so they were thrilled when Hitler promised big things and was elected into power.  There was no talk of persecuting or attacking the Jews.  The Austrians were promised jobs, healthcare, protection and recovery.

Kitty said that after the election was over there was instantly law and order.  German officials were appointed everywhere and there was dancing in the streets.  Though Austria was largely a Catholic country, suddenly in schools everywhere,  all Catholic symbols and crosses were taken down and pictures of Hitler were put up everywhere.

Hitler targeted and controlled education and stopped religious instruction for kids in schools.  The new church for the children of Austria and Germany was still every Sunday, but it now was forced attendance at the National Youth Day.  The first two hours was political indoctrination every Sunday, then the rest of the day they played all kinds of sports.  Naturally, the equipment was free.  Children went home thrilled each Sunday and were getting brainwashed.  Parents had no choice but to send their children each Sunday or else be fined or taken to jail.

Hitler immediately introduced socialist health care.  People were going to the hospital for everything now,  lines were huge and doctors were paid a salary by the Government.  The Austrians soon paid 80% of their income in taxes.  Government gave loans for the newly married,  and took care of everything from day care needs to paying all College tuition.

As the noose tightened around education, religion, healthcare and enforcement, the ‘mercy killings’ started in. Kitty,  then a student teacher in a small village in the Alps, described 15 mentally retarded adults who were known in the community and did good manual work.  One day they were rounded up and taken to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade and various skills. Their families where forced to sign papers saying that they wouldn’t visit them for 6 months.  They were told that any visits could cause homesickness and disrupt the program.

The letters started arriving back to the parents after several months saying these people had died natural deaths.  Of course, they all knew 15 completely healthy adults could not, six months later, have all died natural deaths.  They knew they were killed.  Euthanasia started to become more common as Hitler’s real world view of perfection started to come out.

Hitler’s final control step of the Germans and Austrians was Gun laws and control.  He started with gun registration.  Once that was done, he said that guns were causing too much crime and that it was best for all to turn in their guns.  They knew that authorities already knew who owned what so they complied.

When you look at Hitler, Saul Alinsky, Stalin, Lenin, Chavez, Castro and others, you see huge similarities with the strategy and world view of Obama.  It is the same, promise of health care, jobs and opportunities.  There is always a contrived crises or two the big Government has to magically solve, while blaming the enemies they want to create.
Obama is on the same control and dictatorship path as Hitler.  First we saw the massive seduction over 15 months; now the controls and intimidation grow with his administration.

This Health care bill might as well have been Hitler’s Enabling Act of March 23rd,  1933.  It also shreds our constitution and forces socialized health care on the people, rationing care for the unwanted and expensive seniors as they age, and forcing us all to pay for the Government slaughter of babies;  abortion.  This bill, run by the IRS, might as well be the Nazi party, as it encourages euthanasia, abortion and rationed care as Hitler did early on in Austria and Germany.

Rep.  Burgess stated the obvious about this nightmare bill when asked about the use of the ‘Commerce clause’  excusing forced mandates by the Government.  In a CNSNews.com  interview Rep.  Burgess, a doctor, stated, “No, I personally do not, and I think that is exactly right.  Never before in the history of this country have we had the ability to coerce American citizens to purchase something and then invoke the Commerce clause after we coerce that purchase.”  He went on…..”It just flies in the face of what a free society should be, so I’m perfectly comfortable with the attorneys general bringing suit against this bill,”

Yes,  law suits are flying by Attorney Generals and other groups.  We must stand no matter how awkward,  inconvenient or expensive it is.  Our freedom and country is at stake.
Obama isn’t stopping with forced Health care and the controls attached to that.  He is going to manipulate votes by pushing amnesty for illegal aliens; controlling American businesses through cap and trade, then he will find a manipulative, back door way to come for our guns….most likely with a UN Treaty he is already working toward.

Obama continues to mock anyone who disagrees with him, and is now, according to the Wall Street Journal, stepping up Confrontation.  Obama must be voted out.  I don’t see any tin helmet on my head, and yes,
Obama comes from the same essence and evil as Hitler.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama...a-total-take-over-of-america.html


ObamaCare Law KILLS the U.S. CONSTITUTION

Health Bill A TRANSFER OF POWER, Kills The Constitution  
A retired Constitutional lawyer has read the entire proposed
'healthcare bill.'  

The Truth About The Health Care Bills

March 24, 2010
I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009.
I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.

To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying the law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business, and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats, and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictlycontrolled by the government.

However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.

The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the US Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people, and the businesses they own.   (New World Order??)

The irony is that the Congress doesn't have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with! I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

This legislation also provides for access, by the appointees of the Obama administration, of all of your personal healthcare, direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.

If you decide not to have healthcare insurance, or if you have private insurance that is not 'deemed acceptable' to the Health Choices Administrator appointed by Obama, there will be 'tax' imposed on you. It is called a tax instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the due process of law.

So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much, out of the original ten in the Bill of Rights, that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn't stop there though.
The 9th Amendment that provides: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;

The 10th Amendment states: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork, neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.

I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to "be bound by oath or affirmation to support the Constitution." If I was a member of Congress, I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it, without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway, I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.

For those who might doubt the nature of this threat, I suggest they consult the source, the US Constitution, and Bill of Rights.
There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.
Michael Connelly,  Retired attorney,
Constitutional Law Instructor,  Carrollton, Texas
http://www.rense.com/general90/hlt.htm
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CJ
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32147



PostPosted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 7:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

8 States already plan to ignore ObamaCare

January 25, 2011  
What if states repudiated a law Washington DC made, and threatened to prosecute those enforcing it?
8 states consider a blanket nullification of the Obamacare nationalization of health-care in their legislatures.
"Thomas Jefferson advised, 'Whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers ... a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy,'" states the Tenth Amendment Center, which advocates a return to the constitutionally delegated powers for the federal government.
"When states pass laws to reject and nullify unconstitutional federal 'laws,' regulations and mandates – it's not rebellion ... it's duty," the organization states.

States already have been moving forward aggressively on several issues, with eight approving firearms freedom acts that reject some federal gun laws, 15 actively defying Washington on cannabis laws and seven passing acts that reject health-care mandates.

Now, however, they are moving a step beyond, according to center founder Michael Boldin.
7 states have introduced acts to nullify the federal health-care reform, including New Hampshire, Maine, Montana, Oregon, Nebraska, Texas and Wyoming.
A similar proposal is expected to be filed in Idaho
within a matter of days.

Obamacare already has been repealed in the U.S. House, where the vote was 245-189, which included 3 Democrats backing repeal.
While Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has promised to prevent the issue from coming up for discussion, Republicans say they will work on getting the Senate, which has a slight Democrat majority, to discuss the issue.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=253521


Judge rules healthcare reform unconstitutional

January 31, 2011   UPDATE - Obama ignored this
A judge in Florida on Monday became the second judge to declare President Barack Obama's healthcare reform law unconstitutional, in the biggest legal challenge yet to federal authority to enact the law.
U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson, appointed to the bench by President Ronald Reagan in 1983, ruled that the reform law's so-called "individual mandate" went too far in requiring that Americans start buying health insurance in 2014 or pay a penalty.

"Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire act must be declared void. This has been a difficult decision to reach, and I am aware that it will have indeterminable implications," Vinson wrote.
He was referring to a key provision in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and sided with governors and attorneys general from 26 U.S. states, almost all of whom are Republicans, in declaring it unconstitutional. The issue will likely end up at the Supreme Court.

The plaintiffs represent more than half the U.S. states, so the Pensacola case has more prominence than two dozen lawsuits filed in federal courts over the healthcare law.
The healthcare overhaul, a cornerstone of Obama's presidency, aims to expand health insurance to cover millions of uninsured Americans while also curbing costs.
Administration officials insist it is constitutional and needed to stem huge projected increases in healthcare costs.

Two other federal judges have rejected challenges to the individual mandate.
But a federal district judge in Richmond, Virginia, last month struck down that central provision of the law in a case in that state, saying it invited an "unbridled exercise of federal police powers."

The provision is key to the law's mission of covering more than 30 million uninsured. Officials argue it is only by requiring healthy people to purchase policies that they can help pay for reforms, including a mandate that individuals with pre-existing medical conditions cannot be refused coverage.
http://www.reuters.com/article/20...dType=RSS&feedName=healthNews
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CJ
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32147



PostPosted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 7:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Obama in contempt of court    March  3, 2011
Obamacare is NOT Constitutional, and Obama KNOWS it.  He is essentially in contempt of court.
Judge tells Obama he has a week to save Obamacare.  The clock is ticking on plans to implement Obamacare.
A federal judge gave Obama 7 days to file an expedited appeal either to the U.S. Supreme Court or the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
If they miss that deadline, it could face an injunction that would bring its implementation of Obamacare to a screeching halt in 26 states.

Judge Roger Vinson’s ruling chastised the government for dragging its feet before seeking a stay, or temporary suspension, of his January ruling that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional.  Judge Vinson previously ruled that requiring individuals to make a federally mandated purchase (buying a healthcare plan) exceeds their Constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce.
It was not expected that they would ignore the order and continue to implement the Act, and then file a belated (ridiculous) motion to clarify.
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/o...inson-health/2011/03/03/id/388276


Arkansas will be the first state to implement Obamacare
Arkansas Gov. Beebe has secretly met with Obama to make Arkansas a test case for Obamacare!
Traitor Beebe agreed that Arkansas will be the first state to implement Obamacare.  He will be changing Medicare by his own power in April or May. He is clearly on the side of the Socialists.
http://securearkansasnetwork.org/...-fda/obamacare-alert-for-arkansas

I added articles from several threads to this one.


.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
RK



Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Posts: 57


Location: The Great State of Texas

PostPosted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It would seem you've hit the nail on the head with all these posts; especially the ones about prior dictators.

I honestly believe this dictatorial bill was put in place with more than one Obama term in mind. Looking at the overall bill, it would require "power" stay in the hands of the Democrats indefinitely; Republicans could simply refuse to fund it IF they held the 3 branches of government.

Seems as if not much Obama is trying to get done (legally) is working. What bothers me terribly is when someone like him is backed into a corner, they take drastic measures. Very bothersome right now is the election is almost a year away and there's already all this talk of voter fraud....just think about that for a little while and it sends cold chills up and down the spine, especially when one thinks about the black panther situation we had a few years back.

This could very easily instill FEAR in my heart but my trust is in the Lord to rectify the situation soon.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BornAgain2



Joined: 12 Dec 2009
Posts: 17197



PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CEOs must work together
Feb 2011
– resident Barack Obama prodded American businesses to do their share to help the economy, calling on executives to "get in the game" and begin investing nearly $2 trillion accumulating on their balance sheets.

The president, in a speech Monday to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, called for a cooperative relationship with the private sector and argued government and business have a shared responsibility. He highlighted new efforts by his administration to improve the nation's infrastructure, invest more on entrepreneurs and foster greater innovation.

But to a polite, subdued audience he offered a stout defense of government regulations, even as he promised to eliminate those that are too burdensome. He reached back to history, invoking President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's outreach to corporate leaders and evoking the strains of self-sacrifice expressed by President John Kennedy.

"I want to be clear: even as we make America the best place on earth to do business, businesses also have a responsibility to America," Obama said. "As we work with you to make America a better place to do business, ask yourselves what you can do for America. Ask yourselves what you can do to hire American workers, to support the American economy, and to invest in this nation."

Obama said his appearance at the Chamber was in the interest of "being more neighborly" — literally true as the trade organization's headquarters are so close to the White House that Obama was able to walk across the street to make his comments. His appearance came as Obama aims to smooth his relations with corporate leaders and persuade major businesses to spend their cash, expand hiring and promote economic growth.

The Chamber and the White House have feuded loudly over the past two years, particularly over the new health care law and an overhaul of financial regulations meant to address weaknesses that led to the Wall Street meltdown in 2008. But in the aftermath of the November elections, which gave Republicans control of the House, both the White House and the Chamber have focused on areas of common ground, despite their lingering differences.

The speech was highly anticipated by the business community. Chamber President Thomas Donohue introduced Obama, saying seats at the event were "one of the hottest tickets in town."

Donohue said the business community had an "absolute commitment to working with you and your administration to advance our shared objectives."

He added: "Our focus is finding common ground to ensure America's greatness in the 21st century."

Obama, who has faced liberal criticism for his overtures to Republicans and to the business community, argued on behalf of the financial regulation and health care initiative that his administration pushed through Congress last year. "The perils of too much regulation are matched by the dangers of too little," he said.

He called for changes in the corporate tax code and increased exports, but pointedly warned his audience that businesses could not translate those benefits into "greater profits and bonuses for those at the top."

"We cannot go back to the kind of economy - and culture - we saw in the years leading up to the recession, where growth and gains in productivity just didn't translate into rising incomes and opportunity for the middle class," he said.

Still, the Chamber and the White House have mutual interests.

Obama needs the centrist cloak that the business community can offer, as he seeks to win independent voters for his reelection bid next year. The Chamber can benefit by softening the sharp edges it developed fighting the health care overhaul and tighter financial rules.

Both sides also need each other to win on areas of policy where they share common interests.

The Chamber can help the Obama administration win congressional support of trade deals, particularly a recently renegotiated pact with South Korea. It can also act as Republican ballast against the influence of the conservative tea party movement.

Both the White House and the Chamber face Republican opposition from fiscal hawks within the GOP to increased spending on public works, from roads and bridges to wireless networks. The chamber has called for such spending to be paid for with user fees, such as a higher gasoline tax. The White House has not embraced that approach, saying only that the administration wants to create an "infrastructure bank" to attract private capital.

The Chamber, which has long advocated for changes in immigration law, could help Obama by pushing Republicans reluctant to take up such a politically charged issue.

Obama cited a recently finalized trade pact with South Korea, which is awaiting ratification by Congress, as an example of the type of agreement he would like to pursue with Panama and Colombia. But the president did not specifically detail what adjustments were still needed in those negotiations to complete a deal.

Following Obama's speech, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell pressed for action on Colombia and Panama, saying, "the time for delay on these two agreements is over."

"It won't be enough for Republicans and it shouldn't be enough for the business community to allow the administration's trade agenda to start and end with South Korea," he said. "We should be passing all pending trade agreements and inking new ones on a bipartisan basis — even when it requires the President bringing his own party along."

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs, pressed to offer a timetable for those agreements, declined. "We'd like to move forward," he said. "And those are discussions that are beginning."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110207/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_chamber

Isn't Obama ADMITTING SOCIALISM?

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    cj.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> HEALTH and Medical NEWS All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1, 2, 3 ... 40, 41, 42  Next
Page 1 of 42

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum