Web Rumors Fueling Extreme Anti-Obama/Government Anger; Deciphering Truths from Fiction & Militias are Good for Freedom:

Web Rumors Fueling Extreme Anti-Obama/Government Anger; Deciphering Truths from Fiction & Militias are Good for Freedom:
By Marc Chamot

The Internet can be both good and bad for political causes, but sometimes it can lead to devastating results for others.

Everybody who follows and read my blogs, are certainly aware by now, I may be somewhat anti-FEDERAL government and biased, and I proudly display my “don’t tread on me” logos.

But I have different reasons to be. My blogs have stories upon stories that details as to what’s wrong with American politics. Without a doubt, the FACTS are, this government is absolutely and unequivocally CORRUPT.

I’m not prone to conspiracy theories, and I don’t belong to militias, however, I’m probably among the million of Americans, who most are the SILENT majorities, and if at anytime they, the American people via Militias, do get FED-up with this federal government’s encroachments of our civil liberties, and wanton violations of our constitution, I would openly participate with militia groups, in open rebellions, secessions or in a civil war to get changes remedied for this country before they (Liberals and others) destroy it.

This may sound like a vague threat to government and liberals, but take it however you want it. We will not stand to have un-American policies crammed down our throats, especially when the majority of us are telling you NO, and you bring it on anyway.

But first, the rumors going around the Internet are wrong and destructive. It seems like Tina Stone, the wife of the accused militia group that conspired to bring harm to some police officers, was victim to one of these emails.

But for the most informed person or blogger, those who read and do research on subject matters, it’s easy to dismiss rumors from facts. And obviously Hutaree’s Tina Stone didn’t do her homework on the subject matters she was angry at. See story: For Hutaree, Web rumor stoked anger at Obama

“A member of the Hutaree militia charged with federal crimes was upset because she thought that President Barack Obama had signed into law this month a bill that would spend $20 billion to help the terrorist group Hamas settle in the U.S.

There was never any such legislation, but Tina Stone believed it was the truth, according to her Facebook account.

"H.B. 1388 passed.... its bad news for us all," Tina Kelley, her maiden name, said on her Facebook page on March 19.

She then said in an update: "I'm peeved,,, when people in this country is getting kicked out of there homes everyday and our government passes a bill to spend more then 20 billion dollars to bring Hamas here and supplies them with food and homes that just wrong."

Stone, part of a Christian militia busted by federal agents this week, apparently got the false idea from fake e-mails and Internet chatter that claimed Obama and Congress had passed H.B. 1388 to help Hamas.

According to the site factcheck.org — which tries to debunk lies on the Internet — the false rumors were generated in part from one e-mail that stated: "Something happened... H.R. 1388 was passed yesterday, behind our backs.

You may want to read about it. It wasn't mentioned on the news...Obama funds $20M in tax payer dollars to immigrate Hamas Refugees to the USA. This is the news that didn't make the headlines."

But somehow, very good friends of mine sent me this chain email: Subject: Fwd: Obama Finds Legal Way around the 2nd Amendment
Make sure this gets circulated! This is very important......

Obama Finds Legal Way around the 2nd Amendment and Uses It.If This Passes, There Will Be WAR Just got these... pass it far & wide.

On Wednesday the Obama administration took its first major step in a plan to ban all firearms in the United States.

The Obama administration intends to force gun control and a complete ban on all weapons for US citizens through the signing of international treaties with foreign nations. By signing international treaties on gun control, the Obama administration can use the US State Department to bypass the normal legislative process in Congress.

Once the US Government signs these international treaties, all US citizens will be subject to those gun laws created by foreign governments. These are laws that have been developed and promoted by organizations such as the United Nations and individuals such as George Soros and Michael Bloomberg.

The laws are designed and intended to lead to the complete ban and confiscation of all firearms. The Obama administration is attempting to use tactics and methods of gun control that will inflict major damage to our 2nd Amendment before US citizens even understand what has happened.

Obama can appear before the public and tell them that he does not intend to pursue any legislation (in the United States) that will lead to new gun control laws, while cloaked in secrecy, his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is committing the US to international treaties and foreign gun control laws. Does that mean Obama is telling the truth?

What it means is that there will be no publicized gun control debates in the media or votes in Congress. We will wake up one morning and find that the United States has signed a treaty that prohibits firearm and ammunition manufacturers from selling to the public.

We will wake up another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that prohibits any transfer of firearm ownership. And then, we will wake up yet another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that requires US citizens to deliver any firearm they own to the local government collection and destruction center or face imprisonment.This is neither a joke nor a false warning.

As sure as government health care will be forced on us by the Obama administration through whatever means necessary, so will gun control. Read the Article, U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms tradeWASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.

The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better. View The Full Article Herehttp://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE59E0Q920091015 14 Nov. 2009
Please forward this message to others who may be concerned about the direction in which our country is headed. This is a very serious matter! Silence will lead us to Socialism!!!

At first glance, I got very concerned about the news content, and then I became pretty amused by it after doing some research to substantiate it.

Obviously, since it’s an email transmitted article instead of being published on any credible blogs, news sites and websites, it was a pretty sneaky ruse to get someone hot and bothered. When I read the article and did some Google searches on it, no-where I’ve found any articles, or any other information to confirm the facts from that email.

I’m not criticizing my good friends at all for sending me this email. I’m sure this is being done rampantly on both sides of the political spectrums, its coming from the left and right-wings. I'm not ready to dismiss this rumor entirely, with the conservative majorities on the U.S. Supreme Courts, I'm sure they are keeping a sharp EYE on our Mr. President Barack Obama by now.

This kind of stuff can inflame some un-informed people to ACT and do something they’ll regret later, it gets them to act on impulse and dangerously against others as Tina Stone possibly did and this is absolutely wrong thing to do.

If we’re to win the war against leftist agenda driven liberals, we can do it based on FACTS, not rumors my friends. My blogs and my fellow conservative bloggers that I link to, have plenty of facts and reasons to get RID of the liberal agendas without rumors.

If my prediction holds true, this administration might be for the first time in American history, where the Supremes may intervene on an American president mutiple of times. It'll be very interesting to WATCH the Obamashows in action.

S. F. & California Liberal Politicians; Counting Illegal Immigrants in 2010 Census for Billions More in Federal Tax Dollars & Possible House Seat:

San Francisco & California Liberal Politicians; Counting Illegal Immigrants in 2010 Census for Billions More in Federal Tax Dollars & Possible U.S. House Seat:
By Marc Chamot

What’s wrong with this picture? Under President Obama all is fair in American politics, and no wonder he wanted to personally take charge of the 2010 U.S. Census.

Sanctuary cities like San Francisco and the state’s Democrats are pushing hard to count their undocumented immigrants. The U.S. government doles out about $400 billion to states and local jurisdictions every year, based on population counts made during the nation's decennial censuses.

They have enlisted every ethnic, pro-immigrant organization, and pro-amnesty groups and their Medias to help convince undocumented living in the state and its localities to be counted for dollars.

In San Francisco, public officials and community advocates maintained that the city was undercounted by at least 100,000 in the last census, resulting in losses of about $300 million over the past decade that otherwise would have supported city services.

Californian liberal politicians, like San Francisco’s Supervisors, David Campos, John Avalos, and David Chiu are targeting mainly, Asian (Chinese) and Hispanic groups, who are the largest undocumented groups in California and in the city, for more federal taxpayer moneys and to possibly help increase the state’s representations at the U.S. house.

States and local governments spend money on censuses outreach efforts to stress to residents and particularly those who may be wary of the importance of the census. Each uncounted resident results in the loss of $1,000 a year in federal funding for a state, according to the nonprofit Grant Makers Concerned with Immigrants and Refugees.

The government uses the data for political apportionment (determining voting district lines and the number of seats each state occupies in the House of Representatives) and for the disbursement of federal funds for vital services, such as health care, public education, job training, infrastructure and emergency preparedness - to the tune of roughly $400 billion per year.

The communities most in need of federal dollars are at the local level, they are those who are most likely to be undercounted. The Census Bureau calls it: Hard to Count Communities. According to its own analyses, Hard to Count Communities tend to be poor, ethnic, most (illegal immigrants) and overwhelmingly young.

Yet, given the extra hardships caused by the economic crisis, education cutbacks, foreclosures, joblessness, the census has taken on added importance.

Perhaps it is more important than in 2000, when an estimated undercount of 1 million people caused California to lose out on a possible state representative in the U.S. house and millions of federal dollars.

"If sanctuary states like California and cities like San Francisco love to protect their illegal immigrants, especially the criminal ones, shouldn’t they be footing the bill, not the nation’s taxpayers?"

Source: SF Chronicle Cuts in cash for census may cost state billions

If Obama/Democrats think Healthcare Rancor’s BAD, wait till they Push Amnesty & Other Left-Wing Agendas by Using More Underhanded Tactics

If Obama/Democrats think Healthcare Rancor’s BAD, wait till they Push Amnesty & Other Left-Wing Agendas by Using More Underhanded Tactics; All Hell will Break Loose:
By Marc Chamot

Democrats are under siege from public anger and threats; they are so fearful that they have asked for more security protections for themselves and their families.

Last summer during the town halls meetings Democrats were warned by angry protestors, if they pursued an unpopular healthcare bill, it could be difficult for them, and especially if they acted on it. But unfortunately they didn’t listen to the people’s rancors then, and they voted for it anyways against the majority’s will, and they are now paying dearly for their arrogances.

This is what congress gets, livid and angry Americans, especially when they aren’t working with the most immediate and pressing problems of our times, like jobs and the economy.

President Obama and his Democratic Party cohorts used their opportunities for power to push for left-wing agendas, instead of taking care of the matter in hand, like a struggling economy and growing joblessness.

People are saying we want JOBS and a better economy and nothing else, but Obamacrats are too busy PUSHING their leftists’ agendas, like government healthcare, Cap and Trade and amnesty for illegal aliens upon this country.

This is absolutely the wrong time to be pushing for Democratic leftist social agendas, especially when these policies cause more financial harms than good, like more massive government debts and no jobs improvement for unemployed folks.

But of course, when they don’t want to listen, then the anger and backlashes will certainly come with the times.

I don’t agree with the racially and homophobic attacks on some of the U.S. congressmen, I think it was way out of line, but in the same context, when someone is truly enraged, unfortunately it’s something that some of us do.

Am I sympathetic to these Democrats who have faced some of these rancor’s and death threats? No, I’m NOT. Not that I condone it, under the circumstances, they actually got what they deserved.

A very close friend of mine, said to me, the conventional SILENT thinking around was Obama, after Bill Clinton failed, succeeded in getting the votes for healthcare, because he was African American and most Democrats didn’t want to be seen as RACISTS.

But in the same token, I don’t blame this president for his insane policies, the blame goes squarely on U.S. congress, they are the ones that make and approve his policies, and they are easier TARGETS.

Some liberal Medias want to portray that Independents are souring on Republicans and Tea Parties over these attacks and threats, from angry Americans, but this is furthest from the truths, we welcome it.

I’m Independent and I’m pretty amused by it, because it’s good for the future of American politics. I think Washington politicians by rattling their cages, needed a somber wake up call, and if they TRULY fear the backlashes from angry voters, and MAYBE next time they’ll vote the right way. And by voting according to what the majority wants, not against our wills, and by using the proper and ethical, legal procedures in congress to pass complex issues.

The bottom line: "The people’s angry message to the U.S. congress and senate, was not to keep on passing idiotic presidential agendas, and catering to minority groups, organizations and special interests, by bribing and making shady deals."

Health care reform anger takes a nasty, violent turn
Shots fired at a congressman's campaign headquarters. Windows smashed at Democratic offices across the country. A coffin placed on a lawmaker's lawn. Hate-filled voice mail messages left on members of Congress' phone lines.

Those are just some of the incidents reported since the House passed historic health care reform legislation Sunday -- a bill that became the law of the land. The issue has unleashed a deep-seated anger from those worried about a government takeover of health care, and what they deem as the process being "rammed through" Congress.

James Leach, with the National Endowment for the Humanities, said that while many of the acts may be protected under First Amendment rights, "that doesn't mean that they're morally justified."

"And we have to think of ourselves as, 'what kind of people are we?' “Leach said. "Are we one people working together with rival thoughts, or are we enemies within? And I think there's something that's been let loose in American politics that has to be thought about."

That anger was visible in unruly protests by health care activists at the Capitol over the weekend.

Republican House members encouraged protesters outside and inside the House gallery, some of whom carried messages like "Vote no or else" or "If Brown won't stop it, a Browning will" -- a reference to newly elected Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown accompanied by a silhouette of a pistol.

But the anger has boiled over into physical and verbal threats. Windows have been smashed at Democratic offices in at least three states, and federal agents are investigating whether a cut gas line at the home of a Virginia congressman's brother was related to the lawmaker's yes vote.

Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-New York, confirmed Thursday that his district office in Queens received an envelope containing white powder and a threatening letter.

Later Thursday, Weiner told CNN that initial tests indicated the powder was not a biological agent, but that he still was awaiting final word from the New York Police Department. Workers at the office turned over their clothes for testing and were given protective suits before being allowed to go home a few hours later, Weiner said.

The FBI and other law enforcement agencies are now looking into the threats, and at least 10 House Democrats have been given extra security.

The voice mail has been vicious toward Michigan's Bart Stupak, who switched his vote to seal the deal for the bill. He has released one of the voice mails.
Listen to the voice mail
"Stupak, you are a lowlife, baby-murdering scumbag, pile of steaming crap. You're a cowardly punk, Stupak, that's what you are. You and your family are scum," an unidentified caller said. "That's what you are, Stupak. You are a piece of crap."
"Go to hell, you piece of [expletive deleted]" another caller said.
Read more about Stupak's political future
On Sunday, Democratic Rep. Russ Carnahan of Missouri had a coffin placed on his lawn, said his spokeswoman, Sarah Howard. She said Tea Party protesters at his office in St. Louis had a coffin with them and later brought it to his house. The coffin was later removed, she said.

Democratic congressional leaders have demanded Republicans join them in condemning a spate of threats and vandalism that has followed Sunday's vote on the health care system overhaul.

The top Republican in the House, Minority Leader John Boehner, condemned the threats and vandalism, telling reporters Thursday that it "should not be part of a political debate."
"There are ways for people to channel their anger, and they should do it in a constructive way," he said.

Liz Mair, a Republican consultant, said protesters "are unfortunately crossing a line."
"When we're talking about violence, vandalism, threats, that crosses a legal line, in addition to being in plain old bad taste," Mair said. "And I think that there's a lot that is in plain old bad taste that is going on."

Democrats aren't the only ones being targeted.
Rep. Eric Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House of Representatives, said Thursday that a bullet had been fired through a window at his campaign office in Richmond, Virginia.

Watch Cantor warn against Democrats "fanning flames"
A Richmond police spokeswoman confirmed to CNN that a bullet was fired at the congressman's office. "We are investigating the circumstance surrounding it," spokeswoman Karla Peters said.

Cantor also said that he had received threatening messages but that he would not publicly release the messages out of concern that doing so would only incite further violence.
He also accused Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine and Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland -- a member of the Democratic House leadership -- of "fanning the flames" of violence by using threats that have been made against Democratic members "as political weapons."

iReport: 'Violent Threats after the Healthcare Signing'
"Enough is enough," Cantor said. "It has to stop."
Democratic National Committee spokesman Brad Woodhouse hit back against Cantor's claims.

"We disagree with the charge made by Rep. Cantor today that Democrats are using acts of violence for political gain," he said. "Let's be clear: Calling on Republican leaders who have contributed in part to this anger by wildly mischaracterizing the substance and motives of health reform to condemn these acts is entirely appropriate."

Another Republican -- Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite of Florida -- said in a news release Thursday that she received what appeared to be a death threat on her district office's voice mail.

"Just wanna let you know I have 27 people that are going to make sure that this b**** does not live to see her next term. Goodbye," the voice mail said, according to the release.

Brown-Waite said she contacted both the Capitol Police and the Hernando County sheriff, and they are "looking into the matter and subpoenaing telephone records."
At least one of the threats aimed at lawmakers appears to be racially based.
House Democratic Majority Whip James Clyburn, who is African-American, said he has received a fax in his office with a picture of a noose drawn on it and had threatening telephone calls at his home.

"We're giving aid and comfort to these people, and this stuff gets ratcheted up," Clyburn told CNN. "We in this Congress have got to come together in a bipartisan way and tamp this foolishness down. It doesn't make sense. That's not what a democracy is all about."

Democratic officials and liberal Web sites are also upset that Sarah Palin used an image of crosshairs in a Facebook post this week listing 20 vulnerable Democrats who voted for the legislation. She plans to target them this election year with money from her political action committee.

Read more about Palin's targeting effort
Palin's team is fighting claims that she is encouraging threats of violence. One House member mentioned her Facebook posting during a Wednesday meeting on safety concerns, a Democratic source told CNN's Dana Bash. Mention of the map brought audible groans to the room, the source said.

An adviser to Palin responded by pointing to several instances in which the former Alaska governor has urged supporters to focus their energies on civil debate and action at the ballot box, not extremist activities.

Obamacare Death Watch: Lawsuits Filed over Healthcare; Virginia, Texas AG’S Suing & 10 to 11 Other States Soon to Follow:

Obamacare Death Watch: Lawsuits Filed over Healthcare; Virginia, Texas AG’S Suing & 10 to 11 Other States Soon to Follow:
By Marc Chamot

If I’m a betting man, all my money is with the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn Obamacare, I am absolutely sure of it.

I have started my new blog series of articles called “Obamacare Death Watch.” People ask, after healthcare just passing, then why are you thinking it’s going away, just as quick as it passed?

And why am I being so negative about Obamacare, knowing full well it will help folks like me? Don’t get me wrong, there are some good aspects of Obamacare, but the costs to have it, during economic depressed times like today; it’s absolutely the wrong time to have it.

And also it’s simple, I’m being a realist about things, I’m using my political prowess, and savvies that makes my blog, the Marc Chamot Report very popular, and pretty much unpopular with liberal Medias around.

I usually do not support or condone judicial interventions’ in political matters like popular voting results and what our congress does, but in this case, I will make one big big exception, and I am going to be an ardent backer for the overturn of Obamacare through the COURTS.

I’m quite surprised that Democrats didn’t see this coming, when they arrogantly went overboard to pass a constitutionally flawed and questionable bill laden with profits for certain groups, by mandating laws to force people to buy a program, without any input from any constitutional courts, lawyers and from the other major political party.

Mandating laws and forcing people to carry healthcare, with fines or possible imprisonments, and even garnishing wages and bank accounts, if someone doesn’t carry the mandated federal programs is absolutely illegal in this country.

The Federal government doesn’t have the constitutional right to force any American to BUY anything, and less alone healthcare insurance. They can tax us, create enforceable laws and policies, but they cannot make us buy anything, period.

Secondly, there are those astronomical hidden costs with Obamacare, with over 15 million unemployed Americans, with 32 million uninsured, plus 12 million undocumented aliens, who right around the corner may be given free paths towards citizenships. It will totally bankrupt this nation. Yeah? We didn’t think about that did we, when some people embarked on the Obamacare bandwagons?

Why do you think the undocumented’s were intentionally left out of the bill? Because the Obama/Pelosi plan was to come right back around and use the very same arm twisting, bribes and other unethical measures, to pass legalization for the undocumented.

Those who are the poorest of the poor and the lowest income earners in America, they are the ones who can least afford to pay full premiums for healthcare; all will be subsidized by taxpayers and more debt.

Thirdly, the taxing thing comes back into play. The money to finance all of this has to come out of somewhere, if the federal government can’t pay it all, they will be raising taxes and then more taxes, and then mandating states to come up with the moneys for this financial wreck.

Seniors are being hit the hardest, those who can least afford it, and they will be obligated and responsible for 25% of the drug costs.

Take a look at Massachusetts themselves, which Obamacare has been fashioned after, their insurance companies, those in charge to cover most of the uninsured have left the state. Now speaking federally, it will allow the federal government to take their place and become the providers for people’s insurance needs.

The whole plan stinks, because it doesn’t reduce the escalating costs of healthcare. Forget about the bad guys within the insurance industries for a minute; take a good look at the escalating costs in drugs and medicine that is not going to be controlled under Obamacare. As in Massachusetts, healthcare costs rose and kept rising, because of their loony programs to cover the uninsured.

See: Factbox: Winners, losers’ in House healthcare bill: The healthcare reform measure passed by the House of Representatives delivers good news for drug makers, device companies, hospitals and medical industries, while losers are Private Medicare, insurers, and taxpayers.

SEE WINNERS
BRAND-NAME DRUGMAKERS
* The pharmaceutical industry keeps its $80 billion agreement to provide savings and rebates. Its fees, to be divided among companies such as Pfizer and Merck & Co, would be delayed from 2010 to 2011, increasing from the initial $2.3 billion a year to $2.7 billion.
* Overall, wider insurance coverage could help offset the costs by providing more potential customers.
* Drugmakers warded off deeper price cuts in the Medicare program for the elderly. The House had sought to fully close the so-called "doughnut hole" where coverage drops temporarily after reaching a certain limit, but the bill maintains the industry's 50-percent discount. The government will pay for another 25-percent discount.
* Lawmakers rejected Obama's plan to end lucrative "pay-for-delay" settlements with brand-name drugmakers, a win for both generic and brand-name companies.
* The bill also discards an earlier provision that would have extended a hospital drug discount program.
BRAND BIOLOGIC DRUGMAKERS
* While the bill sets up a regulatory path for generic versions of expensive biologic drugs, Amgen and Roche's Genentech unit and other biological drugmakers won a 12-year period of exclusive sales for brand-name drugs before facing competition from generic rivals.
DEVICE MAKERS
* Fees for medical device makers, such as Boston Scientific and Medtronic, would be delayed to 2013 after initial bills called for 2010. The sector earlier won a reduced industry tax of $20 billion, down from $40 billion.
* Rather than an overall industry fee, the bill now contains a 2.9 percent sales tax. Certain consumer products, including eyeglasses and contact lenses, are exempt.
HOSPITALS
* Hospitals, which include companies such as Universal Health Services and Tenet Healthcare, say they kept a $155 billion, 10-year deal to accept lower government payments from Medicare and Medicaid in exchange for an expected boost in insured customers.
* A provision that could have helped certain rural and children's hospitals with an expanded drug discount program was dropped.
PHARMACY BENEFIT MANAGERS
* Analysts say increased Medicare drug coverage could boost pharmacy benefit managers (PBM) that administer prescription drug benefits as companies, such as Express Scripts and Medco Health Solutions, could see increased volumes.
* PBMs still face more disclosures but not new taxes. Companies must give the Department of Health and Human Services information about rebates from drugmakers for certain drugs.

See Losers HEALTH INSURERS
“* While health insurers overall still face tighter regulation, companies such as Aetna Inc, Cigna Corp, UnitedHealth Group Inc and WellPoint Inc saw their $67 billion, 10-year tax delayed until 2014.
· Private Medicare plans called Medicare Advantage would see their payments frozen in 2011, then lowered in 2012. The plans, which can offer more benefits than traditional Medicare coverage, would also have to spend at least 85 cents out of every dollar on medical costs -- leaving 15 cents toward overhead and salaries, among other things.”

This is one of my biggest pet peeves, as is with millions of other Americans, the escalating greed within the pharmaceutical and other healthcare industries, on top with that government mandated profits for the industry, it will make them billions of dollars more.

But in the end it will cost us even more, while hurting the insurance industries as it did in Massachusetts, so to purposely let a federal government takeover of the insurance industry; it’s all absolutely and morally wrong things to do.

I would have preferred more price controls and regulations on the skyrocketing costs of the medical and pharmaceutical industries, but mandating laws to hand them more money, especially our taxpayer moneys? This is totally insane!

What a BIG joke, government cannot be trusted on any financial matters, and now they want to be in the insurance business for our healthcare?

So the hits against Obamacare are coming hard, Texas is on board and we’ve got Virginia to sue over healthcare reform NEW YORK (Reuters) - Virginia's attorney general said he plans to sue the federal government over the healthcare reform legislation, saying Congress lacks authority to force people to buy health insurance.

Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli, a Republican, said on Monday that Congress lacks authority under its constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce to force people to buy insurance. He said the bill also conflicts with a state law that says Virginians cannot be required to buy insurance.

"If a person decides not to buy health insurance, that person by definition is not engaging in commerce," Cuccinelli said in recorded comments. "If you are not engaging in commerce, how can the federal government regulate you?"

Cuccinelli said he plans to file his lawsuit in federal court in Richmond, Virginia, after President Barack Obama signs the bill into law, which he is expected to do. The bill requires most Americans to have health coverage, and provides subsidies to help lower-income workers afford it.

No Republican voted for the bill, which passed the House on Sunday night by a 219-212 vote.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel; editing by John Wallace)

More on States Suing:
States launch lawsuits against healthcare plan (Reuters) - Less than 24 hours after the House of Representatives gave final approval to a sweeping overhaul of healthcare, attorneys general from several states on Monday said they will sue to block the plan on constitutional grounds.

Republican attorneys general in 11 states warned that lawsuits will be filed to stop the federal government overstepping its constitutional powers and usurping states' sovereignty.
States are concerned the burden of providing healthcare will fall on them without enough federal support.

Ten of the attorneys general plan to band together in a collective lawsuit on behalf of Alabama, Florida, Nebraska, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Washington.

"To protect all Texans' constitutional rights, preserve the constitutional framework intended by our nation's founders, and defend our state from further infringement by the federal government, the State of Texas and other states will legally challenge the federal health care legislation," said Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, in a statement.

The Republican attorney generals say the reforms infringe on state powers under the Constitution's Bill of Rights.

Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli, who plans to file a lawsuit in federal court in Richmond, Virginia, said Congress lacks authority under its constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce to force people to buy insurance. The bill also conflicts with a state law that says Virginians cannot be required to buy insurance, he added.

"If a person decides not to buy health insurance, that person by definition is not engaging in commerce," Cuccinelli said in recorded comments. "If you are not engaging in commerce, how can the federal government regulate you?"

In addition to the pending lawsuits, bills and resolutions have been introduced in at least 36 state legislatures seeking to limit or oppose various aspects of the reform plan through laws or state constitutional amendments, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

So far, only two states, Idaho and Virginia, have enacted laws, while an Arizona constitutional amendment is seeking voter approval on the November ballot. But the actual enactment of the bill by President Barack Obama could spur more movement on the measures by state lawmakers.

As is the case on the Congressional level, partisan politics is in play on the state level, where no anti-health care reform legislation has emerged in Democrat-dominated states like Illinois and New York, according to the NCSL.

Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum, a Republican candidate running for governor, said the mandate would cost Florida at least $1.6 billion in Medicaid alone.

All states would receive extra funding to cover Medicaid costs that are expected to rise under the reform, including 100 percent federal coverage for new enrollees under the plan through 2016.
Medicaid is the healthcare program for the poor jointly administered by the states and federal government.

(Reporting by Karen Pierog, additional reporting by Michael Connor in Miami, Jonathan Stempel in New York, Joan Gralla in New York, Lisa Lambert in Washington and Michael Peltier in Tallahassee; Editing by Andrew Hay)

Supreme Court Showdowns; Obama’s Rebuke of Court in State of Union Address Could Come Back to Haunt Obamacare, if/when passed:

Supreme Court Showdowns; Obama’s Rebuke of Court in State of Union Address Could Come Back to Haunt Obamacare, if/when passed:
By Marc Chamot

Can the Democrat’s version of Obamacare hold down constitutionally? Can there be a possible U.S. Supreme Court intervention on congress’ Obamacare fiascos?

From Wiki.Answers: Yes they can, any court can declare a law unconstitutional, if the law legitimately infringes on a person or entity's constitutional rights; however, the government would most likely appeal the decision to the Supreme Court of the United States, which is the ultimate arbiter of constitutionality.

The federal courts can declare legislation passed by Congress and signed by the President unconstitutional, but someone who has standing to challenge the law must file a suit first (the Supreme Court can't just pluck a bill off the President's desk and start critiquing it). In order to have standing, an individual must be personally, directly and negatively affected by the law in a significant way and there must be an issue that can be remediated by a court. Not all legislation lends itself well to judicial review.

And unless a party with standing to challenge the law files suit against the United States in US District Court, the losing party appeals the case to the appropriate US Court of Appeals Circuit Court (usually), and the subsequent losing party files a petition for a writ of certiorari (request to review the case) with the US Supreme Court.

If they grant cert (accept the case), the Supreme Court will evaluate whether the law conforms to the US Constitution either in general, or as applied. If the Court determines the law is unconstitutional, it will be nullified and rendered unenforceable. It is important to note that the US Supreme Court does not systematically review every law Congress passes.

Someone who is severely and directly, negatively affected by the law, and has a grievance that can be resolved by a court, must file suit and exhaust the required appeals process before the Supreme Court can review the case (and the law).

There are plenty of reasons to believe that it will happen. First of all, the Democrat’s tactics to push Obamacare over the top has been pretty much illegal and unheard of.

The very anti-democratic tactics of, extorting, threatening, and bribing party politicians to vote their way, and even against the majority of their constituents’ wishes, is a violation in itself. Not counting the very illegal Deem and Pass vote, where they don't go on record to cast their votes. This is communist China, not the United States of America!

After President Obama, who arrogantly, and openly criticized the court during his last State of the Union Speech, attacking mainly the conservatives of the Supreme Court, over their decisions to strike down corporate campaigns financing laws, it’s a sure given to an arrogant SOB, who acts like a dictator, and who likes to call himself an American president.

If Obamacare becomes law, the Supreme Court can declare it unconstitutional, and the only way for President Obama and the Democratic controlled U.S. congress can override the Supremes, and to make Obamacare a reality, is to override the Supreme Court through Constitutional Amendments. It’s a tougher process, it would be virtually impossible to get it done. Other than that, only the Supreme Court can overturn its own precedent.

Good job Mr. President! From someone who claimed to be a constitutional lawyer, eh?

See more from Wiki.Answers here:

Even before House vote on healthcare bill, legal challenges loom
Opponents of the healthcare bill are poised to challenge it over the House's likely use of the 'deem and pass' rule, as well as on the substance of the legislation itself.

As congressional leaders and the White House push to attract the remaining votes needed to pass a healthcare reform measure this weekend, opponents are poised to take their fight to the courts, and potentially all the way to the US Supreme Court.

The mounting drama on Capitol Hill could extend far beyond the political, economic, and national policy implications of healthcare reform. It could set the stage for a major showdown over the meaning of a key constitutional provision.

The conservative Landmark Legal Foundation has already drafted a nine-page complaint set to be filed in US District Court in Washington within moments of passage of the measure. There will likely be others.

Republican lawmakers have pledged similar efforts to challenge the constitutionality of a legislative maneuver that would allow the House to adopt a Senate version of the bill without casting a specific vote on it. The so-called Slaughter rule, named for House Rules Committee Chair Louise Slaughter (D) of New York, is an attractive alternative for Democratic lawmakers who want to pass some version of healthcare reform but who worry about the potential political consequences.

A close look at 'deem and pass'
Legal analysts are divided over whether the so-called “deem and pass” rule violates the constitutional mandate that each house of Congress pass identical bills that are then forwarded to the president for his signature.

Former Appeals Court Judge and Stanford Law Prof. Michael McConnell says it violates the requirement in Article I Section 7 that a bill “pass” both houses. “The Slaughter solution attempts to allow the House to pass the Senate bill, plus a bill amending it, with a single vote,” Professor McConnell wrote recently in The Wall Street Journal. “The senators would then vote only on the amendatory bill. But this means that no single bill will have passed both houses in the same form.”

Yale Law Prof. Jack Balkin disagrees with McConnell’s precise reading of the requirement. He has written on his popular blog that the House maneuver would satisfy constitutional requirements provided the House accepts the same text as the Senate bill as its own act.

The House has the ability to adopt its own rules, he says, and if the members decide to embrace a Senate bill as passed by the Senate, federal judges – and perhaps even Supreme Court justices – are unlikely to second-guess the internal workings of the legislative process.

“If opponents of health care reform want to find a basis to attack the constitutionality of health care reform, challenging the use of ‘deem and pass’ is a pretty good way to get thrown out of court,” he wrote.

Legal fights possible over bill's substance, too
In addition to the “deem and pass” rule, healthcare reform opponents have suggested they will challenge the constitutionality of several provisions in the bill. They argue that Congress lacks the power to order Americans to buy government-backed health insurance, and they say backroom deals offering special favors to Louisiana and Nebraska to gain the support of senators from those states raise constitutional questions.

But the more immediate legal fight would likely be over the deem and pass rule.

The Landmark Legal Foundation’s suit tracks McConnell’s position on the issue. “Because the House violated the Constitution by never voting on the Senate bill, the Senate bill cannot be and is not the law of the United States,” the lawsuit says in part. Any signature by President Obama would be a nullity.

“The piece of paper he has stated that he will sign or has signed is nothing more than that: a piece of paper,” the suit says.

The suit relies heavily on a 1998 US Supreme Court decision, Clinton v. City of New York, in which the court outlined the legislative process as requiring the House to pass a bill “containing its exact text” with the Senate approving “precisely the same text.”

One key test of the lawsuit, should it be filed, will be whether judges are willing to wade into the legislative and political thicket to address the issue. Or whether they would decide to leave it to Congress – and the voters – to apportion credit or blame for the healthcare reform effort.

Who are the REAL Obstructionists? Democrats Blocking Numerous Republican Illegal Immigration Bills on Tougher Employer Sanctions/Border Enforcements

Who are the REAL Obstructionists? Democrats Blocking Numerous Republican Illegal Immigration Bills on Tougher Employer Sanctions/Border Enforcements in the House:
By Marc Chamot

“Rather than enacting a ‘comprehensive’ plan that would put illegal’s on a path to citizenship, I believe that Congress must take an enforcement-first approach to solving our nation’s immigration and border security.

To this end, my bill, the Loophole Elimination and Verification Enforcement Act, will stem the inflow of illegal aliens by securing our borders, denying access to American jobs, and closing loopholes in our government programs that provide access to benefits.

With an enforcement strategy, the United States could reduce the illegal population by as many as 1.5 million each year, which would more than halve our current illegal alien population in five years. By securing the border and ending the job magnet, illegals will lack incentives to cross the border and the illegal alien population will begin to dwindle.” Republican Representative Gary Miller

Have we’ve had enough of the Democratic dog and pony show in Washington? Democrats are the REAL obstructionists when it comes to American immigration reforms.

First of all, more about these wayward Democrats, the nations’ total discontent with this government are at an all time low. In today’s Fox News poll shows: 68% Say Vote Out All Incumbents poll shows 68 percent of voters would oust all incumbents, while 20 percent would keep all lawmakers in office.

Even 52 percent of Democrats, whose party controls both houses of Congress, would get rid of all incumbents. Thirty-two percent would keep them. Most Republicans (79 percent) and independents (78 percent) would vote to get rid of all incumbents.

This “throw them out” sentiment reflects what the poll also found about voters’ perception of Congress: just 18 percent approve of the job Congress is doing, while 76 percent disapprove.
Moreover, 17 percent think Congress cares what the American people want, compared to the large 79 percent majority who think Congress does whatever it wants to do.

In response to the traditional generic ballot question, if the election were held today, 42 percent of American voters say they would back the Republican candidate in their district and 38 percent the Democratic candidate.

A higher number of Republicans (89 percent) would back their party’s candidate than Democrats would support theirs (81 percent). By 33 percent to 25 percent, more independents say they would back the Republican candidate, with the remaining 42 percent saying they would vote for another candidate or are unsure.

While we’ve got great Republican representative in Gary Miller, who proposed two anti-illegal immigrations bills in the past year, with other co-authors and supporters from other house Republicans, but unfortunately they have been ignored or stuck in Democrat committees with little chance of ever escaping.

And there’s no action or date being given by Democrats to put these bills for an up and down vote, on most of these Republican immigration reform bills, the up and down votes, like the kind that President Obama wants for his most beloved healthcare.

Representative Gary Miller is saying Amnesty Will Kill American Jobs In an op-ed piece published by the Daily Caller, Rep. Gary Miller (R-Calif.) criticizes the Administration and Congressional leadership for not doing enough for America's 15 million unemployed. Rep. Miller says that the Gutierrez Amnesty bill introduced in the House would "jeopardize millions of jobs for Americans and legal residents."

Rep. Miller criticizes the Administration for constantly saying that its No. 1 priority is jobs, while allowing job-killing bills to come up for votes in Congress. And allowing the Gutierrez Amnesty bill to be introduced proves the point.

Rep. Miller points out several key points in the bill that would hurt unemployed Americans. First, Miller criticizes the offering of amnesty to the nation's 12 million illegal aliens, saying that "granting amnesty to those that have recklessly disregarded our nation’s immigration laws is an affront to American citizens and legal residents."

Second, Rep. Miller points to the bill's overhaul of the E-Verify system; "... the legislation severely weakens existing and proven worksite enforcement activities."

Rep. Miller says the best way to protect American workers is to pass his legislation, the Loophole Elimination and Verification Enforcement Act (H.R.994), which puts immigration enforcement first. Read Rep. Miller's full column at the DailyCaller.com.

Other bills like Nathan Deal of Georgia’s H.R. 1868, the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009 to restrict citizenship birthrights’ to undocumented aliens and a few others, are intentionally being held up by Democrats in house committees.

Here is more from Gary Miller; Reps. Miller, Smith, and Myrick on the Daily Caller: Reclaim 8 Million Jobs Washington, Mar 19 - The United States is facing the most severe economic downturn since the Great Depression. As the unemployment rate stubbornly hovers around 10 percent—15 percent for those without a high school diploma—job creation is our most pressing domestic issue.

More often than not, job creation discussions center around issues such as whether tax cuts or government spending are the most effective method to spur economic growth. These topics are undoubtedly important, but often overlooked is the impact illegal immigration has on Americans and legal immigrants.About 8 million jobs are held by illegal immigrants.

Vulnerable and disadvantaged American workers have seen their incomes and job opportunities shrink. Forcing unemployed workers to compete with undocumented workers is not fair to hard-working Americans.

By simply enforcing immigration laws already on the books, we could create job opportunities for American citizens and immigrants who played by the rules to enter the U.S. Instead, the Obama administration has all but abandoned worksite enforcement efforts.

In the past year alone, administrative arrests fell by 68 percent; the number of criminal arrests fell by 60 percent; the number of criminal indictments fell by 58 percent; and the number of criminal convictions fell by 63 percent.

This is unacceptable and is an insult to unemployed and underemployed American workers.Recognizing the direct link between unemployment and illegal immigration, we have formed the Reclaim American Jobs Caucus. Comprised of 30 members of Congress, we are dedicated to promoting policies that will help citizens and legal immigrants reclaim the eight million jobs held by illegal immigrants.

Specifically, the Caucus seeks to expand use of the E-Verify system that allows employers to validate the eligibility of new hires, enforce workplace immigration laws, encourage attrition through enforcement, and oppose policies that encourage illegal immigration.E-Verify is a successful and commonsense program that checks workers’ names and Social Security numbers to confirm employment eligibility.

This program provides American employers who want to do the right thing with an effective way to ensure that they are hiring a legal workforce. Although nearly 180,000 employers currently use E-Verify, this program is voluntary under current law. The Reclaim American Jobs Caucus supports making E-Verify mandatory, both for new and current employees.

In addition, interior enforcement of our immigration laws is critical to the recapture of stolen American jobs. Worksite enforcement in previous years has opened up thousands of jobs for American workers.The Reclaim American Jobs Caucus supports turning off the jobs magnet that draws illegal immigrants to America.

If the federal government were to strongly enforce our immigration laws, many illegal immigrants would simply return home voluntarily. This approach—‘attrition through enforcement’—will dramatically reduce the illegal immigrant population over time.

The Reclaim American Jobs Caucus opposes amnesty for illegal immigrants. We are a nation of immigrants and also a nation of laws. Respect for the rule of law is a core American value.Our government must send the message that the United States takes our immigration laws seriously. It is simply wrong to award citizenship and permanent access to American jobs to those that have recklessly disregarded our nation’s immigration laws.

If nothing else, amnesty is patently unfair to would-be immigrants who have played by the rules.Some argue illegal immigrants do the work Americans cannot or do not want to do. Such statements demean Americans who work hard in every occupation.

There are no jobs that American workers will not do; any honest job is a worthy job.Members of the Reclaim American Jobs Caucus have worked in Congress—and will continue to work—to get Americans back to work.

Millions of individuals and families are hurting and we should open those jobs for them immediately. Reps. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), Gary Miller (R-Calif.), and Sue Myrick (R-N.C.) are the co-chairs of the newly formed Reclaim American Jobs Caucus.

Battle for Public Opinions LOST on Obamacare & Ignoring Polls will Kill the Democratic Party, Say Top Democratic Party Operatives:

Battle for Public Opinions LOST on Obamacare & Ignoring Polls will Kill the Democratic Party, Say Top Democratic Party Operatives:
By Marc Chamot

Stop this nonsense, are now saying two Democratic operatives/pollsters on Obamacare, before it kills our party.

According to two well known Democratic Party operatives, Patrick H Caddell and Douglas E Schoen, they are both saying, if President Obama and the liberal Democrats keep on pursuing this very unpopular, healthcare reform, it will be curtains for them in the November elections and from hence on.

“Their blind persistence in the face of reality threatens to turn this political march of folly into an electoral rout in November. In the wake of the stinging loss in Massachusetts, there was a moment when the president and the Democratic leadership seemed to realize the reality of the health-care situation. Yet like some seductive siren of Greek mythology, the lure of health-care reform has arisen again.

First, the battle for public opinion has been lost. Comprehensive health care has been lost. If it fails, as appears possible, Democrats will face the brunt of the electorate's reaction. If it passes, however, Democrats will face a far greater calamitous reaction at the polls. Wishing, praying or pretending will not change these outcomes.

Nothing has been more disconcerting than to watch Democratic politicians and their media supporters deceive themselves into believing that the public favors the Democrats' current health-care plan. Yes, most Americans believe, as we do, that real health-care reform is needed. And yes, certain proposals in the plan are supported by the public.

However, a solid majority of Americans opposes the massive health-reform plan. Four-fifths of those who oppose the plan strongly oppose it, according to Rasmussen polling this week, while only half of those who support the plan do so strongly. Many more Americans believe the legislation will worsen their health care, cost them more personally and add significantly to the national deficit. Never in our experience as pollsters can we recall such self-deluding misconstruction of survey data.”

And even worse, of what I understand, Obamacare is fashioned after the 2006 Massachusetts’ disastrous and FAILED public healthcare program, that they initiated.

Massachusetts Miracle or Massachusetts Miserable: Instead of saving costs, although the state has reduced the number of residents without health insurance, 200,000 people remain uninsured. Moreover, the increase in the number of insured is primarily due to the state's generous subsidies, not the celebrated individual mandate.

Health care costs continue to rise much faster than the national average. Since 2006, total state health care spending has increased by 28 percent. Insurance premiums have increased by 8–10 percent per year, nearly double the national average.

New regulations and bureaucracy are limiting consumer choice and adding to health care costs.
Program costs have skyrocketed. Despite tax increases, the program faces huge deficits. The state is considering caps on insurance premiums, cuts in reimbursements to providers, and even the possibility of a "global budget" on health care spending—with its attendant rationing.
A shortage of providers, combined with increased demand, is increasing waiting times to see a physician.

With the "Massachusetts model" frequently cited as a blueprint for health care reform, it is important to recognize that giving the government greater control over our health care system will have grave consequences for taxpayers, providers, and health care consumers. That is the lesson of the Massachusetts model.

After their Royal healthcare failures, and with that folks, this must explain as to why Massachusetts chose to elect Republican Scott Brown, to take former Ted Kennedy’s senate seat. They wanted to make sure that the Feds weren’t going to repeat the same fatal mistakes they made in their state.

If Democrats ignore health-care polls, midterms will be costly
In "The March of Folly," Barbara Tuchman asked, "Why do holders of high office so often act contrary to the way reason points and enlightened self-interest suggests?" Her assessment of self-deception -- "acting according to wish while not allowing oneself to be deflected by the facts" -- captures the conditions that are gripping President Obama and the Democratic Party leadership as they renew their efforts to enact health-care reform.

Their blind persistence in the face of reality threatens to turn this political march of folly into an electoral rout in November. In the wake of the stinging loss in Massachusetts, there was a moment when the president and the Democratic leadership seemed to realize the reality of the health-care situation. Yet like some seductive siren of Greek mythology, the lure of health-care reform has arisen again.

As pollsters to the past two Democratic presidents, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, respectively, we feel compelled to challenge the myths that seem to be prevailing in the political discourse and to once again urge a change in course before it is too late. At stake is the kind of mainstream, common-sense Democratic Party that we believe is crucial to the success of the American enterprise.

Bluntly put, this is the political reality:
First, the battle for public opinion has been lost. Comprehensive health care has been lost. If it fails, as appears possible, Democrats will face the brunt of the electorate's reaction. If it passes, however, Democrats will face a far greater calamitous reaction at the polls. Wishing, praying or pretending will not change these outcomes.

Nothing has been more disconcerting than to watch Democratic politicians and their media supporters deceive themselves into believing that the public favors the Democrats' current health-care plan. Yes, most Americans believe, as we do, that real health-care reform is needed. And yes, certain proposals in the plan are supported by the public.

However, a solid majority of Americans opposes the massive health-reform plan. Four-fifths of those who oppose the plan strongly oppose it, according to Rasmussen polling this week, while only half of those who support the plan do so strongly. Many more Americans believe the legislation will worsen their health care, cost them more personally and add significantly to the national deficit. Never in our experience as pollsters can we recall such self-deluding misconstruction of survey data.

The White House document released Thursday arguing that reform is becoming more popular is in large part fighting the last war. This isn't 1994; it's 2010. And the bottom line is that the American public is overwhelmingly against this bill in its totality even if they like some of its parts.

The notion that once enactment is forced, the public will suddenly embrace health-care reform could not be further from the truth -- and is likely to become a rallying cry for disaffected Republicans, independents and, yes, Democrats.

Second, the country is moving away from big government, with distrust growing more generally toward the role of government in our lives. Scott Rasmussen asked last month whose decisions people feared more in health care: that of the federal government or of insurance companies. By 51 percent to 39 percent, respondents feared the decisions of federal government more. This is astounding given the generally negative perception of insurance companies.

CNN found last month that 56 percent of Americans believe that the government has become so powerful it constitutes an immediate threat to the freedom and rights of citizens. When only 21 percent of Americans say that Washington operates with the consent of the governed, as was also reported last month, we face an alarming crisis.

Health care is no longer a debate about the merits of specific initiatives. Since the spectacle of Christmas deal making to ensure passage of the Senate bill, the issue, in voters' minds, has become less about health care than about the government and a political majority that will neither hear nor heed the will of the people.

Voters are hardly enthralled with the GOP, but the Democrats are pursuing policies that are out of step with the way ordinary Americans think and feel about politics and government. Barring some change of approach, they will be punished severely at the polls.

Now, we vigorously opposed Republican efforts in the Bush administration to employ the "nuclear option" in judicial confirmations. We are similarly concerned by Democrats' efforts to manipulate passage of a health-care bill. Doing so in the face of constant majority opposition invites a backlash against the party at every level -- and at a time when it already faces the prospect of losing 30 or more House seats and eight or more Senate seats.

For Democrats to begin turning around their political fortunes there has to be a frank acknowledgement that the comprehensive health-care initiative is a failure, regardless of whether it passes. There are enough Republican and Democratic proposals -- such as purchasing insurance across state lines, malpractice reform, incrementally increasing coverage, initiatives to hold down costs, covering preexisting conditions and ensuring portability -- that can win bipartisan support.

It is not a question of starting over but of taking the best of both parties and presenting that as representative of what we need to do to achieve meaningful reform. Such a proposal could even become a template for the central agenda items for the American people: jobs and economic development.

Unless the Democrats fundamentally change their approach, they will produce not just a march of folly but also run the risk of unmitigated disaster in November.

Patrick H. Caddell is a political commentator and former pollster. Douglas E. Schoen, a pollster, is the author of "The Political Fix."

George Miller’s “Local Jobs for America Act,” a FRAUD; Jobs Bill Only Saves Costly Local/State Unionized Government Employees at taxpayers’ expense:

Rep George Miller’s “Local Jobs for America Act,” a FRAUD; Jobs Bill Only Saves Costly Local/State Unionized Government Employees at taxpayers’ expense:
By Marc Chamot

Beware of upcoming jobs bills masquerading in sheep’s clothing. Democrats still want to help and finance, in a down economy, costly local and state government employees and their unionized jobs, medical benefits, and extravagant retirement plans.

A top San Francisco Bay area Democrat is proposing a bill that sends cities, 100 billion dollars over the next two years. But this money is NOT for main street folks like us. It is our monies to salvage the way out of control and costly unionized jobs, for cities like San Francisco, other Bay Area cities, Oakland and Los Angeles.

Representative George Miller, a Democrat, is pushing for the public sectors bill, to help finance this very costly political favoritism, and sweetheart deals that local and state politicians have made with the unions, which they cannot pay.

It is primarily to forestall massive public sector lay-offs, but the clincher behind these proposals, most of these unionized cities, and state employees are refusing to take pay cuts. They are “fighting tooth and nail” on restructurings and pay cuts, to their healthcare plans and retirements.

In other words, while the rest of America in the private sectors have seen their wages downsized, with loses to their health benefits, these unionized government employees, all want to keep their pay going up, with complete healthcare packages and retirements paid for, by the John Q taxpayers. They want keep living “high off the hog,” while the rest of us are suffering.

I say to all of this, BULL! Let the cities and state cut their salaries and benefits, just like its being done in the private sector. We, the taxpayers are under NO obligation to foot, these ludicrous deals that were made by politicians for vote buying, just to get favors for favors from unions and their government employees.

They say it’s a way to slow down the jobs losses, since December 2007, over 8 million jobs have been lost.

But the problem is this, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, has handed out between 17,000 to 26,000 pink slips to city workers, his plan was to rehire them back with shortened workweeks that would save local taxpayers 6.25% on public employees salaries. But George Miller’s bill would rescind all of that. So we are adding more money to the problem, rather than finding a permanent solution to trim back costs on these out of control wages that are being paid out to unionized public employees.

That is the problem with free spending Democrats like the Miller bill, “Local Jobs for America Act,” just because of the meltdown on property values and tax revenues; we ARE not obligated to pay hefty salaries for these greedy, unionized people. They can take pay cuts just like EVERYBODY else has. It’s these kinds of preferential treatments that Americans are Fed-Up with.

I say to my fellow conservative friends, fight this bill. Say HELL NO to this crappy bill, which favors certain privileged groups over others.

Source: Senate action
Miller said the stimulus has done "a pretty fair job" but "clearly is not going to be sufficient" to reduce the current 9.7 percent national unemployment rate.

The Senate's $138 billion legislation would extend stimulus-funded unemployment insurance, tax cuts and health care for unemployed workers through the end of 2010, and provide $25 billion more in aid to states. It would borrow $97 billion, with the rest offset by giving the Internal Revenue Service new tools to go after tax shelters.

The Senate bill also included $150 million in disaster relief for California produce farmers hit by water cutbacks. California Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, both Democrats, inserted the aid into a broader $1.5 billion farm disaster relief provision that was added to the Senate jobs bill by Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Blanche Lincoln, an Arkansas Democrat whose seat is considered one of the most endangered in the Senate. Feinstein said three years of drought in California has led to $600 million in crop losses last year.

Another $18 billion Senate plan would give companies a tax break for hiring people who have been unemployed for at least 60 days. The House is also working on another bill to give small businesses $13 billion in tax breaks, including lifting capital gains taxes on certain small business stock.

Input from mayors
Miller's "Local Jobs for America Act" was written with input from mayors across the country who said they are confronting a meltdown in property tax revenue from the real estate crash and cutbacks in aid from similarly strapped state governments. Miller said local budgets have been cut to the bone, receding to their level of 1980, and that many cities are facing layoffs of firefighters, police and teachers.

He said the money would go directly to city hall officials, who would best know what their local needs are and be able to hire people immediately.

The effort won rave reviews from liberal interest groups, including the labor-friendly Employment Policy Institute, which called it "exactly the kind of bold response we need," but there are no Republican co-sponsors. Miller and other Democrats acknowledged an uphill battle and said it would be up to the House leadership to decide how and when to take up the bill. They said they hoped a big push by mayors visiting Washington next week would build momentum.

San Francisco deficit
San Francisco faces a $522 million budget deficit. "Many of the cuts we're facing as a city are result of trying to grapple with state cuts," said Newsom spokesman Winnicker. He said last year's federal stimulus "helped us enormously."

Newsom has been pushing hard for an extension of the "Jobs Now" program that was part of the stimulus and created 2,100 jobs in San Francisco, two-thirds of those in the private sector, according to the mayor's office.

The program provides hiring subsidies directly to private businesses, nonprofits and government agencies through the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. It was killed by Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., on a procedural vote but Newsom is pushing to add it to the Miller bill and more upcoming Senate jobs legislation.

"Everybody is talking another jobs bill for sure," Winnicker said. "None of this is done yet by any stretch from what we're hearing."

1 Billion Dollars Spent by Top California Groups over a Decade, Influencing Vote Results & Politicians for Profit & Favors:

Bought & Paid For in American Politics; 1 Billion Dollars Spent by Top California Groups over a Decade, Influencing Vote Results & Politicians for Profit & Favors:
By Marc Chamot

Big money is truly the “Roots of All Evil,” in American Politics:

The new American Politicians Credo should be; “Have Lots of money, will buy You Big Favors;” if anybody wants to know what’s really wrong with America and American politics, take this new report to heart and figure it all out.

An interesting report just out, the California Teachers’ Association’s union spent more than $211.8 million, and more than any other special interest groups in a decade to influence state voters and politicians’ to sway big favors, like hefty salaries, benefits and pensions their way.

Three American Indian tribes bought their way for big gambling casinos with $200 million dollars into the political process, and big business, corporate entities, have shelled out more than $500 million combined!

The California Fair Political Practices Commissions just reported, basically, “big money talks in politics and favors, while a whole lot of BS walks away.” If special interests weren’t getting their money back on investments, they wouldn’t be doing it at all, simply put.

This is the sad reality as to what is happening in this country. It’s not only happening in California, but throughout this country and Washington DC. All is being paid and bought for, by big special interests, which have billions of dollars in consumer and taxpayer’s at stake for their greediness and profitability’s.

This report shows little doubt, in how our nation is being perverted and corrupted by big money, and in how they sway outcomes in elections.

In all, 15 top groups, two are government employees unions, six major corporations, and four business associations. They all include three Indian tribes, drug manufacturers, utility companies, telecommunications, oil, and big tobacco. “All of these have a disproportionate amount of influence on California elections and POLICIES” the FPPC concludes.

The report also warns that there is no end in sight to these spending binges and government deal makings. Of those billion dollars, $660 million were spent on state and local ballots, to sway favors towards their greedy interests. They often in many cases, win by spending big money to defeat ballot measures to maintain the status quos.
Source: Hey, big spenders

These 15 groups spent more than a combined $1 billion over the past 10 years to influence public policy:
-- California Teachers Association: $211.8 million
-- California State Council of Service Employees: $107.4 million
-- Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America: $104.9 million
-- Morongo Band of Mission Indians: $83.6 million
-- Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians: $69.2 million
-- Pacific Gas & Electric Co.: $69.2 million
-- Chevron Corp.: $66.2 million
-- AT&T Inc.: $59.6 million
-- Philip Morris USA Inc.: $50.7 million
-- Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians: $49 million
-- Southern California Edison: $43.4 million
-- California Hospital Association: $43 million
-- California Chamber of Commerce: $39 million
-- Western States Petroleum Association: $35.2 million
-- Aera Energy LLC: $34.6 million
Source: California Fair Political Practices Commission

Big money in politics is so perverted, that the San Francisco Chronicle dug and hid this story in the back of their C section yesterday. It’s happening nationwide, Americans are finally catching on to all of this corruption. It will be a matter of time, when it will be all over.

In the recent Rasmussen Reports, it asked voters about their immediate concerns, public corruption and special interests, was second to the economy as their biggest concerns about American politics. Americans are screaming for fixes, and if politicians don’t pay any mind to them, they will be defeated and out of power soon.

Rasmussen Reports: Economy/Jobs 82%, Government Ethics/Special Interests 81%, National Security 64%, Taxes 62%, Healthcare 62% and so forth. You can all see where healthcare is at. To President Obama and the loony left Democrats, its their number one issue, while the rest of America sees it as a lesser priority, it is tied at number 4.

This is just another governmental blemish; it shows how out of whack and touch American politicians have become with the general folks, the ones who put them in office.

The Great American White Out, the disappearing “American White Majority,” Census Estimates half of children born in U.S. are Minorities/Hispanics:

The Great American White Out, the disappearing “American White Majority,” Census Estimates half of children born in U.S. are Minorities, Mainly Legal/Illegal Hispanics:
By Marc Chamot

The Great American White Out, the disappearing “American White Majority,” new study out shows that half of children born in the United States are minorities, and mostly Latinos.

Using figures and percentages from last census’s reports, in about forty years, minorities are expected to be the majority in America. Some demographers say, this year could be the tipping point, when minorities’ babies will outnumber whites.

The open and out of control American Immigration policies, visas, and the constant flow of illegal immigration is to blame. The flow of primarily, Hispanic women in their prime, especially illegal immigrants of childbearing years made up 48% of U.S. children born in 2008, compared to 37% in 2007.

According to previous U.S census estimates, Hispanics/Latinos, will become the minority-majority in the nation. Hispanic younger women are driving the birthrates, more than any other races.

Whites currently make up two-thirds of the total U.S. population, and at the rate these Hispanic minorities are going, they will overtake American White Americans by 2050. Roughly, one in ten of the nation’s 3,142 counties have minorities greater than 50%, but one in four communities have more minority children than whites.

Hispanics women have an average of three children, while others have two. The numbers are 2.99 for Hispanics, while 1.87 for whites, 2.13 for African Americans, and 2.04 for Asians.

Source: Census figures show nearly half of babies in US are born to minorities each year
By: HOPE YEN Read more at the San Francisco Examiner:

It’s simply amazing folks, Latinos in general, gripe and bitch about their low wages, they are the lowest wage earners in the United States according to some studies, and they all want amnesty, but they certainly can afford to have three or more children, more than anyone else. It’s “La Reconquista” all over folks, they all claim “LaReconquista” is all made up baloney by anti-illegal immigrant groups, but there it is in print.

And then we’ve got Hispanic voters who some say, may be influential for Democrats in 37 competitive U.S. congressional races and three governorships. Even though Latino groups claim to have had 10 million voting in the last presidential election, 2.5 million more from four years before, they can help Democrats stay in power, depending if they show up to vote.

“There’s going to be a major mobilization in favor of immigration reform. The final chapter has not been written as to whether immigration reform is going to happen in 2010.” Eight Senate and 29 House seats spread across 12 states, plus gubernatorial contests in California, Texas and Colorado, are particularly at play, he says.

The expected candidates for California are Democrat Jerry Brown, the current state attorney general who served two terms as governor, (’75 -’83) and former EBay CEO Meg Whitman. In Colorado, Denver’s Democratic Mayor John Hickenlooper will face off against either Scott McInnis or Dan Maes both of whom served in Congress.

But then again, as I’ve said before, Hispanics may be vote getters, they are only a small majority over all African American voters, and they may want comprehensive immigration reforms and “amnesties,” but Independents are the largest voting bloc in America today, they are the new party of majority dissatisfied White and African Americans these days.

While the Democratic and Republican Parties are shrinking, Independents are growing; Independents now constitute almost 40% of American voters. And then we’ve got our Tea Party, made up of White Americans mixed with, some patriotic loyal African Americans. Hispanics think they can get “La Reconquista” going here, but they will be stopped in their tracks, along with their political supporters in Washington, just wait and see.

But it’s not all gloom and doom for the United States and Americans. According to Department of Homeland Security, they are showing that illegal aliens are self deporting, due to a bad American economy. Their reports show that illegal aliens in the U.S. have plunged by a million since 2007 and it’s still dropping now.

Number of Illegal Immigrants Plunges by 1M
Department of Homeland Security Reports Sharp Drop in Undocumented Population, Renewing Divisive Debate. Even though I dispute the government’s total count, it’s AWESOME news folks!

This is the time for us to get even tougher on visas and illegal immigration, the federal government needs to get tougher on employers who hire the undocumented, and we need to put more pressure on congress and Obama to further secure the border with Mexico.

We as Americans, need to get louder, scream and yell, and place all future politicians on the Litmus Tests, are they for legal or illegal immigration?

White House Chief of Thugs; Rahm Emanuel is a “Son of the Devil’s Spawn,” Obama/Democratic Leaderships' Running the Nation with Threats/Intimidations:

White House Chief of Thugs; Rahm Emanuel is a “Son of the Devil’s Spawn,” Obama/Democratic Leaderships' Running the Nation with Threats & Intimidations:
By Marc Chamot

This is the way American politics is being run in Washington these days, as Mr Massa put it, “I am showering, naked as a jaybird, and here comes Rahm Emanuel, not even with a towel wrapped round his tush, poking his finger in my chest, yelling at me because I wasn’t going to vote for the president’s budget. Do you know how awkward it is to have a political argument with a naked man?"

What a disgraceful and embarrassing bunches we’ve got. While the country is falling apart, people are losing jobs, and this president wants to socialize everything, we’ve got grown men running around NAKED at the capitol!

Is America heading for a constitutional crisis and a possible civil war, with these lame bunches at the White House, and Democrats in the U.S. Congress? Can Americans wait for the 2010 Midterms?

First, from the ACLUist voice, the New York Times came out with a full page ad for the ACLU this past Sunday. They were trying to convince President Obama not to try Guantanamo terrorists in military tribunals, but instead, have these killers tried in American courts.

The ACLU seems to advertise their propaganda rhetoric’s only in the Times. And that tells you what the New York Times is all about, “What will it be Mr. President, change or more of the same?” They also claim to speak for the voice of the majority, when they actually aren’t.

It wants to remind the world that America stands for due process, justice, and rule of law even for murderous terrorists, who want to kill Americans. ACLU bylines, ninety years protecting your constitutional rights, but not American security and lives though.

Its desperation time for Democrats: its “Houston, we’ve got a problem, the party’s imploding and in the fringes of complete collapse,” they need to pass Obamacares no matter what. And the president’s poll numbers are sinking deeper into the abyss as the healthcare reforms keep going by, and there are more political disasters for Obama and Democrats within their midst’s.

“Embattled Rep. Eric Massa used his final hours in office to settle scores with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and other Democrats, he claims they are pushing him out of office, to clear the way for health care reform.”

That’s twice now; upon leaving Washington, Democrats are blasting their own party leadership, especially the White House, for thug politics. And now we’ve got Representative Eric Massa, with his own ethical problems, is ratting out and blasting the White House Chief of Thugs Rahm Emanuel.

Not long after we’ve had the Evan Bayhs’ Electoral “shock” to Dysfunctional & Broken System; Rifts and Fissures within the Political Structures in D.C. growing:
“Flatly denying any possibility that he'd seek the presidency or any other higher office, Bayh argued that the American people needed to deliver a "shock" to Congress by voting incumbents out en masse and replacing them with people interested in reforming the process and governing for the good of the people, rather than deep-pocketed special-interest groups.”

We’ve now got Eric Massa, blasting the dictatorships and their strong arming, arms twisting, from the ever corrupt Democratic Party leadership in U.S. congress and Obama White House. He blasted one specific White House scum, Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s Chief of Staff; he’s accusing him of being the Master Chief Thug, for Obama left-wing policies.

Massa Details Naked Shower Fight With 'Son of the Devil's Spawn'
He reserved his most excoriating stuff for Emanuel, whom he called "son of the devil's spawn" on his weekly radio show Sunday.

"He is an individual who would sell his mother to get a vote. He would strap his children to a front end of a steam locomotive," Massa said. Illustrating his point, he told the story of how he winded up in an argument with the chief of staff while they were both naked in the congressional gym showers.

Massa said Emanuel came up to him last year, shortly after he entered Congress, while he was trying to clean up to give him grief about a budget vote.

"I'm sitting there showering, naked as a jaybird, and here comes Rahm Emanuel, not even with a towel wrapped around his tush, poking his finger in my chest, yelling at me because I wasn't gonna vote for the president's budget," Massa said. "Do you know how awkward it is to have a political argument with a naked man? ... It's ridiculous."

He continued, "By the way, what the heck is he doing in the congressional gym? He goes there to intimidate members of Congress."

"Mine is now the deciding votes on the health care bill and this administration and this House leadership have said, quote-unquote, they will stop at nothing to pass this health care bill, and now they've gotten rid of me and it will pass. You connect the dots," Massa said.

"The future of the Democratic Party rests on passing this health care bill. They can get anyone to say anything about me concerning anything at all and in fact they did."

Under the George Bush Republicans or any other American president, I have never witnessed such a chaotic, ruthless and un-American way of running policies.

There is no question about it, it’s a precursor to a REVOLUTION in any country, and it could be peaceful, violent or pretty bloody, and this is not a threat, its facts. But the political elements for it to happen here are real.

When somebody strong arms our representatives and senators by threats, they are threatening and strong arming the voters and the general population too. It disrespects the American voters, their say, values and their opinions on issues. It's very dangerous.

At this rate, I predict U.S. Supreme Court interventions soon, before the Obama Presidency is over in 2012.

Photo of "the Obamacrats," courtesy Nice Deb