If someone initiates force against you, you DO have the right to defend yourself. Governments don’t like this, since they are one of the principle organizations initiating force. They want their agents (aka soldiers) to be able to initiate force, without people defending themselves against their aggression.

Today I see news releases in which B. H. Obama is bragging about “fixing” medicare. Looks like little more than window dressing to me. Many doctors are dropping medicare patients because they don’t make any money and it’s just not worth the paperwork and effort to comply with the regulations. So much for “affordable health care for all.”

When the government socializes services and then makes big promises, there is a good chance they won’t deliver on those promises when hard times are here. These cuts and the subsequent bragging about “eliminating waste” are just another example of this.

Obama, like most politicians, is a highly paid professional shill. He lied his way into office and he used his lies to crack open the treasury and rob the future generations of their freedom and prosperity. How about we get these leftist hacks out of office and put people in who give a damn about our inalienable Constitutional rights.

You can’t create new “rights” like the “right to health care” which violate existing basic human rights like property rights; because in order for the government to hand out services for free, they must take something from someone else.

What you end up with, after all of this welfare, is crappy health care for everyone, more poverty and a much more difficult life for future generations.

Doctors’ Medicare payouts to be cut 21% June 1

CNN Money | May 17, 2010

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — For the fourth time this year, doctors face a potential huge cut in the fees that the government pays them to treat Medicare patients.

Physicians will be hit with a 21% cut in Medicare reimbursements as of June 1, unless lawmakers decide to patch over the issue — as they’ve done for years. Congress is now debating the matter, and to stop the cut lawmakers would have to vote to pass a new patch sometime in the next two weeks.

If the proposed cuts go through, physicians are worried their practices will be so strapped that they’ll have to drop some of the 43 million Americans who are covered under Medicare.

But, of course, on the other side of the issue is cost to the government at a time when the federal budget is tight.

Federal law currently requires that the payment rates for doctors who accept Medicare be adjusted annually based on a formula that’s tied to the health of the economy.

“The current formula is absolutely broken,” said James Rohack, president of the American Medical Association. “Congress is in a hole, and instead of climbing out they keep digging deeper.”

That formula was established in 1997, and the law says rates should be cut every year to keep Medicare in the black.

But Congress has blocked those cuts in seven of the last eight years, setting up nine temporary patches often referred to as the “doc fix” — three of which were in 2010 alone.

“It’s hard to imagine this 21% cut actually being allowed to go through,” said Patricia Neuman, a vice president at the nonpartisan analysis group Kaiser Family Foundation. “A cut of this magnitude would have a chilling effect on physicians.”

‘Annual agony’

Of course, delaying cuts merely kicks an existing problem down the road.

“This annual agony must end,” said Lori Heim, president of the American Academy of Family Physicians, in a statement. “Postponing a permanent solution is false economy.”

One possible outcome of the congressional wrangling is a five-year delay in the 21% cut in Medicare fees. That option, the most-discussed so far, would cost about $80 billion.

That spending would be exempt from a “pay as you go” law enacted in February that requires lawmakers to find ways to offset certain spending increases or tax cuts.

Other options include delaying cuts by a fewer number of years, but at higher reimbursement rates, provided that the cost is capped at $80 billion.

But the AMA’s Rohack says he wants “a new formula that actually reflects the true cost of care.” Lawmakers counter that repealing the current setup would cost $210 billion over 10 years.

The massive cost of retooling Medicare is the reason such a measure wasn’t included in the new health care reform law.

“Like so many things, this is a fiscal issue — it all gets down to money,” Neuman said. “There’s a lot of interest in changing the formula, but it’s not so straightforward, especially from a budgetary point of view.”

The AMA is pushing for a total Medicare overhaul because the years of temporary patches have created uncertainty for physicians and consumers alike, Rohack said.

“There will be letters saying, ‘Dear Mrs. Jones, I’m closing my practice because I can’t afford it anymore,’ ” Rohack said. “I’m worried they won’t even be able to recommend other physicians because no one else in the community is accepting Medicare either.”

A permanent fix would remove physician uncertainty, restore consumer faith and ultimately save money, Rohack said, adding that a permanent fix in 2007 would have cost just $49 billion.

“If they’d fixed this permanently years ago, it would have been a tadpole-sized problem,” Rohack said. “Now, it’s become a bullfrog — and eventually it’ll be Jabba the Hutt.”

I would like to thank the leftists for giving us all “universal” health care.  Basically services that we are going to be forced to buy, else pay a penalty on our IRS tax return.  I haven’t even been to an allopathic “doctor” for my health in about 10 years; so despite the fact that I might not want to take part in that system at all someday, these extortionists are going to force me to have insurance; and not just any insurance, the insurance that the government says is okay.

The way a republic like ours is supposed to function is: you are allowed to do whatever you please, so long as it doesn’t violate the inalienable rights of another individual.  The government is supposed to exist in order to protect those inalienable rights as their soul function.  The people of a nation are supposed to keep their government in line by demanding that those rights be protected above all else.

This healthcare bill infringes on my rights to choose where and how my money is spent and how I manage my health.  What if I decide I don’t want insurance someday down the line?  Let’s say I’m a self-employed health conscious individual who only needs coverage in the event I get hit by a truck and have to get put back together.  I might want a health savings account and a high deductible policy; but the government must first approve any selection or I will be forced to pay penalties out of my salary.

Look, if you can’t get affordable health coverage, I’m sorry; but you need to realize that the government involvement in the health care system is a great deal of why it is so expensive already.  Around half of all of the money spent on healthcare comes from the government; this drives up the prices for everyone.   Its the same with education and all of the government money pumped into that system on a continuous basis.

If you don’t really understand the deeper effects of how markets work; then I can see how it looks like a good idea.  You think that the so-called “free market” doesn’t work for health care; but you don’t realize that we don’t really have much of a free market here; the government has all but taken over the system and look what the results where.  What we’re looking at is a problem that government helped create and more government control is not going to magically solve it.

Personally, I am covered by an insurance plan via my employer; but I rarely use it for myself.  I can accomplish most of my health care with diet, nutrition, exercise, herbs and an inquisitive mind.  I don’t want your health care and I do everything in my power to not need it.

There are a great many people who need the health care, primarily because they are mostly unaware of their unhealthy lifestyle habits.  I’m sorry to say it; but if you drink soda and eat processed junk all day you are going to have health problems; I don’t see why it should be my responsibility to bail you out when you are made to face the consequences of bad decisions.

One thing that we have to realize as a collective is that there needs to be risk.  Risk motivates people to be more aware; because they know they must avert that risk.  People are always calling on the government to protect us from risk by spreading that risk out over the collective; but all this really does is make us a weaker society because people make worse decisions when they don’t have to be concerned with risk.  It also penalizes productivity because a fair chunk of society freeloads on the back of the socialized risk machine without contributing meaningfully.

We need to make some drastic changes in the direction our society is going.  Less health freedoms are not going to make us any healthier; it will just encourage people to be lazy and freeload on the system.  It will also limit the options of people who are mindful and want to use alternative treatments; because being extorted into paying for “care” lessens the amount of money for alternative treatments.

Source: Allegiance and Duty Betrayed

Ignorance, illiteracy, stupidity always have been relevant social factors. This has been the case in any historical human social organization one cares to name — from clan to nation-state.

In every civilization, there is a very thin upper stratum of the people who are concerned with questions of truth, justice, the good — in other words, with the life of reason, or of the human spirit if you prefer. Historically, such people have tended to believe these ultimate values have a claim on every man in terms of the constitution of the good order of his soul, and on the direction of his actions as they translate into the social sphere.

Such people are surrounded by a vastly larger mass of “stupid people” who simply do not see the world that way, generally because they are ignorant, thus personally disordered/disorderly, thus irresponsible — and (thus) ever needy. This mass of “stupid people” has been called: “slaves by nature.”

In Aristotle, we find the distinction between the mass of the people, the plethos — who basically function on the “stupid level” — and the spoudaioi — the prudent, virtuous, public-minded “mature men.” It is the latter class that actually maintains the civilization.

Nowadays, however, progressive educrats like Barack Obama’s old friend, Bill Ayers, teaches teachers to teach their pupils that these spoudaios characters are really nothing but a reactionary, usually male, usually white gang of fascist thugs who are selfishly trying to preserve their own interests against the just claims of disadvantaged people, who are usually either women or “people of color.” The spoudaioi are oppressors you see. Read the rest of this entry »

One of the attributes shared by many of Barrack Obama’s more fanatical supporters, is an acute form of Narcissism. It seems as if they enjoy Obama’s presidency so much, because he reflects the same kinds of personality disorders that are endemic in the supporters’ own minds.

The problem these individuals face, is the fact that neither Obama, nor his supporters, seem to realize what the administration’s policies may do to the country, if fully implemented. For the most part, they are not genuinely interested in hearing what anyone else has to say either, if it isn’t directly supporting the administration’s stance.

In fact, many of these supporters are unaware of the details of Obama’s policies; often they may not know more than the title of the bill, the abstract or some sound bytes they heard via the media. As anyone who has actually read bills knows, these tidbits rarely convey the true nature of the meaning and scope of a proposed bill.

It seems as if one of the main attractions to Obama is his rhetoric and his personality. Certain types of people are attracted to him like a magnet, regardless of the implications of his policy agenda. Some of them even admit that his policies don’t matter, and all that really matters is his “leadership.” This is one of the most fatally flawed viewpoints I can imagine driving an executive’s support base. Read the rest of this entry »

by Michael S. Rozeff | LewRockwell.com

If you like economic depression, Obama is your man. The stock market is shouting this message loudly and clearly. The S & P 500 (measured by the security SPY) made a little high at 100.41 on November 4, 2008. The election was the next day. It has been downhill ever since. The close on March 2, 2009 was 70.60. This 30 percent decline qualifies as what used to be an ordinary bear market!

Congress and the President could not construct better measures, proposed and enacted, to deepen this depression if they tried. Congressional Democrats intend to ensconce Democrats as the majority party for the next 25 years or so. Their chosen method is wasteful pork sold as rational investment. But by gilding the nests of their chosen constituencies and supporters with huge taxpayer-funded giveaways, they will deepen and lengthen the depression.

The stock market tells us this, but it is easy for stimulus supporters to explain away the stock market’s drop in other ways. Obama supporters are likely to extol the good things that his program is doing to revive spending in the economy, and to regard the stock market as an aberrant den of gamblers and thieves who deserve their Bush-induced fate.

Very few men on the street, including my doctor, understand that spending, whether private or government, does not get rid of economic depression; and the lack of spending does not cause it. They do not fathom that government spending, borrowing, and taxing will further gash the sinking economy below the water line and send it to its watery grave. They are more inclined to believe, along with prominent economists, that government spending should be increased by trillions more. There cannot be too much of a good thing.

People automatically think that if everyone does not spend, then how can businesses keep going and hire people? How can the economy work? Then they think, if people only have money, then they can spend. If the government spending will only put that money into their hands, this will cause people to spend. It will jump start the economy, restore business confidence, and all will be well.

This story has a firm hold on the public imagination, but things don’t work that way. People in the aggregate can only earn money to spend by working productively. Money still doesn’t grow on trees.

The government doesn’t have a money tree either. Without resorting to inflation, it can only shift money around. America’s federal government is a group of Americans who are empowered to tax the rest of us and borrow from anyone in the world. This money is collected from you, me, and others. We then have less to spend. Shifting money from the left pocket to the right pocket doesn’t enhance the total amount. Read the rest of this entry »

The spell-bound American citizenry must realize what is really going on with their new president.  They need to sit down and do their research; to realize what is truly happening here.  The so-called populist president, Barrack H. Obama, has appointed to his administration the very architects of the financial disaster we are now engaged in.

Most of these supporters are well meaning; they just want something to believe in.  They want to feel like we’re turning a new leaf as a country and as a civilization; but we will not be able to achieve any measure of “change” until the a critical mass of people realize how things really work in this paradigm and begin to think for themselves, instead of this cattle-like group-think that got us into this mess in the first-place.

First you had Bush, who used the 9/11 inside job to buffalo the population into a perpetual war, after which, Bush ran roughshod over the people of this nation, with policies that trashed every tradition that our fore-bearers worked so hard for.

Now we have Obama, who takes advantage of the people’s desire to have a feel-good sort of attitude; because they want you to allow what is now taking place to happen, without objection.  You might ask what is happening?

The bankers are taking trillions out of the economy every week.  And while Gitmo may now be closing, what you failed to realize is that they are moving these types of operations on shore, where you are likely to one day be threatened with incarceration without the due process of law.

I’ve got news for many of you out there.  Nothing changes overnight, although the media will use every tool in their arsenal to convince you that it has.  The corruption that plagues this planet is deep-seated, and it has been around for several thousand years.

If we really want to do something about this corruption, we have to rely on our own selves and our independant thoughts.  We have to return to our constitutional roots and become sovereign individuals, instead of idolizing one individual or institution.

The United States, Presidency, Federal Reserve, AMA and many other institutions that pervade your lives are not here to help you.  They are specifically designed to control your thoughts and actions, with the eventual goal of extracting your sweat equity and preventing your ability to self-actualize.

by Anthony Gregory | Campaign for Liberty

Questions as to whether Timothy Geithner, Obama’s pick for Treasury Secretary, has paid all his taxes or followed immigration law concerning his housekeeper raise an interesting point. The scrutiny surrounding confirmation hearings presents one of the only opportunities politicians get to see what it is like to be harassed like a normal American citizen. Only during scandals like these are government officials given a taste of their own medicine, and it is such a bitter taste that the more humane among us might sympathize even with our would-be rulers as their lives and finances become open to inspection and public criticism.

Consider the rich irony in Geithner’s case. He seeks to be the head of the Treasury, and thus the head of the IRS, which commands an apparatus of staggering intrusiveness nearly unparalleled in all of human history. The IRS notoriously enjoys a certain exemption from the standards of Anglo-Saxon law; the presumption with tax cases is that you are guilty until proven innocent. Every year, millions of good Americans are terrorized by the organization. Many have their homes, their savings, their businesses confiscated, all supposedly in the name of creating a great society for all. IRS agents give the wrong advice to Americans filling out their taxes about a third of the time, but getting it wrong under their instruction is no excuse when error is found.

In addition to the nightmare of mid-April, the Treasury and other departments have burdened Americans with thousands of regulations that invade every facet of financial life. Democrats are even worse rhetorically than Republicans in this regard. In response to cries for immigration reform, the most common proposal from Democrats is to crack down on employers, to spy on them and threaten them with fines and imprisonment if they do not pry into all their employees’ lives to ensure none are illegal aliens. Aside from being a threat to the freedom of contract, this guarantees increasing government involvement into business and erosion of privacy and civil liberties. Much of the rationale behind the horrific Real ID Act can be attributed to this particular desire to ferret out illegal immigrants.

And so what a scene we have: A national Democratic leader in potential trouble for violating employment regulations; the chosen chief of the Treasury, which brings in trillions of dollars annually by taking it by force from those who earned it, himself accused of not putting in his fair share.

From the standpoint of freedom, however, Geithner’s true rip-off of the American people is not in his alleged tax evasion. All by itself, not paying taxes is not a scandalous crime. An everyday taxpayer would not deserve media attention for this. And as head of the New York Federal Reserve, Geithner did far more to compromise economic fairness than he could have possibly done with his tax forms; as Treasury Secretary, he would undoubtedly do much more. Furthermore, from the perspective of liberty, Geithner’s villainy is not in the fact that he might have hired an illegal alien so much as it is in the hypocrisy by which he and so many other government officials hold themselves to a standard of law radically different from that to which they hold the rest of us.

A little hypocrisy is ubiquitous in nearly any society, but the issue of government always raises the stakes and makes it all the more egregious. It may be an insult for someone to verbally criticize you for a vice, such as smoking, only to light up himself minutes later. But for the government to impose the will, the ethics, the standards of some politicians on you by force even as they do what they claim should not be done—that is a different, much worse form of hypocrisy altogether.

Which brings us to William Corr, Obama’s choice for the second slot at the Department of Health and Human Services. Corr is an anti-smoking advocate and both he and Obama seem to support an agenda, to be carried out by the Democratic Congress, of “increasing federal regulation of cigarettes, raising taxes on tobacco products and approving an international tobacco control treaty,” as the New York Times puts it.

Obama has gotten attention as the first open cigarette smoker to be elected president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and yet he seems to have no problem pushing around smokers, making their habit more expensive (tobacco taxes always hurt the poor the most), and even internationalizing an issue that should not even be dealt with at the national level under our Constitution. In a free society, tobacco, along with other drugs, would be handled locally, and ideally by the family and community, and not at all through the criminal justice and regulatory systems. Yet politicians who drink alcohol or smoke tobacco or even have tried illegal drugs think very little of taxing, regulating, harassing and even jailing their fellow citizens for doing the same.

It has long been frustrating to watch a politician who smokes tobacco or drinks alcohol champion the war on drugs, all to stem the tide of chemicals that don’t kill nearly as many people as tobacco and alcohol do. Perhaps it is even more frustrating to see a president who smokes cigarettes wave the anti-smoking banner. Government crusades against drugs, cigarettes or other vices always fail to uplift the moral character of the people, but they are great ways to destroy liberty and personal responsibility and are reliable sources of high hypocrisy.

Just this week we have seen two exemplary cases of political hypocrisy pop up in the area of Obama’s political appointments. Again, such appointments are one of the few occasions when the media really explore the hypocrisy saturating the personal lives of politicians. If they were watched this closely year round, we would find ever more examples all the time. But in all such cases, whether it is Al Gore consuming enough electricity for 20 people as he flies around condemning carbon emissions, or a Republican leader caught straying from the very family values he has claimed should be imposed on us all by national planning, the real problem in the hypocrisy is not usually the politicians’ personal indiscretions, which usually fall short of any offense against the public safety or liberty. No, the real problem with such hypocrisy is that it is borne by politicians who implement their plans for a Brave New World on their compatriots without considering the human costs, the destroyed wealth, the uprooted lives, the lost liberties, the jailed innocents. If Geithner agreed to butt out of our finances, and Obama agreed to let people smoke as they will, it is doubtful we would not happily reciprocate and leave them alone as well.

“I use emotion for the many and reserve reason for the few.”
— Adolf Hitler

“He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future.”
— Adolf Hitler

“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.”
— Adolf Hitler

Obama has better rhetoric, he’s a slicker speaker and is more deceptive than his predecessors. He knows how to say exactly what you want to hear, and he will tell you that he is here to solve all of your problems; even if he changes his rhetoric, or does the exact opposite later-on.  Whatever he says or does, or has said or done in the past; nobody seems to care.

Yes, Barrack H. Obama has yet to demonstrate genuine integrity, during his political career; nor does he have a willingness to change the status quo.  He and his friends in the congressional black caucus were integral in causing the debacle which lead to the epic failure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Just have a look at this man’s history.  Has he ever demonstrated genuine integrity? What has he ever accomplished? If you think the man is for “change” then find me examples of what he has accomplished.

The people love him and he will be given a few months, during which he will be able to ram through, whatever legislation he wants; but after this so-called “honeymoon” period, there may be violence and insurrection as the blacks, especially, realize that we’ve all been fucked, right up the ass, just like it has always been done since the assassination of JFK.

Obama is in the oval office, as we speak, lubing up his big black anal probe. You had better bend right over and spread out those cheeks, young ones; because you’ve been had.  And I might add, it was like shooting fish in a barrel this time.

Barrack Heussein Obama, there is ample evidence to illustrate your contempt for the American people. You have refused to produce a certified birth certificate. You have deceived the American public into thinking that you will stop the warfare and fix what is wrong with this nation.

In point of fact, you truly plan on exacerbating what is wrong with this nation; and you plan on bringing socialist ideals and bigger government into an already bankrupt nation.

The politician you most closely resemble bears the name Adolf Hitler. One day, they may very-well call you the “Black Hitler” of our time.  May the youth who’s minds you have in the palm of your hands realize what you are before it is too late.

What’s that Bunkie? You thought the Obamanation was here to help? You thought he was here to change the world so we could all be one big happy family? Believe it or not, the Obamanation has some surprises in store for you.

First off, Bunkie, Obama is a freshmen congressman who came out of no-where to take the nomination by a landslide. That sort of reminds me of how George W. Bush took office. Barely anyone knew about the man then, out of nowhere, he is the front-runner for president.

When you look into Obama’s history, review his backers, and read between the lines of the vague statements that he makes; you will see that he is a commu-fascist at heart. He wants to turn the united States of America into a Communist Obamanation.

Yes Bunkie, he wants to make it so dead-beats are just as important as innovative entrepreneurs. If you think I’m making this up, just read the article below.

Barack Obama’s Stealth Socialism

Investors Business Daily

Election ’08: Before friendly audiences, Barack Obama speaks passionately about something called “economic justice.” He uses the term obliquely, though, speaking in code — socialist code.

During his NAACP speech earlier this month, Sen. Obama repeated the term at least four times. “I’ve been working my entire adult life to help build an America where economic justice is being served,” he said at the group’s 99th annual convention in Cincinnati.

And as president, “we’ll ensure that economic justice is served,” he asserted. “That’s what this election is about.” Obama never spelled out the meaning of the term, but he didn’t have to. His audience knew what he meant, judging from its thumping approval.

It’s the rest of the public that remains in the dark, which is why we’re launching this special educational series.

“Economic justice” simply means punishing the successful and redistributing their wealth by government fiat. It’s a euphemism for socialism.

In the past, such rhetoric was just that — rhetoric. But Obama’s positioning himself with alarming stealth to put that rhetoric into action on a scale not seen since the birth of the welfare state.

In his latest memoir he shares that he’d like to “recast” the welfare net that FDR and LBJ cast while rolling back what he derisively calls the “winner-take-all” market economy that Ronald Reagan reignited (with record gains in living standards for all).

Obama also talks about “restoring fairness to the economy,” code for soaking the “rich” — a segment of society he fails to understand that includes mom-and-pop businesses filing individual tax returns.

It’s clear from a close reading of his two books that he’s a firm believer in class envy. He assumes the economy is a fixed pie, whereby the successful only get rich at the expense of the poor.

Following this discredited Marxist model, he believes government must step in and redistribute pieces of the pie. That requires massive transfers of wealth through government taxing and spending, a return to the entitlement days of old. Read the rest of this entry »