Posts tagged healthcare
4:20 am - Thu, Apr 5, 2012

Excerpt:

One justice in particular chided the administration for what he said was being perceived as a “challenge” to judicial authority — referring directly to Obama’s latest comments about the Supreme Court’s review of the health care case. 

The testy exchange played out during a hearing over a separate ObamaCare challenge. It marked a new phase in the budding turf war between the executive and judicial branches. 

“Does the Department of Justice recognize that federal courts have the authority in appropriate circumstances to strike federal statutes because of one or more constitutional infirmities?” Judge Jerry Smith asked at the hearing. 

Justice Department attorney Dana Lydia Kaersvang answered “yes” to that question. 

A source inside the courtroom, speaking to Fox News afterward, described the questioning by Smith as pointed. 

Smith also made clear during that exchange that he was “referring to statements by the president in the past few days to the effect … that it is somehow inappropriate for what he termed unelected judges to strike acts of Congress.” 

“That has troubled a number of people who have read it as somehow a challenge to the federal courts or to their authority,” Smith said. “And that’s not a small matter.” 

Smith ordered a response from the department within 48 hours. The related letter from the court, obtained by Fox News, instructed the Justice Department to provide an explanation of “no less than three pages, single spaced” by noon on Thursday. 

10:32 pm - Tue, Apr 3, 2012
29 notes
ronpaulrevolution:

Obamacare is an Abomination - by Ron Paul

Last week the Supreme Court heard arguments concerning the constitutionality of the Obamacare law, focusing on the mandate requiring every American to buy health insurance or pay fines enforced by the IRS.  Hopefully the Court will strike down this abomination, but we must recognize that the federal judiciary has an abysmal record when it comes to protecting liberty.  It’s doubtful the entire law will be struck down.  Regardless, the political left will continue its drive toward a single-payer, government run health care system.
The insurance mandate clearly exceeds the federal government’s powers under the interstate commerce clause found in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.  This is patently obvious: the power to “regulate” commerce cannot include the power to compel commerce!  Those who claim otherwise simply ignore the plain meaning of the Constitution because they don’t want to limit federal power in any way.
The commerce clause was intended simply to give Congress the power to regulate foreign trade, and also to prevent states from imposing tariffs on interstate goods.  In Federalist Paper No. 22, Alexander Hamilton makes it clear the simple intent behind the clause was to prevent states from placing tolls or tariffs on goods as they passed through each state— a practice that had proven particularly destructive across the many principalities of the German empire.

ronpaulrevolution:

Obamacare is an Abomination - by Ron Paul

Last week the Supreme Court heard arguments concerning the constitutionality of the Obamacare law, focusing on the mandate requiring every American to buy health insurance or pay fines enforced by the IRS.  Hopefully the Court will strike down this abomination, but we must recognize that the federal judiciary has an abysmal record when it comes to protecting liberty.  It’s doubtful the entire law will be struck down.  Regardless, the political left will continue its drive toward a single-payer, government run health care system.

The insurance mandate clearly exceeds the federal government’s powers under the interstate commerce clause found in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.  This is patently obvious: the power to “regulate” commerce cannot include the power to compel commerce!  Those who claim otherwise simply ignore the plain meaning of the Constitution because they don’t want to limit federal power in any way.

The commerce clause was intended simply to give Congress the power to regulate foreign trade, and also to prevent states from imposing tariffs on interstate goods.  In Federalist Paper No. 22, Alexander Hamilton makes it clear the simple intent behind the clause was to prevent states from placing tolls or tariffs on goods as they passed through each state— a practice that had proven particularly destructive across the many principalities of the German empire.

3:45 pm
3 notes

A report prepared for legislators and business leaders by the American Trucking Associations highlights just how critical our just-in-time inventory and delivery systems are, and assesses the impact on the general population in the event of an emergency or incident of national significance that disrupts the truck transportation systems which are responsible for carrying some ten billion tons of commodities and supplies across the United States each year.

A shut down of truck operations as a result of elevated threat levels, terrorist attacks, or pandemics would, according to the report, have “a swift and devastating impact on the food, healthcare, transportation, waste removal, retail, manufacturing, and financial sectors.

So too would events such as an EMP attack or a coordinated cyber-attack that could shut down global positioning systems and the computers responsible for inventory control. Another potential scenario that is more likely now than ever before is liquidity problems within the financial system stemming from currency crisis or hyperinflation. All of our just-in-time delivery systems are built upon the unhindered transfer of money and credit, but when credit flow becomes restricted or money becomes worthless, no one will be able to pay for their goods. Likewise, no one will trust the credit worthiness of anyone else. This is exactly the scenario playing out in Greece right now and the consequences on the health care industry in that country have left many without life saving drugs. When there’s no money, no one will be transporting anything.

The effects of a transportation shutdown for any reason would be immediate (in some cases, within hours) and absolutely catastrophic.

Excerpted from the American Truckers Associations report

Food

  • Significant shortages will occur in as little as three days, especially for perishable items following a national emergency and a ban on truck traffic.
  • Consumer fear and panic will exacerbate shortages. News of a truck stoppage—whether on the local level, state or regional level, or nationwide—will spur hoarding and drastic increases in consumer purchases of essential goods. Shortages will materialize quickly and could lead to civil unrest. (We’re seeing this in the UK right now)

Water

  • Supplies of clean drinking water will run dry in two to four weeks. For safety and security reasons, most water supply plants maintain a larger inventory of supplies than the typical business. However, the amount of chemical storage varies significantly and is site specific. According to the Chlorine Institute, most water treatment facilities receive chlorine in cylinders that are delivered by motor carriers. On average, trucks deliver purification chemicals to water supply plants every seven to 14 days. Without these chemicals, water cannot be purified and made safe for drinking.

Health Care

  • Without truck transportation, patient care within the truck stoppage zone will be immediately jeopardized. According to Cook, many hospitals have moved to a just-in-time inventory system. In fact, some work from a low-unit-of-measure system.  This means that essential basic supplies, such as syringes and catheters, are not ordered until the supplies are depleted. These systems depend on trucks to deliver needed supplies within hours of order placement. Internal redistribution of supplies in hospitals could forestall a crisis for a short time; however, in a matter of hours, hospitals would be unable to supply critical patient care.
  • If an incident of national significance produces mass injuries, truck transportation is the key to delivering urgently needed medical supplies necessary to save lives.
  • Hospitals and nursing homes will exhaust food supplies in as little as 24 hours
  • Pharmacy stocks of prescription drugs will be depleted quickly. According to the National Association of Chain Drug Stores, most of the nation’s 55,000 drug stores receive daily merchandise deliveries by truck.

Transportation

  • Service station fuel supplies will start to run out in just one to two days. An average service station requires a delivery every 2.4 days. Based on these statistics, the busiest service stations could run out of fuel within hours of a truck stoppage, with the remaining stations following within one to two days
  • Air, rail and maritime transportation will be disrupted.
  • A fuel shortage will create secondary effects. Without access to automobile travel, people will be unable to get to work causing labor shortages and increased economic damage. Without cars, many people cannot access grocery stores, banks, doctors, and other daily needs. Public bus systems will cease to operate as well, preventing many disabled and elderly people from accessing these necessities. Without fuel, police, fire, rescue and other public service vehicles will be paralyzed, further jeopardizing public safety.

Waste Removal

  • Within days of a truck stoppage, Americans will be literally buried in  garbage with serious health and environmental consequences. Further, without fuel deliveries, many waste processing facilities will be unable to operate equipment such as backhoes and incinerators.
  • Uncollected and deteriorating waste products create rich breeding grounds for microorganisms, insects, and other vermin. Hazardous materials and medical waste will introduce toxins as well as infectious diseases into living environments. Urban areas will, of course, be significantly impacted within just a couple of days.

Retail / Manufacturing / Economy

  • Replenishment of goods will be disrupted. Many of the nation’s leading retailers rely on just-in-time delivery to keep inventory levels as low as possible. Similar to the low-unit-of-measure hospital inventory system, these stores rely on frequent deliveries to replenish basic goods. Often, delivery of a shipment is not triggered until the current inventory is nearly depleted. Without truck deliveries, retailers will be unable to restock goods, including consumer basics such as bottled water, canned goods, and paper products.
  • Consumer behavior during emergencies triples the rate of inventory turn-over.Since many large retail outlets typically keep inventories as lean as possible, problems often arise quickly during truck transportation slowdowns that occur from crises such as hurricanes.
  • Just-in-time manufacturers will shut down assembly lines within hours. Major American manufacturers, ranging from computer manufacturers such as Dell and Compaq to major automakers such as GM and Ford, rely on just-in-time manufacturing. Without truck deliveries, component shortages and manufacturing delays will develop within hours

Financial Sector

  • ATM and branch bank cash resources will be exhausted quicky. In today’s fastpaced, high-technology economy, consumers access cash 24/7 from 370,000 ATMs nationwide. JP Morgan Chase, the nation’s second largest consumer bank, replenishes its 6,600 ATMs via armored truck delivery every two to three days. Given the increase in ATM activity that occurs before and after any type of crisis, ATMs would run out of cash much sooner.
  • Small and medium-size businesses will lose access to cash.
  • Regular bank functions will cease.

While an event that disrupts truck transportation systems may be unlikely, recent history suggests it is fully plausible and the blowback can be devastating. A day after Hurricane Katrina ravaged New Orleans, panicked government officials stopped all transportation flow into the region, forcing hundreds of trucks loaded with emergency supplies like food and water to wait for permission before they could enter the area. As a result, thousands of residents of the city were left without items essential for survival. It took days before truck routes were re-opened and supplies were allowed to flow. Government officials acting on limited information, lack of knowledge and personal politics were responsible for restricting the flow of goods into New Orleans, potentially killing hundreds of people in the process.

What this incident demonstrated  is that when the trucks in America stop, all commerce and delivery stops with it.

Now consider what may happen if the emergency is more widespread, affecting not just a city, but the population of an entire region or the United States in its entirety.

5:12 pm - Wed, Mar 28, 2012
2 notes

(NaturalNews) The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing arguments this week about Obama’s health care law, which has been challenged by twenty-six states. The crux of the legal arguments center around whether the federal government can mandate private citizens to purchase a product or service they may not even want or need. (I don’t buy health insurance, for example, because I prefer to invest in healthy eating and superfoods.)

If the Supreme Court upholds the constitutionality of Obamacare, it would mean a limitless expansion of federal government authority to dictate to Americans what they must buy — and then to financially penalize Americans who don’t buy those products or services. This is precisely the model for Obamacare, which financially punishes those who fail to buy private health insurance by fining them through the IRS.

I began to wonder: What else might the government force Americans to buy if they are granted this absurd new power by the Supreme Court? I’m sure there all sorts of things the government would want to push for its selected business buddies who profit from Obama’s new consumption mandates. So here are ten more things the Obama administration may soon require people to purchase (or else!).

#1) A Chevy Volt

Since nobody is voluntarily buying Chevy Volts, for the good of the auto industry we must all be forced to buy them! That will keep Detroit in business and create jobs for the economy. Keep America strong!

Chevy dealers will be staffed with military personnel toting M4 rifles, and those rifles will be pointed at customers to make sure they “comply” with Obama’s new economic program. Those who refuse to buy a Chevy Volt will be punished by being forced to buy a Chevy pickup.

#2) Annual flu shots

With so many people figuring out that flu shots are total medical quackery and are intentionally laced with mercury preservatives, it’s no wonder most people don’t want to buy them anymore.

Without public demand for vaccines, the vaccine industry might collapse! And that would be terrible for the fat cat CEOs who run those companies and also sit on the boards of all the other global elite corporations. The answer? Mandate annual flu shots for every person, every year! Get your flu shot, or we’ll throw you in prison and jab you there!

#3) Terrorism insurance

What? You don’t own terrorism insurance? Then how will you keep your family safe with all the countless terrorism attacks happening every day?

Coming soon: Obama’s buddies will set up a whole new insurance scam called “terrorism insurance,” and they’ll use false flag terror attacks to remind people why they need to keep buying insurance policies. All Americans will be forced into buying these terrorism insurance policies, and those who don’t will be called anti-American traitors.

What? You don’t have terrorism insurance? You must be one of those anti-government nuts who also owns gold. Yeah, that’s a sure sign of being a terrorist yourself.

#4) Pink slime

Given that nobody in the country wants to buy pink slime anymore — that’s the new term for “mechanically separated meat” that has suddenly become widely known across the ‘net (http://www.naturalnews.com/035255_pink_slime_USDA_school_lunches.html) — the government may simply force everybody to buy it!

Yep, every month you’ll have your “pink slime quota” that you must meat — er, I mean meet — by purchasing pink slime at the grocery store, filling out twelve pages of documentation describing your purchase, then mailing it off to Washington with proof your purchase to a whole new federal department called “Food Usability for All” or just “F U All” for short.

#5) Air tickets

Given that the TSA has utterly destroyed the U.S. travel economy with its illegal, perverted “hands down your pants” search and seizure protocol, Obama must mandate that everybody buy one air ticket a month, whether you need it or not.

Supporting the travel industry is patriotic, didn’t you know? And if you refuse to buy an air ticket each month, you’ll be visited by TSA agents in your own home who will conduct a crotch-and-anus search of your entire family in lieu of you actually showing up at the airport for the search. This will be called a “pre-search” for the travel you’re supposed to be taking. You can never be too safe in the war on terror, right? Now bend over…

#6) A gun - but you have to carry it into Mexico and sell it to a drug gang member

This might be called the “Eric Holder” program: Every American will be required to buy a firearm at a gun shop in a state bordering Mexico, then walk that gun across the border and deposit it into the hands of the Mexican drug gangs.

Oh, wait… that program already exists. It’s called “Fast & Furious” or “Operation Gunwalker,” and it was dreamed up by Attorney General Eric Holder to cause gun violence by having ATF operatives buy guns in America and sell them to Mexican drug gangs. (http://www.naturalnews.com/032934_ATF_illegal_firearms.html)

#7) Obama Water - with electrolytes!

Coming soon: Obama Water! It’s got electrolytes! And if you drink it, you’ll get free rent for the rest of your life.

Or should I just call it the Obama Kool-Aid?

Either way, the government will make you buy it, and you can bet it will be “enhanced” with government-approved fluoride chemicals. But they can’t actually make you drink it, so flushing always remains an option for getting rid of the stuff.

(LOL! Read More →)

(Source: addtoany.com)

4:49 pm
1 note

“This case is extraordinary important to restraining the power of our government over the people of this country, it’s supposed to be the other way around, the people have the power over the government,” Kyl told TheDC.

I don’t think most people realize ^this. I’ve even heard more ignorant people refer to this as “free healthcare.” How is the government forcing you to buy something and then financially penalizing (or “taxing” or whatever bs term they have decided to call it today because even Obamacare’s legal defense team is unable to be consistent here) considered free?

The Supreme Court’s ruling over Obamacare will determine so much more than simply whether or not our country has socialized healthcare. This ruling could fundamentally change every American’s relationship with the United States government FOR-EV-ER. People laughed at some of the justices’ comments, such as when Justice Roberts remarked that if the government can force us to buy healthcare, couldn’t it also force Americans to buy cell phones in case of a national emergency. Or couldn’t the government force us to exercise too, since we all know that has health benefits and health consequences that ultimately end us in the same place that having no healthcare would?

I’m paraphrasing of course, but seriously: where would the line, if ever, be drawn?

Because we all know politicians keep their promises and this would only relate to healthcare and nothing else ever…right? Kinda like when the president promised not to sign the NDAA, then he signed it, but then he promised he wouldn’t ever use it. Uh huh. Sure.

Trust the government to tell us what we need? Absolutely not. If this horror passes the Supreme Court, I can’t even say this is the beginning of the end of the Constitution and our personal rights because, at this point with the Patriot Act, NDAA, and Obama’s latest peacetime martial law executive order, it’d merely be one more nail in the coffin of our once Constitutional Republic.

~Cloudy

4:32 pm
1 note

by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

Excerpt:

The so-called system of checks and balances is a farce and a fraud; the reality is that all three branches of the federal government work together to conspire against the taxpayers for the benefit of the state and all of its appendages. As Judge Andrew Napalitano wrote in his book, The Constitution in Exile, the Supreme Court failed to rule a single federal law unconstitutional from 1937 to 1995. The Court is essentially a political rubber stamp operation with all of its black-robed ceremony being nothing more than part of the circus that is employed to dupe the public into acquiescing in its dictates.

There is no such thing as an “American union.” The original union was a union of the free, independent, and sovereign states. If that union still existed, then Wisconsin, Florida, Massachusetts, Alabama, and all the other states would have at least a say in the current discussion in the Supreme Court over whether or not the American system of healthcare should be Sovietized. They do not. Every television and radio talking head is feverishly awaiting the Pronouncement from Upon High from the black-robed deities of the “Supreme” Court on this issue.

(More →)

11:33 am - Tue, Mar 27, 2012

As solicitor general of the United States, Justice Elena Kagan served as the head of an office responsible for formulating the Obama administration’s legal defense of its domestic agenda priority — Obamacare. It could be no surprise to President Obama who appointed her to the Supreme Court that any former solicitor general would have many conflicts for years to come. Now, the Court will soon hear a constitutional challenge to the health-care law. Despite mounting evidence of her substantial participation in the administration’s legal defense of that law, she still has not announced whether she will recuse herself from presiding over the case as a justice.

According to Section 455(b)(3) of Title 28 of the U.S. Code, justices must disqualify themselves in cases where they have “served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser, or material witness concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case or controversy.” In United States v. Gipson, the Tenth Circuit held that judges must recuse themselves if they have “previously taken a part, albeit small, in the investigation, preparation, or prosecution of a case.” Other courts have suggested that, merely by virtue of a lawyer’s position as the head of an office during the preparation of a case, he or she is disqualified to sit as a judge on that case. For example, several U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal have held that U.S. attorneys who later become judges must recuse themselves from any proceeding that had been pending in any way in their offices, even if they were not substantively involved.

(More…)

100% conflict of interest much?

8:53 am
88 notes

antigovernmentextremist:

It’s been 365 days and about a fourth of the law has gone into effect. Let’s take a recap of what has happened so far:

So one year later and this is the behemoth that is Obamacare. I’m looking forward to another year of quality blogging material!

This was me celebrating the 1st birthday of Obamacare. Good times.

2:05 pm - Mon, Mar 26, 2012
57 notes
antigovernmentextremist:

theheritagefoundation:

As it goes on trial, don’t forget about Obamacare’s 17 NEW taxes. And…another #FAIL.

Oh yeah! I totally forgot the Supreme Court was taking up Obamacare today! The decision marks an important point in the history of our Constitution. Does the government operate within limitation put forth by the Constitution or does the Commerce Clause give the government broad authority to regulate inactivity?

^This this and this.

antigovernmentextremist:

theheritagefoundation:

As it goes on trial, don’t forget about Obamacare’s 17 NEW taxes. And…another #FAIL.

Oh yeah! I totally forgot the Supreme Court was taking up Obamacare today! The decision marks an important point in the history of our Constitution. Does the government operate within limitation put forth by the Constitution or does the Commerce Clause give the government broad authority to regulate inactivity?

^This this and this.

2:03 pm
10 notes

antigovernmentextremist:

Obama vs. Obama on Obamacare

Following
Likes
More Likes
Install Headline