I received a letter yesterday from my governor, Mitch Daniels, in response to a fax I recently sent him about what Obamacare would do to the state of Indiana and how it would harm me and my family. I posted a link to a copy of his letter that he sent to my Congressman in a previous post. If you haven’t seen it, go here.
As you will note in the letter to Rep. Peter Visclosky, who represents much of Northwest Indiana, Gov. Daniels noted the following:
- The House version of Obamacare was “the worst version yet with truly awful consequences” for the state of Indiana
- The popular state run (but not controlled) insurance plan currently in place would go kaput under Obamacare
- The bill would originate “enormous new taxes” while forcing currently insured Hoosiers out of their present plans
- The legislation is a “job killer” and will create “unbearable costs” for us and our children and grandchildren
In the governor’s letter to me, similar expressions were given. I suppose I could post a copy of this letter but since a good chunk of it is redundant to the letter sent to Rep. Visclosky, I’ll forgo it. But here are a few notable excerpts in the letter dated Nov. 19th to yours truly.
- “Over the past few months, I have watched as citizens have come forward to passionately express their anxieties about the legislation. Their worries, as well as yours, are well-founded.”
- “I fear the current rush to overhaul the system will ultimately do more damage than good and create far more problems than it solves“.
- “Indiana would bear the brunt of many of the reckless policies being proposed.”
- “States will likely have to pick up the tab for this extension of Medicaid. We have estimated that the price for Indiana could reach billions. These additional costs will overwhelm our resources and obliterate the reserves we have fought so hard to protect.”
I have not always been in full agreement with Gov. Daniels on some matters. But given that he was President George W. Bush’s budget director for 2 1/2 years, anyone with half a brain has to come to the conclusion that he knows a few things about money and budgets. And one good thing he has done for the people of this state is signed legislation capping property taxes here in Hoosierville so we won’t lose our homes. If only my former state of Illinois was so fortunate!
Gov. Daniels is quite popular in this state, having won reelection last year with 58% of the vote. Given that GOP presidential candidate John McCain lost here, the first time in decades a Republican was defeated in Indiana in the electoral college, this was a ringing endorsement for Gov. Daniels. He truly has delivered for the state. I have absolutely no problem with the $95,000 salary he commands as the state’s governor. It is much less than in other states, including neighboring Illinois. He is well worth it.
So as far as I’m concerned, given the governor’s Washington background and experience, I will take at face value what he has said about Obamacare. Using words like “reckless“, “obliterate” and “well founded worries” are very telling. In my opinion, I cannot see how one person can support this legislation, that is, one person who has so much as read a tiny portion of either the House or Senate versions of Obamacare (as little as 10 pages) and has not abandoned common sense. If the bill is too complex to understand, and of course it is with it over 2000 pages long (hey, our U.S. Constitution is only 18 pages), then common sense dictates its abandonment.
Plus, as I noted in my previous post on Obamacare, why would anyone want a health care bill that Congress has opted itself out of? Even the most liberal of liberals I would think would want what Washington has. I cannot imagine anyone, liberal or otherwise, saying, “I like the health care bills being passed and debated in Congress. I like the fact that I won’t be able to get any of the Cadillac plans members of the House & Senate have and that Congress has exempted itself from plans being created for us .”
This doesn’t pass the smell test by any stretch of the imagination.
If you know just this much from this post, you know enough to tell the U.S. Senate that you don’t want it and that no explanation will suffice for your Democrat senator’s support of it (no Republicans are expected to be on board on this satanic monstrosity).
If your Democratic senator backs Obamacare (or Harrycare, as some folks are calling the Senate’s version), it means he or she wants to control every aspect of your life. There is nothing redeeming of the bill – zip, zilch, zero, nada.
Any Democratic senator voting for this catastrophe must be terminated in November at the ballot box, providing they are up for reelection then. If not, there must be unprecedented and sustained public pressure to demand their immediate resignation. We cannot wait til 2012 or 2014 to unseat those particular Democrats. They must be removed upon their vote for it, no matter what state they are from.
Impossible, you say? I’m sure of it. But impossible times demand impossible actions and it’s up to We the People to deliver. We fail to do so at our own, our children’s, our grandchildren’s and the nation’s peril.
If Obamacare passes and is signed into law, we must revolt. We likely will have little recourse but to do so.
If you have read this post and you understand it, then you know what you must do. And that is broadly disseminate it, especially to those who like Obamacare or who are unsure about it.
I close with the full quote of the immortal words of Patrick Henry from March 23, 1775.
No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope that it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen, if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.
This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty towards the majesty of heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation?
For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth — to know the worst and to provide for it. I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House?
Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with these warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation — the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motives for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies?
No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us; they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer on the subject? Nothing.
We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves longer.
Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament.
Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne. In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope.
If we wish to be free — if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending — if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir, that we are weak — unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot?
Sir, we are not weak, if we make a proper use of the means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us.
The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable — and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come!
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, “Peace! Peace!” — but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!“”
I believe countless numbers of Americans across the fruited plain are tired, worn out, fed up – whatever you want to call it – with reading about Resident Obama (either in the paper or online), hearing his voice on the radio or worse, seeing it on TV. I am certainly no exception.
But the bogus POTUS stuck his nose where it didn’t belong – on the TV set, via Chicago’s WGN-TV, channel 9, while I was preparing Thanksgiving dinner (yes, I did all the cooking – except for the mac and cheese) . And for a couple hours, I could not get it off my mind. It was the last thing I expected on a day where I was trying to avoid the difficult times we face as a nation.
The show was this one – see the 11/26 date at 11 AM.
Obama appeared about a minute or two before noon on a commercial where he was promoting his Serve.gov website with some mindless imbecile robots doing his bidding for about 3 minutes (an unusually long commercial, if you ask me). I could tell you what I thought of that interruption to my day but it would not be pretty to read.
Nonetheless, I decided to check out that site (reluctantly). Knowing that Obama is the King of abortions, including partial birth and infanticide, I decided to see what opportunities exist to serve (as if I really needed a gov’t official to order me to show compassion to a person or community) in pro-life services. I plugged in “crisis pregnancy centers” and “Illinois” and came up with a surprising 57 results thru a website called allforgood.org. The first page said in the right hand corner that there were 37 results but in counting them all I came up with 57. However, none in Illinois. Interesting.
But if you type in “Planned Parenthood” and “Illinois“, you get a whopping 352 search results. And on the first two pages, 18 of the 20 results come up with locations in Illinois. 17 of the 18 are abortion related, though not necessarily PP.
But even more shocking is this – if you type “reproductive health” and “Illinois” , brace yourself – you will get over 63,000 (no typo) search results.
Now let me quickly interject – this number is suspect, given that not all the results come up are abortion related. And there are most definitely not that many surgical abortion clinics exist in the country – there are just over 750, according to Life Dynamics.
But when you see the disparity in the numbers from one to another, it doesn’t take a brain surgeon to deduce that Washington’s agenda is to promote the murder of unborn children. Sorry if that offends but the truth is the truth and that is what we are all about here at That’s-A-Fact.
Now between the time you click to go to the allforgood.org website from the serve.gov site, you get this disclaimer (you have to act quick to see it as I did to copy and paste it):
“The United States Government / Corporation for National and Community Service does not endorse or support the views expressed or the community service opportunities presented on this site nor does it endorse any commercial products that may be advertised or available on this site.”
If that is to be believed, then let me ask this question – if President Bush was still president, do you really think he would have permitted the abortion industry to be part of his national service plan?
But given that Barack is more pro-abortion than pretty much any public official in America, is that statement really believable? Sorry, I think not.
Back to the WGN story
When I was a little boy of 5 years of age (that would be in 1965), my mom and dad would take me about 7:30 each weekday morning from our home on the southwest side of Chicago to a neighbor across the street who would watch me for the next 7 years before going to school and during the lunch hour.
At Aunt Betty’s house (she was “affectionately” called Aunt), we’d have WGN on from 7:30 to about 8:45 when it was time for me to leave for school (I was only about 2 1/2 blocks away so it was a quick 5 minute walk.). I’d watch the balance of the Ray Rayner show from 7:30 to 8 AM with the Garfield Goose show on at 8 AM.
When I returned to Betty’s home for lunch (yes, I went home for lunch from appr. 12-1 PM each day, unlike most public schools these days where lunch is served at school), we’d have WGN on for the Bozo’s Circus show. Although I was not necessarily a huge Bozo fan, the show was so popular back then that if you wanted to go to WGN’s studios to see it live, you had to wait years to get tickets (no exaggeration). The show was funny and had quite a bit of variety, including audience games and frequent segments with live acrobats, among other items.
Unfortunately, the WGN website appears to be devoid of any clips or segments of the shows that appeared, something that is most unfortunate, considering young and old would enjoy it. Wikipedia points out that as far as the Garfield Goose show goes, most of its clips, taken via old-fashioned videotape, were recycled and are no longer in existence.
So on Thursday, I was watching the show back and forth from the kitchen. The replaying of a few of the old Ray Rayner shows was so refreshing to view as well as what little we could gather from the Garfield Goose show. Believe me, those shows way outperformed the kids shows on PBS – Sesame Street, Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood and the Electric Company. Although the PBS kids shows were not as politicized as they are now, they could not hold a candle to anything the mornings offered at WGN. I rarely watched anything on PBS back then. They were anything but entertaining.
I wish kids today had the Rayner show, Bozo and Garfield Goose to watch.
Anyway, there is a commercial break before going to the Bozo archives and there appears Barack Obama promoting his serve.gov site, taking far more than the standard 30 seconds to one minute most commercials air. As I indicated earlier, it appeared the commercial ran for about 3 minutes.
Perhaps if Obama’s face wasn’t there, it wouldn’t have been so bad. But after hearing his voice and seeing his face, I just wanted to upchuck.
Funny, other than rare TV interruptions for something vitally important for the nation to know about and his weekly radio address, I’m hard pressed to remember President Bush putting out his face as often as Obama has. I certainly don’t recall him doing TV commercials to promote the government or any government website or telling Americans what they must do to serve their country. I’m really offended that Obama does this, even more so in light of his uncertain (at best) natural born citizenship status.
But stations like WGN have no compunction about tooting Obama’s horn. In fact, after Chicago was eliminated in the first round of the selection for the 2016 Olympics, Steve Sanders, one of WGN’s news anchors, couldn’t help but profusely express his dismay right on the air. Unfortunately, I can’t seem to locate the video (roughly 3 minutes). If any of my readers can provide a link to this video, please send it to me via the comments section. Thanks.
It’s one thing for a Chicago station to defend Obama since he’s from the city. It’s quite another for the station to air his commercial during a time of nostalgic history that had nothing to do with him. It was deeply offending and as a result, I fired off a letter to the station today. The WGN website used to have a comments section but it’s no longer there.
As one can see by viewing the WGN timeline, the station went thru a series of transformations over the years. In my opinion, once the station began phasing out children’s and family friendly program (including items like Family Classics), that’s when WGN’s biases started showing. Kid friendly shows were replaced kid sexually arousing shows like Dawson’s Creek, no doubt as a result of the station joining Warner Brothers’ Time Warner network. The sexually explicit Sex & the City took to the airwaves in the late 90s and to this day, there isn’t much redeeming or wholesome to watch on WGN. I used to watch its news but its bias was too much for me.
As typical of many networks these days, WGN began some years ago (my guess is between 8 & 10) to participate in Chicago’s annual so-called “Gay Pride” parades. Soon participation transferred to sponsorship (while still retaining participation). It became disgusting to see.
Several years ago I wrote the station on at least two occasions regarding this obnoxious “partnership” with the homosexual community. I criticized them for doing so, providing information to them how homosexual sexual activity frequently results in STDs and AIDS and an early grave. The responses I received from their webmaster (he was the only one who would respond to e-mails) were ones of criticism and claims of bigotry and intolerance of my comments, ignoring the volumes of evidence provided the station of such unhealthy behavior. Pleading to cater to decency, such comments were routinely ignored and the station to this very day continues supporting this perversion and the day to honor it.
And now it caters to a “president” who has ZERO experience and ZERO redeeming value and legitimacy. It is disgusting. And it’s why, with the exception of Chicago Blackhawk hockey games aired from time to time, I virtually never watch WGN. It’s not the station I grew up and not the station of my parents and grandparents. The station, like the Communist Broadcasting System (CBS), the All Barack Channel (ABC), PMSNBC and the Clinton & Obama News Network (CONN), is full of sexually explicit programming, debauchery and untold volumes of filth. Frazier Thomas, the host of Garfield Goose; Ned Locke, the original ringmaster of Bozo’s Circus, and Ray Rayner, host of his own show, would likely turn over in their graves if they could see what the station they once proudly served at for years has become.
Since I couldn’t locate a fax or e-mail address on the WGN website, I fired off a letter to station management with my criticisms. I expect little, if anything, to come out of it. But I do take solace that the mainstream media is tanking.
Perhaps WGN was forced to air this commercial as a result of some demand from Obama’s FCC. I don’t know. If so, I would have loved to have seen a note to the government that any demands to show anything relative to Obama would not be met and that there would be a legal fight to that end. I doubt such is the case, however. But it would have been fitting.
So Obama really “made my day” on Thanksgiving. I really want to make his day, along with millions of other American patriots, by escorting this usurper out of the White House where he doesn’t belong.
I really hope that time will come soon. I pray it does. But in the end, only God knows. God help us if it doesn’t come soon.
The U.S. Senate met last night on the Senate floor for a Saturday evening vote, somewhat similarly to the gathering on the House floor two weeks when the House version of Obamacare narrowly passed. Unlike the House vote, the vote yesterday in the Senate was a procedural measure, one to simply open debate on the Obamacare (or Harrycare, if you will) version in that chamber. A minimum of 60 votes were required to proceed with the bill. Exactly 60 votes were obtained with all 58 Democrats and two far left “independents” (Lieberman & Sanders) that virtually always work with the Democrats comprised the 60 yesses.
Given the fact that virtually no polls show that the majority of American people are clamoring for government run health care and given that the both chambers voted on their versions in the evening and on a Saturday to boot is clear cut evidence that the public by and large does not want this. We want jobs first so we can provide for ourselves and our families. National health care does not enable us to bring home the bacon. However, Democrats do not care and your 60 vote majority yesterday is clear confirmation of that. They want to shove this down our throats. Well, they sure are trying but I daresay few Americans are going to swallow it hook, line and sinker without the stiffest resistance possible.
There are plenty of sites to go to read about what lies ahead on government run health care and commentary on this whole issue in general. You can go to those if you want and I’m sure they will help educate you in some way.
However, I think it is important to establish that with this vote yesterday, I am of the firm persuasion that the Democrat Party is not so much a political party any more (though it most certainly is) as it is a cult. It is a one-sided party, notwithstanding that there are a small handful who are not toeing the whole line. Follow where I’m going.
There are numerous definitions listed at Dictionary.com for the meaning of the word “cult” but #6 is fitting, defined as “a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader“.
Perhaps a second definition that complements the one above is this one (see under “What is a Cult”):
“The modern definition of a mind control cult is any group which employs mind control and deceptive recruiting techniques. In other words cults trick people into joining and coerce them into staying. This is the definition that most people would agree with. Except the cults themselves of course!”
Gee, does this fit the Democrats to a T or what? The only difference I see between the modern day Democratic Party and a cult is that the Democratic Party has become very hostile to religion. But besides that, these definitions have the bases covered.
Let’s examine this portion of the first definition “a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist“. As for false, I’m hard pressed to think of any statements made by high ranking Democrat officials that are true. They think global warming is man made. They believe they need to regulate the air we breathe. They claim Medicare will be saved by trimming half a billion bucks in costs in this health care debacle. They believe abortions are good for mankind and that it’s OK for two men to marry each other. They believe it’s humane to let illegals cross our borders and become citizens without going thru the proper channels. They believe God and prayer don’t belong in the public schools and that evolution is how we humans come into existence. It goes on and on.
As for “unorthodox“, well, that one opens up a huge can of worms but let’s give just one example. Earlier this year, the U.S. House (and later the Senate) passed a hate crimes measure that essentially restricts free speech on moral issues. As bad as that was and is (and yes, it’s unconstitutional), the fact that this law essentially gives a thumbs up to crimes like pedophilia cannot be interpreted as normal other than the criminally insane.
So yes, Democrats are included among the criminally insane. And yes, we’ll add a few Republicans (18) to the mentally ill. They need help. But 90% or so of the Republican Party is supposedly sane (according to the House vote on this measure) where as almost 95% of the House Democratic Party is nuts.
OK, so we have 17 Democrats who don’t think preachers should be punished for speaking out on homosexual issues or Islam. Now subtract three of those 17, Indiana Congressmen Joe Donnelly & Brad Ellsworth and Ohio Rep. Chris Carney, for voting for the abominable Obamacare in the House (here’s the vote on that) and we’re down to 14 certifiably sane House Democrats thus far.
Now that we’re at 14, let’s look at the House vote on cap and trade which would impose an unsustainable tax on the American people, of which one Congress said on You Tube that it would be the highest tax, not in the nation’s history but the world’s history.
Out of those 14 remaining Democrats, you have three, Heath Shuler of North Carolina, Bart Gordon of Tennessee and Collin Peterson, who voted with the majority. That knocks us down to 11 certifiably sane Congressmen who voted against all 3 bills. They are as follows:
- David Boren of Oklahoma
- Bobby Bright of Alabama
- Travis Childers of Mississippi
- Artur Davis of Alabama
- Lincoln Davis of Tennessee
- Parker Griffith of Alabama
- Mike McIntyre of N. Carolina
- Charlie Melancon of Louisiana
- Mike Ross of Arkansas
- John Tanner of Tennessee
- Gene Taylor of Mississippi
Out of the 11, Rep. Davis of Alabama is normally not viewed as conservative. He voted for the hate crimes bill in the previous Congress and even testified in favor of it. His opposition to all 3 of these atrocious measures this Congressional term is likely due to his planned run for governor of Alabama next year.
That leaves 10 Democrats for which I must ask the question – why are you still in America’s cultic political party? They’re all pro-life, anti-hate crimes, anti-Obamacare, anti-tax and I believe they are all pro 2nd Amendment.
If any of these guys are your Congressmen, ask them why they think the DC party (Democrat Cultic) is still worth a membership. They should be urged to leave the same way an avalanche of Texas Democrats just did – not that the Republican Party is the party of the Constitution – far from it, but it at least has some semblance of it. There is zip, zilch, zero, nada in the DC party.
So here we have 248 Democrats out of 258 who supported one or more of the three defining votes. Now contrast that to the 18 Republicans out of 177 who voted for the hate crimes measure. 6 of the 8 votes for cap and trade came from the 18 who voted for the hate crimes bill. One of those 8 is now the secretary of the army and the other is Rep. Chris Smith of New Jersey.
Another of those 18 but just one altogether, Ahn Cao, voted for Obamacare. Add Rep. Smith and you have 19.
So we have 19 Republicans who supported one of the above 3 ungodly measures and who should be tossed from the party. An exception might be made for Rep. Smith’s, however. Although his vote for cap and trade is totally inexcusable, given that he is arguably one of the House champions for the unborn, it might be a mistake to boot him from the party. He should be read the riot act, no doubt. But expulsion for him might not be beneficial.
But back to the above. Let’s summarize. With only 10 out of 258 Democrats voting with common sense, only 4% of the DC party is certifiably sane. With 159 out of 177 Republicans voting against all 3 of these measures, 90% of the party is certifiably sane.
90% – 4% and someone is going to tell me there isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between the two parties? Uh, I don’t think so. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure this one out.
Or let’s put it this way – 96% of the Democrats in the House are at least partially insane while only 10% of the Republicans are.
You can’t argue with those numbers. Who in their right mind wants to be a Democrat today? I guess the phrase “right mind” has to be emphasized.
Yes, I am well aware that some of the Republicans who voted against the original hate crimes bill voted for the subsequent merged version, which combined the bill with a defense spending measure. Although I firmly believe these few Republicans should have voted NO, I won’t hold it against them for doing so, given the bind they were in.
As for extremist, well, this one needs little explanation. Any Democrat voting for Obamacare and especially those who wrote the 2000+ page bills certainly qualifies. The Democrats like to say that pro-lifers, pro-marriage folks, evolution opponents and those who support border security and local control of our public school system are extremists.
If so, I’d like to know what normal is. I don’t think the general public would concur with the Democrats’ definition. How many books out there, aside from encyclopedias, are 2000+ pages long?
Watch this video and ask yourself who would write such a bill, let alone the garbage in it. Anyone of a sound mind would easily reject this measure.
But the DC Party is not of a sound mind.
On to the second definition, let’s refresh our minds. Here it is again.
“The modern definition of a mind control cult is any group which employs mind control and deceptive recruiting techniques. In other words cults trick people into joining and coerce them into staying.“
The key phrase here is “mind control”. The “charismatic leader“, as defined in the first definition, is Barack Obama, America’s putative president. The Democratic Party has refused on all counts to address Obama’s citizenship status, proving that all who embrace this political party and stay in it after knowing the truth about it have bought into the cultic nature of the party.
The “change” message that Democrats have bought into over and over not only captured unthinking minds of the general electorate but the politicians themselves. They didn’t look into Obama’s background, his connections, his experience and of course, his questionable at best natural born citizenship. They were mesmerized by his smooth talking with little substance behind it. He could do no wrong.
Of course, being black had something to do with it as well. The Obama worshippers wanted a black man in office. And they did whatever they could to get him in. John Kerry in 2004 and Al Gore in 2000 couldn’t hold a candle to him. As bad as they were, they would have been better than Obama.
Then you have the numerous You Tube videos of school children and teachers singing their praise to Obama (before and after the election) in classrooms in various parts of the country. I won’t link to them here because they are disgusting, let alone blasphemous, to the Lord I love and worship.
You also have the picture posted in a January World Net Daily article (which I also won’t link here because of its blatant blasphemy) which featured a New York City artist depicting Obama as crucified on a cross.
And you have Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize for absolutely nothing.
Perhaps in the eyes of Democratic politicians this was not the sign of a cultlike leader. But then again, most of them wouldn’t recognize one, especially the ones in Washington. They were already captured by him.
If that all isn’t convincing that Barack Obama is a cultlike figure, then I need an answer to this question: why would anyone in their right mind vote for someone who promised utility rates would “necessarily skyrocket” under his cap and trade plan?
Democratic politicians may dance around their comments and voting record about how they won’t tax the middle class or for that matter, tax anyone at all. But when someone outright says that their utility rates will go up under his (or her) energy plan, frankly, I’m at a loss to understand how anyone would want to vote for that person, no matter how much they thought about him or her on everything else. As bad as John McCain was, and he was a terrible choice for the Republican Party, he should have won the election by a landslide on this alone, despite his own warm and fuzzy feelings about global warming. He promised to take action on it and “reach across the aisle” but nowhere did he ever say Americans would pay more for their electricity use as a result of his plan.
Only a cultlike figure could get an electorate based on such a promise. Barack Obama “employs mind control and deceptive recruiting techniques“, which is how he got the votes to get him elected, along with a “little help” from some foreign entities. He gets people to be part of his team the same way Mary Baker Eddy did for the Christian Science cult, Joseph Smith & Brigham Young for Mormonism, Charles Taze Russell for the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Rev. Sun Yung Moon, Herbert W. Armstrong, Jim Jones, David Koresh and others.
As for deceptive recruiting, well, I can’t say Obama is the founder of that but he certainly has made great strides in getting where he is. He certainly can thank his party for mind control terms like “climate change” instead of “global warming”, “a woman’s right to choose” instead of “abortion, “gays” instead of “homosexuals”, “undocumented immigrants” instead of “illegal aliens”, “gender reassignment” instead of “sex change operations”. In the House health care debate, the “public option” became the “consumer option“. The Democratic Party has done it all. They’ve led the way. No one can say the Republican Party had a hand in these switcheroo techniques. They may use terms like “gays” themselves, and they do, but they didn’t lead the way to the change. The Democrats did. And they brought people on board who would not have ever been persuaded to, had they not played bait and switch with our vocabulary.
So if you have a politician with no experience and shady character associates plus untenable positions like for partial birth abortion and infanticide that anywhere from 70-80% of the people reject, how can you recruit people into your camp? You lie and alter your language and you use vagaries like “change” to get your message across. That’s how Obmaa did it.
And that’s how Democrats are doing it.
Although Obama’s “Organizing for America” has had a role in bringing young people to his side, you can’t say the same about Democratic politicians, unless you automatically subscribe to what they say and believe and how they vote. If you have common sense and can rationally think things thru, you can’t vote for a Democrat. You may have difficulty voting for a Republican – and that’s perfectly understandable in some ways, given their recent years of backslidden behavior and ignoring the Constitution. You can vote third party. But sane people these days do not conscientiously vote Demcorat, assuming they understand a candidate’s political positions and votes.
It may be too late now but fortunately, scores of Obama’s supporters are finally deserting him and this story is devastating in terms of sheer numbers. You also don’t have to look very far, both in articles and on various website forums, to read how people who voted for him are sharing their “buyer’s remorse”. It’s growing by leaps and bounds as people differentiate what Obama said on the campaign trail and what he is doing today.
But even if he’s losing the people, he’s got Congress under his cultlike control.
Although he doesn’t have Republicans on most issues, Obmaa does on his lack of constitutional eligibility. However, he has got the Democratic Party in lockstep on his agenda (perhaps minus the roughly dozen or so Democrats noted earlier) and is no doubt using Rahm Emmanuel and David Axlerod to do the brainwashing, along with “help” from House & Senate Democrat leaders Nancy Pelosi and “Dirty” Harry Reid, respectively.
And nowhere is that more evident than in the government run health care iron fist debate. Obama, Emmanuel, Axlerod, Pelosi, Reid and company used every little trick in the book to get the voting majority in the House. They made promises (read “bribes”) to get recalcitrant Democrats on board, “promises” including reelection dollars and district projects.
And with the 60 votes yesterday in the Senate with no Democrats saying NO to opening debate, there is no doubt that there is a spell over this party and the only way it will be broken is with an unearthing of Democrats in Congress and perhaps a 30 million person march on Washington.
When pro-life Democrats like Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson (he’s really the only one in the Senate) join everyone else to begin debate on Obamacare, and knowing that the Senate bill allows for abortions, yes, there was arguably some arm twisting to get Nelson aboard. But I have to also believe that it was his cultlike allegiance to the Democratic Party, and maybe to a lesser extent his party’s ineligible leader, that he signed on with the rest of them.
Same with Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu, who was allegedly offered money (again, read “bribed”) and Sen. Blanche Lincoln, who is up for reelection next year and who is being reported in a poll as being trounced if she winds up for voting for this bill (probably the final version).
So regardless of whether there were incentives (bribes), strong arm tactics or blind allegiance to persuade these Democrats, plus perhaps Sen. Lieberman to join a unanimous 60 non-Republican vote to open debate, it takes mind control to force these individuals and any others to adopt their agenda. And Obama has the mind control to do it, even if his resume is empty (which it is). And that’s why they signed on, for the good of party and Obama.
So Sen. Nelson can claim he’ll vote against Obamacare in the final bill but it doesn’t matter. He sold out his pro-life principles for Obama instead of doing what is right by his constituents. And since he’s been known to be the most conservative Senate Democrat (no one else is really close, especially on social issues), if he can be bought (under Obama mind control), so can the rest of them. They all voted for almost all of Obama’s nominees for cabinet and other appointees requiring Senate confirmation. You can count on maybe two hands the number of Democrats voting against their leader’s appointees.
The coercion is there. The public is pulling away from Obama. But not the politicians in Congress. They are beholden to the cultist Obama as though he can do little or no wrong. They won’t challenge his eligibility to be president and the tiny handful of Republicans who would don’t have a prayer. Obama is their cult leader. And sadly, I see little to get them away from the brainwashing.
Meanwhile, the above 10 Democrats who largely oppose Obama’s agenda should switch parties and send a message. There were many who did after the “94 election after Democrats got trounced. There are none at the national level now, meaning they are either afraid or brainwashed.
Personally, it’s hard for me to see Obamacare/Harrycare go down in the Senate. If it is defeated, it will be when it goes to conference committee where I expect the pro-life Democrats in the House who voted for the bill, along with the other 39 Democrats (many who are pro-life but not all) who voted against the original version, to stick to their principles about abortion and keep the Stupak Amendment in the final bill. I could be wrong but I think they will stand by their life stance. However, I do believe a political blood bath will ensue from the pro-deathers who will insist on scrapping the Stupak Amendment and force public funding of abortion. But if that occurs, I think the pro-life Democrats will revolt and say NO to Pelosi and the pro-aborts. Yet in the end, even if the bill passes with the amendment intact, it would be tough for the usurper “president” to sign it, considering his 110% oppostion to anything pro-life.
Nevertheless, if Obamacare becomes law, I can assuredly say that there will be hell to pay and it may not just be at the ballot box.
And it may occur even if Obamacare/Harrycare does not become law. The American people are fed up with the Democratic Party.
As to what that hell would be, well, let’s just say the Boston Tea Party may well pale in comparison, not to mention the more recent tea parties.
It may be the only way to end the Obama cult and occult, not to mention the real voodoo economics of Obama and the Democrats.
For Immediate Release
Contact: Nedd Kareiva, Director of Public School Exodus, at firstname.lastname@example.org or by cell phone (773) 875-5762.
What: H1N1 Picket & Protest
Where: Portage High School, 6400 U.S. Hwy 6, Portage, IN
When: Saturday, Nov. 21st from approximately 8:30 AM to 1 PM
This Saturday, Portage Township Schools, in conjunction with the Porter County Health Dept., will be offering the swine flu vaccine (H1N1) to children residing in this district. While we fully appreciate the district superintendent stressing that the vaccination is strictly voluntary and that it is the parents’ decision whether to inoculate their children, such does not address the many legitimate concerns relevant to the vaccine. As such, we will be on school property to distribute flyers and share information with interested parties so that parents and guardians will be able to make informed decisions regarding their children (and themselves) before entering the school facility.
Some issues citizens have with the H1N1 shot include but are not limited to:
- Its safety, considering the ingredients incorporated in the vaccine
- Its alleged rush to market without thorough testing
- Its necessity, considering the number of cases of flu this year have not been much different than previous years
- Its manufacturing outside the United States, thus raising more concerns as to its safety
- Uneasiness among doctors and nurses who either feel the vaccine is risky or otherwise is unnecessary
- Sizable numbers of doctors and nurses who refuse to take the shot themselves, both at home and abroad
- Legal immunity from litigation granted to the manufacturers of the shot as well as the U.S. government
- The number of adults and children who got sick after getting the shot
- The facts that Barack Obama and New York state Health Commissioner Richard Daines, among other public officials, refused to take the H1N1 shot themselves (see here and here) and have offered excuses why they won’t get it
While sizable numbers of Americans are becoming increasingly skeptical of the efficacy claims and crises manipulations manufactured by likes of the Centers for Disease Control, the U.S. Dept. of Human Services and putative “President” Obama and are turning to alternative independent sources on the Internet for their information (like here, here, here and here), there are still in some places long lines of adults and children waiting to get this shot who likely have not assessed the risks associated with it. Our presence on school property hopefully will persuade individuals to think thru this decision thoroughly before rolling up their sleeves.
Nedd is the father of an Asperger’s Syndrome child who is beyond convinced that the mercury in vaccines led to his son’s autistic condition at 3 1/2 years of age and has a vested interested in ensuring parents do not get shots for both themselves and their children without a thoroughly informed conscience. His website (currently not up) is PublicSchoolExodus.com and his blog is thatsafact.wordpress.com
End of Press Release
If you are thinking of coming to the picket and protest, please e-mail me at email@example.com and let me know how many are coming with you. We’d like to get a good turnout in order to create good public awareness as well as press coverage.
Please note that we do have full permission from both school superintendent Dr. Mike Berta as well as the police officer assigned to Portage schools, Cpl. Troy Williams, to be on school property to peacefully protest. We thank them for that as they appear to understand the 1st Amendment rather well and have designated an area to hold up signs and pass out our flyers. It would have been tough to maintain a visible presence had we been confined to the public sidewalk as the school building’s entrance is well set back from the street and sidewalk. We’d be in a good position to raise public awareness from passing motorists but with little, if any, access to those waiting to enter the facility. Thus we are quite pleased that they are extending this courtesy to us.
Directions to the school are available at this link. Just plug in where you’re coming from and you’ll be all set. It would be great to meet any of you. Stay for an hour or for the entire time, if you can. I realize the possible chilly weather may tempt you not to come, along with any pre-Thanksgiving plans you may have but we need to get the word out to as many folks as possible about the potential adversity they or their children face if they get this shot.
Having lived here for almost 2 1/2 years now, I can assure anyone thinking of coming that there should be no problems. The Portage police here are fine folks (unfortunately, that opinion does not extend to the so-called “finest” in Chicago where I resided for the previous 14 years) in a fine community and I have nothing but praise for them. I also appreciate Dr. Berta who personally extended his blessing for me to come. While he may be charged with informing Portage parents about the Porter County clinic coming to the district and opening school doors for this purpose, press reports indicated he was not exactly enthused about doing so. Plus he and other school officials were responsible for removing an offensive book from a classroom last fall. Thankfully the ACLU didn’t stick its nose here where it didn’t belong.
Thanks again go to Cpl. Williams and Dr. Berta for their assistance here and we hope to see a good number of you this Saturday. Lord bless.
P.S. Even if this shot was deemed to be safe and worthy of widespread acceptance, given the governments long lapses in getting supplies to its designated locations, do you really trust Washington to deliver on health care? If you don’t, you likely are in the majority and should tell your U.S. senators (in Indiana, Dick Lugar & Evan Bayh) to reject the bill in their chamber. Sen. Lugar is on record as opposing it. Sen. Bayh should as well. Tell him NO on cloture and NO on a vote. Voting yes on cloture means a favorable vote for Obamacare, regardless of the final vote. Look it up at the Heritage Foundation or Americans for Prosperty.
P.S.S. Our next post will be our blockbuster and super hard hitting piece on the atrocious and blatantly outrageous, let alone totally unconstitutional, hate crimes law that our so-called representatives in Washington recently passed. It will be the most powerful article I’ve ever written in my 6 years of writing articles on the Internet. We hope to have it up by Friday. It will be brutally explosive, blisteringly honest and straightforward and hopefully wake up the American people, including the religious community and America’s pastors. Trust me, this one you will want to forward and I don’t say that lightly.
Unfortunately, I am still working on the blockbuster piece and it’s possible it may not be up before Thanksgiving. Keep checking back. In the meantime, please read my piece today. I think it’s beyond damning.
As per my custom and personal conviction, I am willfully avoiding detailed discussion of various aspects of the Obamacare legislation that passed the U.S. House of Representatives on a Saturday night when few Americans were paying any attention. After all, why should you come here to read what I have to say on these aspects when others are saying the same thing? I just assume you visit those sites instead.
But since you are here, and I am so glad you are, please read on.
Of course, I am seething, outraged, yes – pissed off, whatever adjective you want to use as to what 219 Democrats and one bought out Republicrat have done to our blessed United States Constitution and in turn the lives of the American people. I do pray for an unprecedented political earthquake to occur at the ballot box just under a year from now. Shall we call for a 10 on the political Richter scale?
Yes we can! Or better yet, yes we shall!
Yes, I know about the fines and jail time that could well occur if Obamacare becomes law. Yes, I know about the claims of rationed care (which I believe are accurate) and how seniors will be affected. Yes, I know about the gargantuan cost of the bill and the huge loss of personal liberty that will go with it, should it become law.
I agree with all that stuff. But again, if you want to read more on that, go to those other sites.
What I want to discuss here is how the pro-life folks have contributed to the passage of Obamacare.
Now wait just a second, you might say, especially if you are an ardent pro-life guy or gal. We are the ones that kept abortion coverage out of the House bill. We got 240 votes for it, including 64 Democrats.
Like I’m impressed. I’m not. And I’m inclined to call you idiots. And though I am not prone to name calling, especially those on our side, I am making an exception here.
Yes, I will probably take heat from some pro-lifers and pro-life groups. And I’ll gladly do so. But here are my two points.
Point one, without the Stupak pro-life amendment, Obamacare dies and here’s how.
In viewing the 64 Democrats who voted with all but one Republican (who voted present and in my view, rightly so), there are a good 30-35 of them who either have a fairly consistent pro-life voting track record or for those whose time in Congress has been limited, a good history of public statements and support for life causes. Those individuals seen as reliably pro-life (even if this is their only issue with the good guys) are (based on the vote call list): Altmire, Berry, Bishop, Boren, Bright, Carney, Chandler, Childers, Costello, Dahlkemper, Davis (TN), Donnelly, Ellsworth, Gordon, Griffith, Lipinski, Marshall, Matheson, McIntyre, Melancon, Mollohan, Oberstar, Peterson, Rahall, Ross, Shuler, Skelton, Stupak, Tanner, Taylor & Wilson.
There may be 3-5 others that could be added but from my analysis of their records and statements, I think 31 is a very reasonable but more importantly accurate number.
So you have 31 people who are principled in their pro-life positions and voting record. Subtract those 31 and you knock the 240 down to 209. The bill fails.
Now before you say anything, I’m well aware that if you’re going to exclude the 31 pro-life Democrats, you’re going to have to exclude the roughly 90% of House Republicans who are pro-life. And you get no argument from me.
But that’s exactly what should have been done. There was no need for any Republicans to support the Stupak pro-life amendment. They all should have been opposed to it, even with the pro-life Democrats supporting it. The public surely would have known that the entire Republican Party didn’t go from pro-life to pro-abortion in one swing. The people would have eventually picked up why pro-life Republicans were joining pro-abort Democrats in this bill. The pro-life records of the 90% or so Republicans in the House have been consistent thru the years. The public would have known there to be a reason for their opposition to Stupak’s addendum.
So if you have 176 Republicans and 194 pro-abort Democrats (you can count on one hand the number of those Democrats who have so much as cast one pro-life vote) in opposition to the Stupak Amendment, you have 370 Congressmen and women against 64 Democrats supporting it. And with the squabbling of the pro-life Democrats against the pro-abort Democrats, coupled with the non-pro-life Democrats but who oppose illegal immigration and deficit spending in the bill, it wouldn’t be too difficult to have buried it.
Admittedly, the entire Republican Party in union with the strongly pro-abort element of the Democrat Party is rather freaky, to say the least, but it would have likely done the job there (barring the Blue Dog Democrats changing their votes) in defeating the amendment and in turn Obamacare, particularly because the pro-life Democrat from Michigan said he had roughly 40 Democrats to derail the original legislation without pro-life protections. And the 40, virtually all on board with the pro-life position, coupled with perhaps 10-20 more, would have more or less sent Obamacare to an early grave.
So in a moment of irony, pro-lifers helped pass Obamacare in the House.
But was that by design? Uh, yeah, though the pro-life community doesn’t view it that way. And that leads to point two.
The matter of certain pro-life groups and supporters being one issue person. And this has me fit to be tied and why I’m going to expose a few of them here.
In an e-mail forwarded to me by a friend, Americans United for Life (AUL) had fought at all costs to make sure no abortion coverage was in the legislation, they, willingly or not, ignored the grave threat to liberty this legislation will cost Americans. Here’s what they say on their site on this bill (also here).
Amazingly, this same group thought it to be a good idea to meet with Resident Obama’s pro-abort staff to lobby for pro-life provisions in the bill. Boy, that’s real good (insert sarcasm) – like walking into the lion’s den and asking the lion not to eat you.
Of course, AUL, like so many misguided good groups, calls Obama “President”, thus affirming he was rightfully elected, something we’ve talked about in previous posts and which we fiercely disagree.
I also had another e-mail forwarded to me from the Susan B. Anthony group. Here’s what they say on their site, ignoring the much bigger picture – constitutional freedom. They resolutely claim victory in this battle of epic proportions.
The same can be said about Operation Rescue, a group I tremendously admire but who, like the others, fail to see the trees beyond the forest. Read their press release. They are reasonably pleased.
And what would health care be without Catholic bishops and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops throwing their two cents and much more into the mix (you have to read this one). As long as abortion isn’t in the bill, they applaud the legislation. They have ZERO concept of liberty.
That disgusts me to no end – heck, I seriously doubt they’ve read the nearly 2000 page monstrosity.
But thankfully, one of the few (and may I say very effective) pro-life groups I think very highly of doesn’t say a thing about Obamacare on its website.
And neither does its parent organization, another pro-life group I have immense respect for, even though I occasionally disagree with them.
Personally, I’d rather both groups come out against Obamacare. But if they mainstain a silent or neutral position on it, as noted by absence of anything on their website, that is the next best thing in this writer’s opinion. Both American Life League & 40 Days for Life are highly esteemed in my book.
But that all aside, Life News takes issue with the claims that the House version of Obamacare is free of abortion in any form and even sources AUL in their article.
But my question to these pro-life groups and those who work in them and by turn support their efforts is why are they so damned concerned about the unborn (rightfully so, of course) to the exclusion of EVERYTHING ELSE. Do they not realize that their personal liberties are at stake, just like mine?
Make no mistake about it. Anyone who knows me knows I am pro-life without exception. I do not support rape and incest exceptions because it’s not the child’s fault. Women who are pregnant under those rare circumstances need tons of love, compassion and support.
But they need not abort.
I do not even have the life of the mother exception, though it is understandable if a child dies to save the mother’s life AS LONG AS THERE IS NO INTENT TO KILL THE CHILD.
So why do I fiercely chide my otherwise pro-life friends?
Because the liberty picture is not on their radar! And it should be foremost.
This is not a matter of a bill whereby abortion is the sole element in it. If it was the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) or any bill restricting the right to protest at abortion clinics, provide abortion funding or forcing doctors to do abortions, I’d be at the front of the line with them, if not in front of them all, fighting it with every fiber of my being.
But this is much more than about abortion. Obamacare potentially affects every area of our lives. It may well affect what we choose to eat and drink, whether to vaccinate our children, what medical treatments we may be denied from having, how much medical insurance we may (or may not) need, etc.
And that just scratches the surface.
Obamacare is said to cover the illegals, something vast segments of the American populace oppose, regardless of party affiliation (83% per Rasmussen). Obamacare is said to cover sex change operations. Obamacare requires mandated purchasing of insurance or mandatory fines and jail time. Obamacare requires mandatory counseling for seniors and even counseling on abortion and spacing pregnancy intervals. Obamacare may force doctors to do abortions and fertility treatments for lesbians
It goes on and on. And pro-life groups are celebrating because there is allegedly no abortion coverage.
Well, as noted by Life News, there are possible loopholes in Obamacare that could allow abortions. But even if there aren’t, there are Democrats in both parties that want to strip any and all pro-life regulations.
Bottom line, as many legal experts have noted, never in the history of America have the American people been forced to purchase a product or service. We are forced under the unconstitutional 16th Amendment to pay taxes. But we are not forced to buy anything until now, right?
I think not! And I’ll be damned if I’m going to be forced to!
So pro-lifers, especially you Catholic bishops, let me ask you this. As much as I fully agree with your position that abortion is murder and that we should love all people, born and unborn, from cradle to grave, are you so hell bent on supporting Obamacare (provided there is truly no abortion coverage) that you would support mandatory fines and jail time simply because we choose not to sign up for it? Are you willing to support rationed care in order to make sure 100% of Americans are covered?
If you are and this is your version of Christianity, I would tell you where you can shove this bill but because I respect the clergy, I shall refrain from doing so.
But I will tell you this much: I will fight like hell against you, the Democrats and Obama to ensure this satanic bill never sees the light of day. And so will millions of Americans whom you are willing to consign to inevitability of having this into law.
As many folks have said, we can’t even trust the government to get out an adequate supply of swine flu vaccines to medical facilities across America and yet we’re supposed to trust the government to take care of us. But worse than that, if Americans by large numbers can’t and don’t trust the federal government with the safety of the swine flu shot, saying it hasn’t been adequately tested and has risky side effects due to the ingredients in it, do we really trust the government with the so-called safety Obamacare will provide?
What are pro-lifers, including Catholic bishops, thinking? Pro-life is a critical aspect of this legislation as far as the unborn goes but isn’t the liberty we adults currently have under our U.S. Constitution far more important and worth fighting to keep?
There is no authority in the U.S. Constitution to provide Americans with death, er health care. This is tyranny out and outright.
Our Founding Fathers knew tyranny when they saw it. Among the dozens of examples of tyrannical activity imposed by King George is this notable one:
“He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual uncomfortable and distant from the depository of their public records for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.”
Doesn’t this sound just a little bit like Saturday’s highly unusual meeting, largely unnoticed by the American people to avoid detection, to force Obamacare down our throats, wearing us down (“fatiguing” us into compliance) with their efforts to control all aspects of Americans’ lives?
Pro-lifers, including Catholic bishops, read our Constitution and citefor me where it’s located that government must provide any form of care for us.
Also tell me this – if Obamacare is so good, why are Congressional Democrats unwilling to sign up for it and put their families on it? Or why are Democrats refusing to allow We The People so sign up for the plans Congress is on?
If Catholics and other pro-lifers (and for that matter, anyone else) do not see Obamacare as more than stopping abortion (though abortion is an integral part of it) but are consigned to support it, then I choose to disassociate with you.
Because as the Declaration states, ALL men (and women, including the unborn) are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights….life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Your support of life for all does not come at the expense of my right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Rather, it works in conjunction with it.
So if anyone, pro-life or pro-abort, supports Obamacare in any fashion, it does so at the expense of being my foe than my friend. You support division instead of unity.
Do you really want to go there? If so, sorry, I’m not going with you.