Nobama ONLY Thread 2.0

[breannaw]

Thanks Tarynn@Elissasmom. I saw that yesterday. I was hesistant to believe it but it is true. GOD HELP US. His supporters will probably still be diehard supporters too even though he will have destroyed this country permanently.
Thank goodness we have Fox News and radio talk shows so we can hear news like this. I doubt the LMSM is gong to cover this.


http://www.thefoxnation.com/white-ho...rol-news-media
is this the reason Obama and his bots are going after Fox, he can't control them? Seems to be the case.

Anita Dunn, another loser from this loser of an admins. says she supports Mao Tse Tung. Then tried to back track on it saying she was only kididng. www.foxnation.com

YEAH RIGHT. Another LIAR.These are the people Obama surrounds himself with. Obama supposedly came out and defended Jennings, (one of his Czars) today for all his antics. how can you defend the indefensible???? I guess you can if you are Obama, or anyone on the left these days. It is mind boggling to me. Obama is making Carter look like a boy scout.

I heard today that reporter Helen Thomas, and some others on the left are telling Obama and his admins. to keep their mouths shut and let the war with Fox News stop because they are not going to win it. Finally, something I can agree with her on.
www.foxnation.com

[Solidarity]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ohgCvEx1z0

Wonder if this guy is going to be called a racist?

[breannaw]

Obama is up to his lying ways. He actually LIED 7 times in UNDER 2 minutes.Unbeliebvable. I have never seen or heard of a person who could lie like he does. He has no conscience.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UErR7...layer_embedded

www.drudgereport.com
George Soros has sent out emails telling the dems not to go n Fox News. So, I guess they are admitting that Fox News does allow both sides, unlike the other channels. Obama is trying to determine who is and who isn't a news network I guess. Fox is the only LEGITIMATE NEWS Network. THeir ratings clearly prove that point.

The Dems are locking the Republicans out of the Committee rooms when healthcare is being discussed. When this JOKE of a healthcare bill passes, (IF it passes) the DEMS are going to OWN IT.

I found this on cnsnews.com 40 Dems will vote to KILL HEALTHCARE BILL

CNSNews.com
Congressman Says He Now Has ‘About 40 Likeminded Democrats’ Who Will Vote to Kill Health Bill if He Doesn’t Get Floor Vote on Pro-Life Amendment
Friday, October 23, 2009
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief


(CNSNews.com) - Rep. Bart Stupak (D.-Mich.) told CNSNews.com yesterday that he has organized a group of “about 40 likeminded Democrats” who will vote to kill the health-care bill if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) does not allow a floor vote on his amendment to prohibit federal funds from going to insurance plans that cover abortion.

Under Stupak’s plan, the approximately 40 Democrats in his camp would join with all House Republicans in voting to defeat the special House “rule” that would set the terms for debating and amending the health-care bill on the House floor when it is brought up for a final vote. If a majority of the House does not first vote to approve this rule, the health-care bill itself cannot be brought to the floor.

“We will try to—we, there’s about 40 likeminded Democrats like myself—we’ll try to take down the rule,” Stupak told CNSNews.com. “If all 40 of us vote in a bloc against the rule—because we think the Republicans will join us—we can defeat the rule. The magic number is 218. If we can have 218 votes against the rule, we win.”



“If you hold all 40 of your guys, how many votes do you have?” asked CNSNews.com.

“About 220,” said Stupak.

“So, you’ve got a two-vote margin there?” asked CNSNews.com

“Correct,” said Stupak.

If Stupak’s bloc of Democrats holds together against a rule, Stupak said, “They cannot bring the bill to the floor.”

Stupak’s amendment was defeated by a vote of 28 to 30 in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, when that committee was drafting its version of the health-care bill. Stupak’s serves on the committee and is chairman of its Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.

Stupak said that House Rules Committee Chairman Louise Slaughter (D.-N.Y.) has told him there is “no way” her committee will write a rule that allows a floor vote on his amendment. The Democratic majority on the Rules Committee, Stupak said, acts on the direction of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Stupak’s amendment--which mirrors the language of the Hyde amendment that is incorporated each year into various appropriations bills including the Health and Human Services appropriation--would prohibit federal funds from paying for any part of a health plan that covers abortions.

Stupak told CNSNews.com that although he has about 40 votes now to kill the rule for the health-care bill if Speaker Pelosi does not allow a floor vote on his amendment, he said that situation could change when the rule is brought to the floor and the voting on it actually takes place.

When the vote is going on, Stupak said, the Democratic leadership will “twist arms” and try to persuade the 40 would-be defectors to fall back in line with the party.

There are 435 seats in the House of Representatives. The Democrats hold 256 of these seats, the Republicans hold 177, and there are two vacancies--which will be filled in special elections held on Tuesday, Nov. 3. One of those vacancies is in the California district that was represented by Democrat Ellen Tauscher before she was appointed undersecretary of state for arms control and international security by President Obama. The other is in the upstate New York district that was represented by Republican Rep. John McHugh, who was named by President Obama as secretary of the army.

CNSNews.com asked Speaker Pelosi on Friday whether she would allow a vote on Stupak’s amendment when the health care bill comes up on the floor.

“We’re just finishing our conferencing on this legislation,” said Pelosi. “We haven’t even gone through the procedure as to what we’ll do on the floor, if there even are any amendments on the floor.”

“We will have legislation that will be, I think, compatible with the thinking of our members who have this concern,” she said. Here is a video of the complete interview with Rep. Bart Stupak (D.-Mich):



Here is a partial transcript of CNSNews.com interview with Rep. Bart Stupak (D.-Mich.):

Jeffrey: Assuming that the course we’re on now continues and Congresswomen Slaughter does not allow a vote on your amendment [in] the rule—the rule [that must be approved] before the actual health-care bill that Speaker Pelosi presents to the House can be voted on--the House will have to vote on the rule itself setting the terms of debate--

Stupak: Correct.

Jeffrey: What are you going to do then?

Stupak: We will try to—we, there’s about 40 likeminded Democrats like myself—we’ll try to take down the rule. If all 40 of us vote in a bloc against the rule—because we think the Republicans will join us—we can defeat the rule. The magic number is 218. If we can have 218 votes against the rule, we win.

Jeffrey: If you hold all 40 of your guys how many votes do you have?

Stupak: About 220.

Jeffrey: So, you’ve got a two-vote margin there.

Stupak: Correct.

Jeffrey: So, you hold those 40, the rule comes up, they have a vote on the rule itself, 220 congressman vote against it, and 215 vote for it, then you win, and they cannot move forward to the health care bill.

Stupak: They cannot bring the bill to the floor

[breannaw]

I thought I would give anyone of you a head up about GOv. Palin's book. The libs are releasing a book on the same day with an almost identical title. They just changed the spelling on the word "Rogue". Their trying to hurt her and damage her sale. They are still afraidof her. Is there no end to the filth they will stoop to, to destroy another person. They are the lowest form of humanity. I hoep she sues them for every cent she can get for using her likeness without her permission.

'Going Rouge' To Come Out Same Day As Palin's Book
Rachel Slajda | October 22, 2009, 3:29PM
A collection of essays about former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, titled Going Rouge, will be released the same day as Palin's own much-awaited book, Going Rogue.

The essays, collected by The Nation senior editors Richard Kim and Betsy Reed and written by Max Blumenthal, Katha Pollitt, Matt Taibbi and several others, will examine "the nightmarish prospect of her continuing to dominate the nation's political scene."

And yes, the book is available for pre-order.

I also found this descipable piece of filth. This is disgusting and TRASHY. I am not surprised. The left cannot help themselves. SCUM

Home About Sample Pages Media Coverage Going Rouge
The Sarah Palin Rogue Coloring & Activity Book


October 2009
Sex, death, energy, power, politics, and heavy makeup -- it's all here


Yeah, yeah, we heard all about the Sarah Palin’s Book Going Rogue – An American Life to be launched on Nov 17th. They expect to move 1.5 million copies, and pre-orders have been brisk.

Brilliantly illustrated by cartoonist Julie Sigwart, and co-authored with Micheal Stinson, award-winning political activist/satirist and radio host who has appeared on numerous cable and network television shows. This husband and wife team met at the National Cartoonists’ Society Reuben Awards weekend in 2000 at the World Trade Center in New York, the event where pro cartoonists who create the cartoons that shape our culture gather annually.

[breannaw]

This is good news about the polls. We can keep the momemtum up and take back this country from those who are bent on destroying it. Hopefully,and I PRAY that the damage Obama has and is doing is not permanent.

For the first time in recent years, voters trust Republicans more than Democrats on all 10 key electoral issues regularly tracked by Rasmussen Reports. The GOP holds double-digit advantages on five of them.
recent Rasmussen Reports video report finds that voters are more disappointed lately with Obama’s performance in dealing with corruption in Washington.


October 14-15 & 18-19, 2009

Issue
Democrats
Republicans

Health Care
40%
46%

Education
38%
43%

Social Security
37%
45%

Taxes
35%
50%

Economy
35%
49%

Abortion
35%
47%

Immigration
33%
40%

Nat'l Security
31%
54%

Iraq
31%
50%

Gov't Ethics
29%
33%

[MKGrace]

Originally Posted by breannaw

Thank goodness we have Fox News and radio talk shows so we can hear news like this. I doubt the LMSM is gong to cover this.

That's right. And His Royal Highness Rush Limbaugh and the Excellence in Broadcasting Network deserve a special mention. The libs hate that he and Fox News top the ratings. The truth still attracts viewers and listeners.

[breannaw]

Yes, that's true. I missed Rush being on the air yesterday.I dont care for Mark Davis and he is from my area. I like Rush. He knows what he's talking about. The left cannot stand it that FOX is CLOBBERING the other channels. By a HUGE margin as well.

Anita Dun shuold keep whining, it is only helping Fox News ratings eve more. They are UP another 10% since she started yelping. Thanks Anita.

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/10/2...-declared-war/

CNN’s Anderson CooperCNN, which invented the cable news network more than two decades ago, will hit a new competitive low with its prime-time programs in October, finishing fourth – and last – among the cable news networks with the audience that all the networks rely on for their advertising.

That means CNN’s programs were behind not only Fox News and MSNBC, but even its own sister network HLN (formerly Headline News.) Three of its four shows between 7 and 11 p.m. finished fourth and last among the cable news networks. That was the first time CNN had finished that poorly with its prime-time shows.

Individually, the CNN shows were beaten RESOUNDINGLY by all the Fox News programs, but also lost to all of the MSNBC programs, including a repeat of Keith Olbermann’s 8 p.m. edition of “Countdown,” which beat the 10 p.m. hour of CNN’s signature prime-time program, “Anderson Cooper 360.”
Again that was a first.

www.drudgereport.com

[rbpier]

FACT CHECK: Health insurers' profits 35th of 53
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091026/...alth_insurance
By CALVIN WOODWARD, Associated Press Writer – Mon Oct 26, 10:06 am ET

WASHINGTON – In the health care debate, Democrats and their allies have gone after insurance companies as rapacious profiteers making "immoral" and "obscene" returns while "the bodies pile up."
But in pillorying insurers over profits, the critics are on shaky ground. Ledgers tell a different reality.
Health insurance profit margins typically run about 6 percent, give or take a point or two. That's anemic compared with other forms of insurance and a broad array of industries, even some beleaguered ones.
Profits barely exceeded 2 percent of revenues in the latest annual measure. This partly explains why the credit ratings of some of the largest insurers were downgraded to negative from stable heading into this year, as investors were warned of a stagnant if not shrinking market for private plans

So much for O's enemy list - I swear it is like we are in Communist Russia and his Admin is the KGB. Fox, Insurance Co, Chambmer of Commerce, Congressional Budget Office (when they would not support his numbers)...and probably many more

[breannaw]

Charles Krauthammer has it right on here with his remarks.

www.hotair.com

Krauthammer: Obama attacks on Bush “disgusting”posted at 9:30 am on October 28, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

When does a President stop blaming his predecessor and start taking responsibility for his own actions? To be fair, that has been an eternal question in the American context, but it does seem as though Barack Obama has a crutch that he refuses to put aside. Economy? Blame Bush! Media? Blame Bush! Afghanistan? Especially there, Charles Krauthammer argues, Obama has been “disgusting” in his blameshifting, especially since it has been six months since Obama rolled out his own strategy on the war (via Radio Vice Online):

I want to point out one thing about what Obama had said when he talked about “the long years of drift.” There is something truly disgusting about the way he cannot refrain from attacking Bush when he’s being defensive about himself. I mean, it’s beyond disgraceful here. He won election a year ago. He became the Commander [in] Chief two months later. He announced his own strategy — not the Bush strategy, his strategy — six months ago, and it wasn’t off-handed, it was in a major address, with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense standing with him. And now he’s still talking about “the drift” in the Bush years. What’s happening today is not a result of the drift, so-called, of the Bush years, it’s because of the drift in his years. It’s because of the flaws in his own strategy, which is what he’s actively examining.
Disgusting? At best, one can say that it shows a lack of intestinal fortitude when it comes to taking criticism. No President gets a tabula rasa on entering office, and every president since Washington has had to deal with issues that began during a previous term in office. It comes with the territory, which is why 42 other Presidents dispensed with the whining and took responsibility for their own actions.
Obama may have gotten himself elected by promising to be the not-Bush, and he certainly won his Nobel Peace Prize for being the not-Bush. However, if he wants to be President, he’ll need to start acting like it and quit sniveling about the fact that he won the election after Bush — which he himself chose to do.

[breannaw]

This is a fantastic example of the hypocrisy of the left, the NFL Comissioner and espicially the media. The NFL has no problem withb J Lo, or Fergie various disgusting misdeeds that demean women and promote drug use, sexual abuse, using the "N" word, pornography. It is NOT OK for Rush Limbaugh to say which was totally fabricated and made up. Those who reported on it were even forced to admit their LIES,yet Rush is not allowed to be a part owner of the Rams. This is disgusting behavior form the left and the NFL. Sadly, I have come to expect nothing else from them now.
I know this is now old news, but I wanted to post the comments from Rep. King because you are certainly not going to hear this on the LMSM.

Below is a transcript of a portion of today's House Judiciary Committee hearing on Capitol Hill. Rep. Steve King (R-IA) questioned NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell.

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

However, as I listened to the members of this committee discuss this and we've covered a lot of the territory, I note that Sheila Jackson Lee said that she is concerned that owners need the right image, and her opposition to who might be buying the St. Louis Rams, her reason for that is owners that might not have the right image. Now, she wasn't any more specific than that, but we know who she's talking about, and that's Rush Limbaugh. But I would ask Commissioner Goodell this question. Your position on owners have the right image, and I would direct it to your statement on the 13th of October where you said, 'I think it's divisive comments, or they are not what the NFL is all about. I would not want to see those kinds of comments from people who are in responsible positions within the NFL, no, absolutely not.' Now, I take you as a man of your word. But I would point out that you have a couple of owners that have performed lyrics in songs that are far more offensive. In fact, I don't think anything that Rush Limbaugh said was offensive, but with Fergie and with J. Lo, they have, between the two of them, alleged that the CIA are terrorists and liars, they've promoted sexual abuse of women, they've used the N-word, verbal pornography, recreational drug use, et cetera, and they are owners of the Dolphins,

And it is also ironic that Fergie was approved as an owner on the very day that you made your statement against Rush Limbaugh. And I would point out for the committee, the statement that Rush Limbaugh made is this -- that seems to be the one that survives the criticism, and that is: "I think what we've had here is a little social concern in the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. They're interested in black coaches and black quarterbacks doing well. McNabb got a lot of credit for the performance of the team that he really didn't deserve," close quote.

Now, I've scoured this quote to try to find something that can be implied as racism on the part of Rush Limbaugh, and I can't find it. There is an implication of racism on the part of the media. That's the only quote that seems to survive the scrutiny of chase-checking back original sources in at least nine quotes that were alleged to Rush Limbaugh. And, by the way, of those, eight are complete fabrications. They're not based on anything. They're not a misquote. They're not a distortion. They're complete fabrication. And the one that remains stands true and shines the light against the media, not against Rush Limbaugh. And so if you're concerned about this, Mr. Goodell, then I'd ask you, you know, are you prepared to level the same charges against Fergie and J. Lo, or are you prepared to apologize to Rush Limbaugh today?"

GOODELL: Let me try to take this in a couple of different directions. First off, my comments at the annual meeting were directed about specific comments he made about Donovan McNabb; and I made the point, and I will make it again here today, that the NFL is about bringing people together, it's about unity and that we do not -- we do not move towards divisive actions. And, in fact, our teams, I think, have demonstrated that both on and off the field. Nothing brings a team and a community together better than the NFL.

KING: But, Mr. Goodell, were you considering those other eight quotes that I referenced when you made your statement, or were you considering the one that is true, the one that I've read to you and the one that doesn't shine a negative light on Rush Limbaugh but upon the media?"

GOODELL: I'm not shining any kind of a light on Rush Limbaugh here. I am not an expert on this -- all of his quotes. And I would try to reinforce the -- something I said at the time. He was not even under active consideration as an NFL owner. This is -- I met -- stated this several times before, that we had not started a process to review ownership groups. He had -- they had not even determined to sell the St. Louis Rams, and it's something that" --

KING: Speaking directly of Rush Limbaugh, you said, "The comments that Rush made specifically about Donovan I disagree with very well strongly."

GOODELL: I do.

KING: You are speaking --

GOODELL: Because I think Donovan McNabb is an outstanding young man. He's an outstanding quarterback, and it has nothing to do with the color of his skin.

KING: I'll just close with this. Here are Rush Limbaugh's -- his position. And after 20 years on the radio, there's nothing there that would undermine this. He says, "My racial views? You mean my belief in a colorblind society where every individual is treated as a precious human being without regard to his race?' And I'll close with that, Mr. Goodell.

And I'd ask you to go back and take a look at the owners of the Dolphins and the language that's in the public venue, the songs that they recorded, review those lyrics, and I'll provide some of those lyric songs to you, and I'll ask you to come back and respond to that question after the hearing as to whether you'll put the same scrutiny on those owners who have really shined a negative light on the NFL as opposed to somebody that the NFL apparently just doesn't agree with his politics. I yield back.

[Tarynn@Elissa'smom]

A CEO's 6-month evaluation of Obama's performance:

http://www.manlyrash.com/blog/obamas...ormance-review

My 6 Month Evaluation of the Obama Presidency In November 2008, I drafted my evaluation of the Obama candidacy and what it might mean to America. I filed it away, but sent it to family members and a few close friends and associates, just so I’d be accountable for my real time observations. It’s now been 6 months since Obama’s inauguration. (In the business world, this is typically when a first job review would occur; so, I made a note to myself to revisit his performance on the 6-month anniversary.) Thus, I now commit to filing my mid-year evaluation of our new President. As well, I’ve put in the file (but not forwarded to anyone) a separate “background check” — the one the press should've done on the Obama candidacy prior to presenting him to the American public — in case this is ever of relevance as things unfold.

As concerned as I was by Obama’s candidacy when I wrote my November pre-election reservations, truth be known, I didn't much like McCain/Palin either. At the time, I still had hopes that Obama might “govern from the center.” Six months into it, however, I can say that he’s been considerably worse than my worst fears. Thus, I’m updating my evaluation — this time with the fervent hope that by the year-end I can be genuinely more optimistic.

At worst, Obama’s aims seem truly radical (if stealth); his methods pure Alinsky; and his success derivative of obfuscating the truth, creating crises, and rushing changes into law that no one can possibly absorb under artificial deadlines — all aimed at limiting private property rights, changing the Constitution and forever altering our free market system and so; for those who consider Obama’s training and background irrelevant, they can now evaluate him as a Commander-in-Chief and CEO from what he’s done over his first 6 months.

Among many other things, these evidences have come in the form of:

1. A $787B “stimulus” package (sold as preventing a “crisis from becoming catastrophe”)

2. The failure to focus on addressing the banking crisis as “Job One”

3. The migration of TARP funds to non-banking concerns, including the auto industry

4. Announcing tax increases in the middle of a recession

5. Failure to identify projects to fund job creation (Thus, <10% of stimulus yet to be spent)

6. Announcing that there would be “no pork” or “earmarks” in the “stimulus” package in order to get it passed without review when there were nearly 10,000 buried in the unread bill (including a $9B high-speed rail line to Las Vegas for Harry Reid )

7. Bailouts of the banking and auto industries

8. The appointment of a 31-year-old to manage the revitalization on of the auto companies

9. The exalting of union claims above those of bondholders (violating a 200+ year history of contract law/property rights)

10. The appointment of 34 unvetted “czars” -- creating more than in the House of Romanov between 1762 and 1917!

11. The failure to appoint a Cabinet of tax-paying, competent Americans (Reason for the move to the Czar system of administration?)

12. The appointment of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court despite some questions about her lack of qualifications and judicial temperament.

13. The dark-of-night passage of “Cap and Trade” legislation (300-page-long addendum inserted at 3 am the morning of the vote in the House)

14. The high pressure tactics to rush through a budget-busting $1.6 Trillion takeover of our National Healthcare System.

15. Phony “townhall” meetings with a fake cross-section of Americans selling Obamacare on ABC.

16. “Lying” about budget deficits — projecting 4% GDP growth by year-end.

17. “Lying” about job losses — projecting that if Congress would just ram through the “stimulus” that job losses could be halted at 8% (currently on their way to 10% and rising).

18. “Lying” about the costs of nationalized healthcare -- (just as when politicians projected Medicare’s cost in 1990 to be $3 billion, its actual cost turned out in 1990 to $98 billion — 30 times as much)

19. Pretending that new entitlement programs will provide lower costs, better care, no significant tax increases, more competition (as government joins the fray!) and keeping current private options. Claiming “free” healthcare will make America more competitive is baffling. Everyone knows the above are lies; but no one seems ready to call them out.

20. Forcing the “stimulus” package on states to impinge on“States Rights.”

21. Failing to support the freedom-loving citizens in Honduras and Iran (and instead, giving comfort to their dictators) to say nothing of his ineffectiveness with North Korea and his anti-Israeli pronouncements.

22. Allocating $4 Billion of “stimulus” funds to ACORN, the voter fraud thugs.

23. Seeking to push through Union Card Check, the so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” and threats to take away 2nd Amendment rights (see Eric Holder), etc.

24. Moving the heretofore non-partisan 2010 National Census into the White House under the direction of Rahm Emanuel.

More at the link.

[breannaw]

Thanks for the post Tarynn@Elissasmom. I would give him a HUGE F
he has done nothing good or right.
With the way things have been in my life recently, I would be mortified (just like a poster who started a thread saying she is related to Gov.Palin,)to find out I am related to him. That is absurd and so is her entire thread related to her HATRED for Gov. Palin.

I am happy that she has endorsed our Gov. here in TX. I hope they campaign together here in my area. I like Gov. Perry and I hope he beats Kay Bailey Hutchison. I like her ok, but I trust Gov. Perry more. I am ok with former VP Cheney endorsing Kay Bailey Hutchison. They have somewhat of a history together, with both of them being in Washington together all these years.

[moxie]

Originally Posted by breannaw

I would be mortified (just like a poster who started a thread saying she is related to Gov.Palin,)to find out I am related to him. That is absurd and so is her entire thread related to her HATRED for Gov. Palin.

Bre, since this post obviously is in reference to the thread I just started about my shared ancestry with Sarah Palin, I will respond to it here. Since my thread has nothing to do with Obama, it would have been nice if we could have addressed my Palin posts in the Palin thread. But whatever ...

At any rate, I have never, ever expressed HATRED for ex-Gov. Palin. Not in any post and certainly not in an entire thread. Dislike of some of her policies, yes. Hatred for the person, never.

Also: Family history experts have established that Obama, via his mother's side, shares ancestry with several U.S. Presidents (including both George Bushes), as well as Dick Cheney. So if you are related to the Bush family, you also are related to Obama ...

[Tarynn@Elissa'smom]

Michele Bachmann has asked for Americans to show up on the front steps of the Capitol Building at noon on Thursday, Nov. 5th to confront Congress about the Health Care Reform bills now being considered. I cannot afford to go. I can, however, fax a proxy to her office. Please do the same. Please copy and paste this on to every blog you can. We need millions of proxies to arrive at her office in time for her to be able to represent all of us.

Michelle Bachmann
Washington Office

107 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-2331
Fax: (202) 225-6475

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/65...-on-healthcare

[breannaw]

Moxie, you have repeatedlydisplayed your intense feelings of disdain for Gov. Palin. We al know how you feel about her.
I would be HONOREDto be related to Pres. Bush and VP.Cheney. however I am not related to them.
Obama never. THANK GOD I am NOT related to Obama
Geeeeeesshhhh,

Tarynn@Elissasmom, I wish I could go to DC. I have school that I can't miss, so I will do that. Thank you for the information.

[moxie]

Bre, there is a difference between disdain and hatred, especially in a political sense.
Whatever my feelings are about Mrs. Palin, they have never approached hatred.
When she was running for VP, I would agree that "disdain" was a good word for how I felt.
These days, now that she's transformed herself into a professional celebrity, it's more like "intrigue"; I actually find her fascinating and will probably read her book.

Sarah actually shares ancestry with several Mayflower passengers, many U.S. presidents and royal lines in England. Of the four on the top tickets last fall, the degree of links to earliest American top leaders went like this: Palin, Obama, Biden and McCain.

Bre, if you have any grandparents or great-grandparents of English ancestry (millions of Americans do), it is quite possible that your links to Bush and/or Palin are closer than you think.
Obviously, not at a 1st or 2nd cousin level (you would know that), but possibly back to the
7th or 8th great-grandparent. If you'd like, you could PM me with the name of the grandparent you think is most likely to be English & include birth date & state, death date & state & name of the spouse. No other personal information is needed. I'm a member of ancestry.com & know how to search, so I might be able to find some interesting info that I could relay to you, also privately.

And this offer is open to anyone else at MKF (but my expertise is solely with English lines);
I think family history is fascinating.

[breannaw]

Originally Posted by moxie

Bre, there is a difference between disdain and hatred, especially in a political sense.
Whatever my feelings are about Mrs. Palin, they have never approached hatred.
When she was running for VP, I would agree that "disdain" was a good word for how I felt.
These days, now that she's transformed herself into a professional celebrity, it's more like "intrigue"; I actually find her fascinating and will probably read her book.

Sarah actually shares ancestry with several Mayflower passengers, many U.S. presidents and royal lines in England. Of the four on the top tickets last fall, the degree of links to earliest American top leaders went like this: Palin, Obama, Biden and McCain.

Bre, if you have any grandparents or great-grandparents of English ancestry (millions of Americans do), it is quite possible that your links to Bush and/or Palin are closer than you think.
Obviously, not at a 1st or 2nd cousin level (you would know that), but possibly back to the
7th or 8th great-grandparent. If you'd like, you could PM me with the name of the grandparent you think is most likely to be English & include birth date & state, death date & state & name of the spouse. No other personal information is needed. I'm a member of ancestry.com & know how to search, so I might be able to find some interesting info that I could relay to you, also privately.

And this offer is open to anyone else at MKF (but my expertise is solely with English lines);
I think family history is fascinating.

Ok maybe my use of that word was harsh and I am sorry for saying what I did in that matter.

If I am correct, my family as far back as I know, are from Scotland and Ireland, so that would interesting to learn more about who we may or may not be related to. I would have to get their names and birth dates. I don't even know if we would have them. I wish my mom was here, she probably had all that in her head. She could remember anyones birthdate, whether they were still in her life or not.When my mother passed away, I think my aunt took that stuff. I don't exactly like her, and try to avoid her as much as I can. ONe of the reasons I moved into my own place recently was to get away fron her because she was always coming over to our house for no reason too. I don't think my father knows any of that. I'll see what I can come up with. I sincerely appreciate your offer. That is vey generous of you.

[moxie]

Bre, thanks for your kind words. If you know that there is a lot of Scotch & Irish in your background, then there is a decent chance that some of your ancestry can be traced back to the 1700s; that's when many of those lines arrived in the U.S. (Similar to the John McCain lineage.) I bet your dad knows the names of his parents (and probably also the parents of his parents), where they were born (at least the state) & the approximate dates of birth and death. That's one set of grandparents. His marriage certificate to your late mom likely lists the names & birth locations of her parents (no need to get the aunt involved); that's your other set of grandparents. Your dad is likely to remember which of all those people had a family history "going way back"; people talked about that more in the past then they do now.
So start with that person and get as much info from your dad as you can. (Even if his memory is not so good, there will likely be enough there for some good clues.)
I bet you'll be surprised how much can be found out.

[breannaw]

Yes, dad knows his parents names, birthdates and such!. I was talking about great grandparents and so on. Dad has no problem with his memory. I wish he did sometimes.!!.

My grandparents suffered from illnesses and stuff when dad came along.They didn't keep a lot of records. I would have to talk with him about it. My dad didn't exactly have an ideal childhood. Actually. My mother also. Her mother was toooo busy being a hypercondriac (sp?). my grandfather worked all the time.
My mothers side is from Scotland. I do know that. Both of them are gone. I think I might have something from the obituary from their funerals somewhere. I'll have to go to my dads and search for them. I won't have time for a few days because I should be doing homework now. I am snowed under with school right now.

[moxie]

No rush at all; you are right to concentrate on school.
Whenever you have some info (from what you've said, it might bebest to start on your dad's side), just let me know if you'd like me to check it out.

[breannaw]

You have got to see this. It is so pertinent to today. It is the Dragnet actors giving advice to someone, but they show Obama sitting there like he is listening. It is advice that would serve Obama well today Well worth watching

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cssU3I3SkH4

[breannaw]

Moxie,I forgot to thank you or your post. I would like to know as much family history as I can find out. I will get all that information and send you a PM when I can get some free time away from the books and other stuff. I appreciate your offer very much. Thank you. Not to be nosey or anything, but did you find anything you were not expecting when you did your research?

Well, so far good news in the election. So far, it's 2 out of 3. YAY!! I am surprised though that Hoffman is losing like he is.

Corzine spent a LOT of his own money and still lost. sucker!! Congrats to the Republicans. I hope they will take this momentum to the elections next year and stick it to the dems who are bent on destroying this great nation.

Well 2 out of 3 isn't bad. I was hoping for a victory with Hoffman, but it is not to be I don't believe. I hope the Reps can take this momemtum during the next election and take back America from Nobama before he damage is permanent. YAY Republicans!!!.

I would say the Congress and the Senate dems have some things to worry about next year. I hope so.

I am also happy that the gay marriage vote in Maine is LOSING.

republicans have taken 6 out of 7 of the Republ, races in Pennzylvania, and maybe even 7 out of 7. AWESOME ngiht for the Republicans across America. I think this will bode well for the Repubs next NOv.

[breannaw]

This is an example of just how badly the dems are spinning last nights schelacking they got in the elections. They have absolutely no class at all.. Someone told Glen Beck and his 9-12 project to go to HE**.It is disgusting behavior from everyone. I expect nothing less from them though.

http://newsbusters.org/

[breannaw]

I got this is an email thought I would post it. I was going to just let it go, but it is just toooo important to let go. Obama, Pelosi,Reid.. and the others have got to be stopped from destroying this country. The thinge in this health care bill will astound you. I cannnot even fathom ANYONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND SUPPORTING THIS HORRIFIC BILL. WE deserve BETTER.

Subject: FW: Doctor's Letter to Sen. Evan Bayh (very informative)

You'd better pray for perfect health the rest of your life!

Subject: An Indianapolis doctor's letter to Sen. Bayh about the Bill (Note: Dr. Stephen E. Frazer, MD practices as an anesthesiologist in Indianapolis , IN )

Here is a letter I sent to Senator Bayh. Feel free to copy it and send it around to all other representatives. -- Stephen Fraser

Senator Bayh,

As a practicing physician I have major concerns with the health care bill before Congress. I actually have read the bill and am shocked by the brazenness of the government's proposed involvement in the patient-physician relationship. The very idea that the government will dictate and ration patient care is dangerous and certainly not helpful in designing a health care system that works for all. Every physician I work with agrees that we need to fix our health care system, but the proposed bills currently making their way through congress will be a disaster if passed.

I ask you respectfully and as a patriotic American to look at the following troubling lines that I have read in the bill. You cannot possibly believe that these proposals are in the best interests of the country and our fellow citizens.

Page 22 of the HC Bill: Mandates that the Govt will audit books of all employers that self-insure!!

Page 30 Sec 123 of HC bill: THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get.

Page 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill: YOUR HEALTH CARE IS RATIONED!!!

Page 42 of HC Bill: The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC benefits for you. You have no choice!

Page 50 Section 152 in HC bill: HC will be provided to ALL non-US citizens, illegal or otherwise.

Page 58 HC Bill: Govt will have real-time access to individuals' finances & a 'National ID Health card' will be issued!

Page 59 HC Bill lines 21-24: Govt will have direct access to your bank accounts for elective funds transfer.

Page 65 Sec 164: Is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in unions & community organizations: (ACORN).

Page 84 Sec 203 HC bill: Govt mandates ALL benefit packages for private HC plans in the 'Exchange.'

Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans -- The Govt will ration your health care!

Page 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill: Govt mandates linguistic appropriate services. (Translation: illegal aliens.)

Page 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18: The Govt will use groups (i.e. ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Govt HC plan.

Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans. (AARP members - your health care WILL be rationed!)

Page 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill: Medicaid eligible individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. (No choice.)

Page 12 4 lines 24-25 HC: No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Govt monopoly.

Page 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill: Doctors/ American Medical Association - The Govt will tell YOU what salary you can make.

Page 145 Line 15-17: An Employer MUST auto-enroll employees into public option plan. (NO choice!)

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

Page 149 Lines 16-24: ANY Employer with payroll 401k & above who does not provide public option will pay 8% tax on all payroll! (See the last comment in parenthesis.)

Page 150 Lines 9-13: A business with payroll between $251K & $401K who doesn't provide public option will pay 2-6% tax on all payroll.

Page 167 Lines 18-23: ANY individual who doesn't have acceptable HC according to Govt will be taxed 2.5% of income.

Page 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill: Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (Americans will pay.)

Page 195 HC Bill: Officers & employees of the GOVT HC Admin. will have access to ALL Americans' finances and personal records.

Page 203 Line 14-15 HC: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." (Yes, it really says that!)

Page 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill: Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid Seniors. (Low-income and the poor are affected.)

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

Page 253 Line 10-18: The Govt sets the value of a doctor's time, profession, judgment, etc. (Literally-- the value of humans.)

Page 265 Sec 1131: The Govt mandates and controls productivity for "private" HC industries.

Page 268 Sec 1141: The federal Govt regulates the rental and purchase of power driven wheelchairs.

Page 272 SEC. 1145: TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!

Page 280 Sec 1151: The Govt will penalize hospitals for whatever the Govt deems preventable (i.e...re-admissions).

Page 298 Lines 9-11: Doctors: If you treat a patient during initial admission that results in a re-admission -- the Govt will penalize you.

Page 317 L 13-20: PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. (The Govt tells doctors what and how much they can own!)

Page 317-318 lines 21-25, 1-3: PROHIBITION on expansion. (The Govt is mandating that hospitals cannot expand.)

Page 321 2-13: Hospitals have the opportunity to apply for exception BUT community input is required. (Can you say ACORN?)

Page 335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339: The Govt mandates establishment of=2 outcome-based measures. (HC the way they want -- rationing.)

Page 341 Lines 3-9: The Govt has authority to disqualify Medicare Advance Plans, HMOs, etc. (Forcing people into the Govt plan.)

Page 354 Sec 1177: The Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of 'special needs people!' Unbelievable!

Page 379 Sec 1191: The Govt creates more bureaucracy via a "Tele-Health Advisory Committee." (Can you say HC by phone?)

Page 425 Lines 4-12: The Govt mandates "Advance-Care Planning Consult." (Think senior citizens end-of-life patients.)

Page 425 Lines 17-19: The Govt will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. (And it's mandatory!)

Page 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3: The Govt provides an "approved" list of end-of-life resources; & guiding you in death. (Also called 'assisted suicide.')

Page 427 Lines 15-24: The Govt mandates a program for orders on "end-of-life." (The Govt has a say in how your life ends!)

Page 429 Lines 1-9: An "advanced-care planning consultant" will be used frequently as a patient's health deteriorates.

Page 429 Lines 10-12: An "advanced care consultation" may include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. (AN ORDER TO DIE FROM THE GOVERNMENT?!?)

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

Page 430 Lines 11-15: The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end-of-life! (Again -- no choice!)

Page 469: Community-Based Home Medical Services = Non-Profit Organizations. (Hello? ACORN Medical Services here!?!)

Page 489 Sec 1308: The Govt will cover marriage and family therapy. (Which means Govt will insert itself into your marriage even.)

Page 494-498: Govt will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, and rationing those services.

Senator, I guarantee that I personally will do everything possible to inform patients and my fellow physicians about the dangers of the proposed bills you and your colleagues are debating.

Furthermore, if you vote for a bill that enforces socialized medicine on the country and destroys the doctor-patient relationship, I will do everything in my power to make sure you lose your job in the next election.

Respectfully,

Stephen E. Fraser, MD

[breannaw]

This is so typical behavior during campaigns. They'll say anything to get elected then as soon as they are in office, their true colors come shinging out. Such as what Congressman Owends did just ONE HOUR after being sworn in.HE BROKE 4 campaign promises one hour after being sworn in. He's just like Obama, He has been in office almost a year and look what all he has done to destroy this country. Owens in office one hour and is already lying his backside off. Thye are so corrupt and such evil pathalogical LIARS. I don't think that put together the Pres. of Clinton and Carter could come close to being as evil and corrupt as Obama and now Ownes seems to be cut from the same cloth. The democrat party is full of evil. I am sure there has to be at least ONE person in that party that is a decent person. Sadly.I cannot think of one. Certainly not one that I could trust and believe.

GOUVERNEUR, NY - Congressman-elect Bill Owens was sworn in at noon today.

Owens indicated in a press release released shortly afterwards that he was now in favor of the the "Affordable Healthcare for America Act" bill in direct contrast to his earlier position during the election campaign.

According to Politico.com, Mr. Owens assured voters that he felt the public option had no place in the health care reform bill. Contrary to that position, Mr. Owens now indicates that he intends to vote in favor of the bill even though it now contains a public option.