| Back to the Oregon State Page |
|
11/08/09 09:00 AM - 11/08/09 4:30 PM
Categories: Education, Civil Liberties, Health Freedom, Grassroots News, Action Item, Just For Fun, Social Issues Tags: |
Comments (3)
[This bill having already passed the Michigan House, the resolution is passed! Thanks to David Dudenhoefer for posting this. --Adam] About a month ago, a coalition of liberty advocates descended onto Lansing Michigan to remind our legislators of one key aspect of our US Constitution. Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Globalism, Civil Liberties, Law, Grassroots News, Revolution, State Legislation Tags: Bruce Patterson, HCR 006, SCR 004 |
Comments (10)
The "Model State Health Emergency Act" was created by the Rockefeller funded Center of Disease Control (CDC) to promote "health security" legislation for the States. Oregon adopted part of it's provisions in 2003 and may have adopted more. I am told to enlist the help of favorable representatives to direct their legal counsel to discover any Oregon law relating to health pandemonium. In a nutshell, the MSHEA (illegally) authorizes the Governor to declare a health pandemic with the prodding of the WHO and/or CDC, which would then allow military control of the population, force "vaccine" injections, and quarantine resisters. Rolling roadblocks (choke points) will check people for compliance. If you do not have your papers (e.g. RFID bracelet), you can be injected or sent to a FEMA camp for indefinite quarantine. People will not be able to get food, attend to their daily affairs, or travel freely. This Hell on Earth is reportedly to begin mid October 2009. Any force upon ones body violates the 4th Amendment of the U.S Constitution, but that has never stopped evil - only good men and women can do that. Douglas county has already started this with Sheriff Hanlin using concealed handgun license holders. I am told the Grant county Sheriff could be favorable too. I have met with Marion county Acting Sheriff Jason Myers to gauge his Constitutional awareness and willingness and found he is reluctant to go against bureaucracy. The next step is to have him fill out the "Sheriff Project" questionnaire, which will then be publicly accessible from the website and provide a starting point for activists to transform him. Mary of Childhoodshots.com has also created an 8 point plan which includes a flier listing the dangerous, toxic, untested, and even illegal vaccine ingredients along with a petition for the Sheriff's protective pledge which can be used to build the Sheriff's confidence to do the right thing by seeing he has the support of his constituents. Other references: The Model State Emergency Health Powers Act Any further proof or clarification is encouraged. This is too serious an issue to ignore. "The Insiders do not care what you know - they care what you do about it."
Categories: Health Freedom, Action Item, Federal Legislation, State Legislation Tags: vaccine vaccination martial military |
Comments (4)
I find this to be a wonderful example of how truth shines through the darkness. This would not be possible without the average Joe taking the reigns and demanding that the truth be recognized. I wish to thank all of you that made this possible and ask that you continue to press for liberty because times like these are priceless. Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Finance, Globalism, Grassroots News, Current Events, Socialism, Economy Tags: |
No comments yet.
Obamacare to be 1 big 'death panel' Posted: August 20, 2009 By Richard Poe
Editor's note: Have you wondered what Sarah Palin is talking about when she refers to Obamacare's "death panels"? Does government health care really mean rationing - which is to say, denial - of medical care for the elderly and infirm? What is it about Obama's health-care advisers that has critics up in arms? Following is an excerpt of a shocking investigative report published in the August edition of Whistleblower magazine, titled "MEDICAL MURDER: Why Obamacare could result in the early deaths of millions of baby boomers." President Obama has promised huge cuts in medical spending. In fact, he has warned that, if America fails to make such cuts, it will face financial Armageddon. "Make no mistake: the cost of our health care is a threat to our economy...," Obama told the American Medical Association in Chicago June 15. "It is a ticking time bomb for the federal budget. And it is unsustainable for the United States of America. ... If we fail to act, one out of every five dollars we earn will be spent on health care within a decade. And if we fail to act, federal spending on Medicaid and Medicare... will eventually grow larger than what our government spends on anything else today." To avoid this catastrophe, America must make drastic cuts in health spending, says Obama. The size of his proposed cuts varies from speech to speech, but the figure cited most often by Obama's advisers is 30 percent per year - up to $700 billion annually. A 30-percent annual cut is going to take a big bite out of somebody's health care. The only question is whose. The numbers make clear that most of these cuts will have to come at the expense of those who need health care the most - the elderly, the disabled and the gravely ill. "Older, sicker societies pay more on health care than younger, healthier ones," Obama told the AMA. He is right. According to a 2006 study by the Department of Health and Human Services, five percent of the U.S. population accounts for nearly 50 percent of health care spending in America. Who are those five percent? Most are people over 65 years of age with serious, chronic illnesses. By contrast, the study notes, half of the U.S. population "spends little or nothing on health care... with annual medical spending below $664 per person." These, of course, are mostly healthy young people - people without serious, chronic illnesses. Obviously, Obama will not meet his cost-cutting targets by reducing care to healthy young people. They are already spending next to nothing. It is the old, the dying and the chronically ill whose health care he will cut. The numbers make this clear. At present, the main vehicle of Obamacare is the so-called America's Affordable Health Choices Act, introduced on June 9. This law will force Americans to enroll in "qualified" health plans - that is, plans approved and controlled by the government. Americans will be invited to "choose" between "public" and "private" insurance plans, but will find little difference between them. "Public" or "private," they will all follow the same rules, dictated by the Department of Health and Human Services - the same agency, incidentally, which issued the report, titled "The High Concentration of U.S. Health Care Expenditures, 2006." How will Obama cut costs? His June 13 radio speech gave some hints. Obama said his plan would provide "incentives" to doctors to "avoid unnecessary hospital stays, treatments and tests that drive up costs." And what sort of treatment does Obama consider "unnecessary?" In an ABC News special June 24, he implied medical treatment might be wasted on elderly people with grave illnesses, citing his own grandmother as an example. Dying of cancer, with less than a year to live, Obama's grandmother broke her hip. "[T]he question was, does she get hip replacement surgery, even though she was fragile enough they were not sure how long she would last?" asked the president. It turns out that Obama's grandmother did get the hip replacement - though he did not say so on ABC that night. Obama left the story about his grandmother unfinished, but went on to suggest that other people faced with such choices might do well to forget about surgery and settle instead for palliative or comfort care - treatment that helps you feel better while you are dying, but does not prolong your life. "Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller," Obama concluded. It's already happening in Europe In Europe, governments already ration health care, just as Obama plans to do here. The older and sicker people are, the less care they get. In England, for example, bureaucrats determine a patient's eligibility for health care using the QALY system (quality-adjusted life years). They divide the cost of treatment by the number of "quality" years the patient is expected to live. Older, sicker patients are expected to live fewer "quality" years, so why bother treating them at all? On this basis, British elders are routinely denied treatment for cancer, heart disease and other deadly illnesses. Many die in filthy, overcrowded hospitals or nursing homes, rife with pestilence, including the deadly, antibiotic-resistant "superbugs" Clostridium difficile and MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus). Each year in the U.K., nearly three times more people die from hospital infections than from traffic accidents. In the nation where Florence Nightingale invented modern nursing 150 years ago, cleanliness has become a lost art. British newspapers reported in 2007 that patients in government hospitals were told to "go in their beds" when they had diarrhea. In March 2009, British health inspectors reported that poor treatment at one hospital may have killed up to 1,200 people in three years. That's 1,200 people at just one hospital. Denied food, water and medicine, patients at Stafford Hospital in Staffordshire were left screaming in agony, drinking from flowerpots and lying helpless in their own waste. Many waited for operations which were repeatedly postponed. British officials were quick to label the Stafford horror an "isolated incident." But many health care professionals in England say it is typical. Unfortunately, dissenters have little voice in Britain's National Health Service. The system is notoriously hostile to whistleblowers. Take Margaret Haywood, for instance, a nurse of 20 years, who went undercover for the BBC, filming abuse and neglect of elderly patients at Royal Sussex Hospital. In April 2009, British health authorities punished Haywood for going to the press, banning her from practicing nursing. If she had complaints, they told her, she should have made them through proper channels. In England, whitewashing medical scandals is a bipartisan activity. Conservative and liberal politicians alike defend the National Health Service from all critics. After a harrowing stay at the Royal United Hospital in Bath, Lord Benjamin Mancroft, a Conservative member of the House of Lords, spoke out in Parliament, declaring, "It is a miracle that I am still alive." He described "filthy" wards that were "never cleaned" and nurses who were "grubby... slipshod, lazy... drunken and promiscuous." Fellow Tories denounced Lord Mancroft for defaming British medicine. But his observations may help explain why Royal United Hospital leads Britain in superbug fatalities, having racked up 306 superbug deaths in four years. Government health care supposedly works better in France. But in August 2003, when temperatures in France soared to 104 degrees Fahrenheit, nearly 15,000 elderly people dropped dead - that is, 15,000 more than the average or expected death rate for that time of year. Most died in institutions, such as government-run nursing homes, which lacked air conditioning and other basic amenities. Time magazine reported that deaths from the heat wave in France were "geometrically higher than anywhere else in sunbaked Europe," thanks to "a chronically underfunded and understaffed elder care system." Less money, less care For 20 years, health care reformers from Edward Kennedy to Hillary Clinton have praised the government-run health systems of Europe and Canada. Obama and his team have taken up the same cry. A June 1 report from Obama's Council of Economic Advisers praised European health care and urged Americans to emulate it. If health care is so abominable in Europe, why did Obama's economic advisers commend it? Simple. It's cheaper. Titled "The Economic Case for Health Care Reform," the report noted that six countries - Canada, Germany, Japan, Sweden, Britain and France - spend only 9.6 percent of their Gross Domestic Product on health care, while America spends 15.3 percent. It recommended bringing our health spending down to European levels through "efficiency improvements in the U.S. healthcare system." This is the dirty secret behind the movement for universal health care. Its true purpose is to cut medical care, not increase it. Every plan put forth by health care "reformers" in the last 20 years features drastic cuts - not increases - in health spending. During her 2008 presidential run, for example, Hillary Clinton vowed to slash medical spending in America by $120 billion per year. Obama says he will cut even more. With "the right kind of cost-effectiveness," Obama's chief economic adviser Lawrence H. Summers told MSNBC's "Meet the Press" on April 19, "we could take as much as $700 billion a year out of our health care system." Current annual health spending in America is about $2.5 trillion, so Obama and his team are talking about a 30-percent cut. It happens that the Health Care Financing Administration, or HCFA, reports that 27-30 percent of annual Medicare spending goes to end-of-life care for the elderly - specifically, health care during the last year of life. These figures suggest Obama could meet his target of a 30-percent cut simply by denying treatment to the sickest and feeblest of America's elderly - those with a life expectancy of one year or less. Obama's special adviser for health policy, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, appears to have something like that in mind. In a Jan. 31 article in the British medical journal Lancet, Emanuel advised steering health dollars toward the young and fit; specifically those between the ages of 15 and 40, while reducing health spending for the elderly. Weirdly, Emanuel - along with his co-authors Govind Persad and Alan Wertheimer - made a special point of arguing that age-weighted medical rationing does not violate the rules of political correctness. They wrote: "Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination ... Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years. Treating 65-year-olds differently because of stereotypes or falsehoods would be ageist; treating them differently because they have already had more life-years is not." In other words, to put it crudely, deciding to let the elderly die because we think of them in "stereotypical" terms - say, as useless old dodderers -would be "ageism." However, letting them die for a "good" reason - for example, because they have already had their chance at life, and now it's time to give someone else a chance - is perfectly OK. In Emanuel's view, letting old people die is not the problem. The problem is finding the right words to justify it. Words are very important to Emanuel - for example, the words of the Hippocratic Oath. He blames the Hippocratic Oath for much of what he considers wrong in American medicine. Until the 1970s, all doctors swore this oath upon graduating medical school. It is believed to have been written by the Greek physician Hippocrates of Cos, the father of modern medicine, some 2,400 years ago. The oath forbids doctors to kill, and expressly forbids administering any "deadly drug" or performing an abortion. For that reason, it has fallen out of favor with modern medical schools, which often use edited versions of the oath, or different oaths entirely, written in modern times. Still, the tradition of Hippocrates dies hard. Doctors still honor him, and many feel guilty when they violate his precepts. Emanuel would like to steer modern medicine away from the Hippocratic tradition. In a June 18, 2008, article in the Journal of the American Medical Association, he wrote that strict adherence to the Hippocratic Oath caused "overuse" of medical care. "Medical school education and postgraduate training emphasize thoroughness," he complained. "When evaluating a patient, students, interns, and residents are trained to identify and praised for and graded on enumerating all possible diagnoses and tests that would confirm or exclude them. The thought is that the more thorough the evaluation, the more intelligent the student or house officer." Particularly galling to Emanuel is "the Hippocratic Oath's admonition to 'use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment'" which he says "doctors interpret as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of cost or effect on others." Emanuel would like to see less thoroughness and more cost-cutting. Instead of being "thorough" and "meticulous," doctors should be "prudent" in assessing how much time, effort and money each patient is worth, for the greater good of society, he argues. Evidently, President Obama likes what Dr. Emanuel is preaching. In December 2008, Obama made him special adviser for health policy to the White House Office of Management and Budget. Given Emanuel's views, it can be expected that age-weighted rationing will figure prominently in Obama's health care "reforms." Should Obamacare become the law of this land, many of those 80 million Americans born between 1946 and 1965 can look forward confidently to a nasty, European-style death. It is already happening in Oregon You don't have to go to Europe to see age-weighted rationing at work. Just take a look at Oregon. Its state-run Oregon Health Plan works very much as our president says Obamacare will work. Barbara Wagner of Springfield, Ore., was diagnosed with lung cancer in 2005. Chemotherapy and radiation put her cancer into remission. But the cancer returned in May 2008. Wagner's doctor prescribed Tarceva, a pill which slows cancer growth. There was a good chance it might extend her life by a few weeks or even months. At age 64, Wagner had two sons, three daughters, 15 grandchildren and seven great-grandchildren. Every moment she could spend with her loved ones was precious. But Oregon's health commissars nixed the plan. Her Tarceva treatment would cost $4,000 per month. Wagner was going to die anyway, so why waste the money? Wagner received a letter stating that the Oregon Health Plan would not approve any treatment for her "that is meant to prolong life, or change the course of the disease ..." However, if Wagner opted for physician-assisted suicide, Oregon would be happy to pick up the tab, said the letter. Physician-assisted suicide is legal in Oregon and costs only about $50. "It was horrible," Wagner told reporters. "To say to someone, we'll pay for you to die, but not pay for you to live, it's cruel. Who do they think they are?" Wagner finally got her Tarceva when the manufacturer Genentech offered to supply it free of charge. She died in October 2008. A humble, retired schoolbus driver, Wagner touched more people in death than she had in life. Local and national press picked up her story, alerting many Americans to the danger of medical rationing. One person who remains untouched by her story is Dr. Walter Shaffer, who heads Oregon's Division of Medical Assistance Programs, which runs the Oregon Health Plan. Regarding the Wagner case, Shaffer told the Eugene Register-Guard, "We can't cover everything for everyone. Taxpayer dollars are limited for publicly funded programs. We try to come up with policies that provide the most good for the most people." Equally unsympathetic is Barack Obama, who views Oregon's medical rationing system as a model for the nation. On March 23, 2008, asked to comment on Oregon's assisted suicide law, candidate Obama told the Mail Tribune of southern Oregon: "I think that the people of Oregon did a service for the country in recognizing that as the population gets older we've got to think about issues of end-of-life care." The preceding is excerpted from the shocking August edition of Whistleblower, titled "MEDICAL MURDER: Why Obamacare could result in the early deaths of millions of baby boomers." Until the end of August, Whistleblower subscription and renewal prices are being rolled back to 2002 levels, and you will also receive a FREE copy of either "Glenn Beck's Common Sense" or "Liberty and Tyranny" by Mark Levin. To get the whole, incredible story of Obamacare that no other news organization is willing to tell, subscribe to Whistleblower now. Media outlets can contact WND for interviews on President Obama's health care plan by e-mailing WND. <script type="text/javascript">
Categories: Health Freedom, Current Events Tags: Oregon health care obamacare |
No comments yet.
There will be a Mass Action Day to deliver petitions on S604 to the Senators offices on Sept. 15th.While we seem to have the House locked up now we need to focus on the Senate. There are petitions available on the C4L site or I have some (courtesy of Lyn Riverstone) that hold more signatures per page. And while we have made it roughly 2/3rds of the way, the Senate is very important. I cannot stress the importance of the follow up that is needed here. One of the many bonuses that I think folks need to know is that we have a broad range of other organizatons that have signed up to help us in our fight. These are an important assets that have come to us through the hard work of fellow patriots and we would be foolish not to capitalize on the opportunity that has been laid in our hands. We will be discussing strategy at our BBQ on Sat. the 22nd. If you cannot make it on Sat. then by all means give me a shout so we can go over the possibilities. As of right know our Mass Action Day will be scheduled for your local Senators office. Now is the time to round up the troops. call the media, and enjoy the opportunity to confront your elected "representatives". The Mass Action Days will be held for Senator Wyden at: 1220 SW 3rd Avenue, Suite 585 For Jeff Merkley at: One World Trade Center 495 State Street 405 East 8th Avenue Jamison Building 10 South Bartlett Street I thank you all for your commitment to the fight for liberty. None of this would be possible without your desire to make a difference. Thank you all, Michael Matthews Oregon Interim State Coordinator Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Finance, Media, Action Item, Just For Fun, Revolution, Social Issues, Voting, Economy Tags: |
No comments yet.
Wow! This time around was a completely different ball game.
Rep. Kurt Schrader held a town hall meeting at 9 this morning at a seniors center in Salem in conjunction with (Oregon state) Senator Peter Courtney and (Oregon state) Rep. Brian Clem (all Democrats). These 3 men all are deemed to represent me, so it's certainly apt that I should be there, and I was. The topic du jour was "health care reform". Hmmm.
I got to the event just a few minutes before it began, and found a queue of dozens of people lined up to get in the door of the senior center. As I took my place in the slow march, a news team from KGW TV news approached the queue to get some face-in-the-crowd interviews. They began with a woman just behind me, asking a rather generic question, something like "what brings you out to this town hall meeting" or whatever. My first clue that this event might not be the chorus of leftists calling for gummint health care occurred when the woman (probably in her 60s or 70s, by the sound of her voice -- I didn't turn around to look at her) replied that she was worried about the government taking over the health care industry.
Probably an exception, thought I. Surely most of these other good folks are paid to be here, or otherwise eager for socialism. ...WRONG. While there certainly were plenty of those types in attendance, as the meeting (SRO in a room which holds 350) progressed, the crowd grew restless, and the majority of them were voicing our concerns:
- How will all this be paid for? (New taxes and reducing existing inefficiencies)
- I've watched the government grow all my life; when are you going to reduce it? (Not right now)
- Isn't this bill a trojan horse? (It is "transformational")
- I'm a medical professional who spent 5 years helping the former Soviet Union clean up the mess which socialism made of their medical system; isn't this bill making us more of a 3rd-world country? (This isn't leading us to socialized medicine IMO)
And one you gotta love:
- Where does the Constitution state that health care is a right? (Where does it say it can't be one?)
As these questions -- and the boisterous, spontaneous crowd responses -- went on, it became obvious that the majority of the crowd was generally not only not clamoring for socialized medicine, but outright hostile and angry at the possibility. At least it sure seemed that way from my seat near the back of the room.
There is much more than what I can put into a blog entry without maing it a tome. The above is representative of the overall "flavor" of the event, though. I, like most who attended, never got to speak, so no "audit the Fed" moment occurred. However, what did occur was fascinating. I hope a video of the entire event surfaces (and it should; there were at least 4 tripod-mounted cameras around the edges of the room the whole time), because this was one town hall I won't soon forget. If you can get to one near you, DO IT! Categories: Domestic Policy, Health Freedom, Democratic Party, Grassroots News, Action Item, Federal Legislation, Current Events, Socialism, Congress Tags: |
Comments (2)
I'm ever amazed by how few people vote. Ann Arbor had an election today. (All of Michigan did, but all races were local.) I voted at 7:30pm, and was the last voter of the day, or close to it. The voting machine reported my ballot being the 26th of the day. The only race on the ballot was the primary for City Council. In overwhelmingly Democratic Ann Arbor, there was no Republican candidate, and two Democrats. My maxim is "when in doubt, vote non-incumbent," but I'd heard from several people that the incumbent was a good public servant, so I voted for him. Two important observations: first, my ward has nine precincts, about 12 miles in perimeter, 6 square in area, and is home to about 24,000 people. Extrapolating from turnout in my precinct, 26 * 9 / 2 + 1 = 122 votes were required to be elected to City Council and represent 24,000 people, on a panel of eleven controlling a budget of $89 million (up 6% from last year's budget of $84 million). It's that easy, folks. Second observation: Although my vote isn't public record, that I voted in this election is. So if I need anything from my Councilmember, I can count myself among the 1% of constituents who voted. That cuts me to the front of the line. If you want to prove the value of voting, the next time you speak with your elected official, watch the reaction when you say, "I vote in every election." It's easy to neglect voting. Don't. It's a cliché that "if you don't vote, you have no right to complain." But the flaw in the standard response, "there's no reason to vote if both candidates are bad," is that your vote can matter even if it doesn't affect the outcome, and you can prevent both candidates being bad by running yourself. A lot of revolutionaries view voting as accepting the political system's disagreeable terms, and don't vote. What a shame! Electoral punishment is sometimes the only kind of punishment a politician understands. Why forego the opportunity?! Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Election News, Philosophy, Revolution, Voting Tags: Ann Arbor, diebold |
Comments (36)
I got the following letter from my congressman David Wu. He had a few town hall meetings regarding the economy recently and got a very negative response from the people that were there. They really let him have it! We sent him petitions, and called him frequently. And it worked! The following is the letter I just got from him. Dear Ms. Brown: Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns with the transparency of the Federal Reserve. I appreciate knowing your thoughts on this important issue. I share your concerns with the accountability of the Federal Reserve. Congress created the Federal Reserve System in 1913 to serve as the central bank for the United States. The Federal Reserve formulates the nation's monetary policy, supervises and regulates banks, and provides a variety of financial services to depository financial institutions and the federal government. The System comprises three major components, the Board of Governors, a network of 12 Federal Reserve Banks, and member banks. Recently, however, the Federal Reserve has made a number of decisions I believe warrant closer scrutiny. The Federal Reserve has lent approximately $2.2 trillion to American financial institutions as part of the ongoing effort to revive the U.S. financial system. While I believe the Federal Reserve should remain an independent agency, I also believe Congress has a responsibility to ensure the central bank functions transparently and in the interest of the American taxpayer. With this in mind, I have cosponsored H.R. 1207, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009, which was introduced by Congressman Ron Paul (TX). The bill directs the Comptroller General to complete an audit of the Federal Reserve Board and of the Federal Reserve banks. This would be the first such audit in the nearly 100-year history of the Federal Reserve System. H.R. 1207 has been referred to the House Financial Services Committee for further consideration. I will continue working to ensure the Federal Reserve promulgates monetary policies that serve the interest of taxpayers. As I do, I will keep your thoughts in mind. Thank you again for sharing your views on this issue. If I can be further assistance, please contact my Oregon office at 503-326-2901 or 800-422-4003. With warm regards, Please do not respond to this message. This mailbox is unattended. If you wish to contact me, please use my website, www.house.gov/wu. Thank you. Categories: Ron Paul, Campaign For Liberty, Finance, Grassroots News, Action Item, Federal Legislation, Economy, Monetary Policy, Congress Tags: |
Comments (7)
Hi, my name is Jaynee Germond and I am running for US Congress, OR District 4 because I cannot continue to sit by idly, watching our economy and our rights spiraling downward. Our representatives in Congress are not helping; rather they are the ones causing the deterioration of the economy and the destruction of our constitutionally protected rights. We the People, are struggling to make ends meet with the money that our government allows us to keep, while our paid officials- our hired employees- are squandering our hard-earned money. Our country has been consumed by party politics, and we need to get beyond the 2-party system, which has blurred so much that it is now unrecognizable, and look at being Americans. The 2-party system has gotten us where we are today, with the ‘good of the party' taking a back seat only to "what will get me elected next time". I want to bring back a Congress that wants what is best for America first and foremost. Term limits would help that to become a reality, but term limits would require a Constitutional Convention. If a Constitutional convention is called, Congress is not limited in what they could change in our Constitution and the results could be devastating. "We the People" need to understand that we already have term limits and they are called elections. When our officials come up for re-election and they are long-term, career politicians we need to vote them out. If we limit our reps to 6-10 years maximum we would be much more productive in DC. There wouldn't be the impetus to worry about your own election as much. I belong to the Republican Party. Although, some may consider me Conservative, I am actually a Constitutionalist. This means that even though I have personal beliefs about some issues, the Constitution is specific about how and by whom those issues should be handled. One of those issues is abortion. I am personally pro-life and would love to see it all banned. However, it and all healthcare, is not an issue with which the Constitution empowers Congress. These are powers that are remanded to the states When I take the oath of office , I will swear "that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God." An oath is not to be taken lightly and I stand by that. Though a Christian, I am not running as a Christian, but as an American. A Christian's guidebook is the Bible; an American's guidebook is the Constitution. I think this is going to be an exciting year, because change is in the air. People are tired of "business as usual". People realize that all of our so-called representatives in DC are failing us. People of all socio-economic and political backgrounds want our liberties not only upheld, but regained! If we simply kept our money to take care of our citizens and did not support the citizens of other countries (i.e. Illegal Immigrants and aid to foreign countries), our economy would improve tremendously. We do not ‘owe' food, housing and healthcare to noncitizens. We cannot continue Robin Hood taxation to take care of the world. Charity belongs in the private sector. By definition, you cannot be charitable with someone else's money, but that is exactly what our current government is doing. As a ‘common citizen' who has lived in the real world all of my life rather than in politics, I have had to budget. I had to determine what our wants and our needs were. Sometimes, I had to prioritize our needs because I couldn't afford them all. This is what we need in DC now; some common sense application of monetary responsibility. We the people can't live forever on debt; neither can the government. Furthermore, all of us, elected officials and citizens alike, need to understand that the government has no money. The money belongs to the people. The government simply takes it from us in the form of taxes (visible and hidden) to pay for services and social programs. Second, we need to re-evaluate legislation already in place and start repealing that which is unconstitutional. If we returned to the Constitutional foundations on which this great country was founded, we would have none of the problems we have today. An example of this is our economy. Article 4, section 8 of the Constitution puts the responsibility for money squarely in the lap of Congress, yet in 1913 they delegated it to a private company, the Federal Reserve. "Federal" Reserve is no more accurate of a name than "Federal" Express is. In fact, Article 4, Section 8 of the Constitution lists the powers of Congress. Article 9, paraphrased, says, "Just because we may have forgotten to mention something, doesn't mean we don't have that right." The Constitution goes on to say in the 10th Amendment (the last part of the Bill of Rights) that any powers not delegated to the United States, are reserved to the states or to the people. The rights of the people need to be restored. In recent years, our rights have been systematically destroyed with acceleration of that since September 11th. Benjamin Franklin said, "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." By passing the FISA Amendment Act of 2008 on June 19th, Congress effectively removed our rights of Habeas Corpus. The ACLU defines it as this: Habeas Corpus is not a fancy legal term; it's the freedom from being thrown in prison illegally with no help and no end in sight. With the passing of the Homegrown Violent Radicalization Act, we all become subject to the label of potential terrorist based on our psychological makeup. In fact, by voicing discontent with the current administration, we can be targeted for ‘surveillance' by our government. Now, the bill does say that these certain ‘risk factors' when coupled with violence indicate terrorist tendencies, but what is violence? When I was a child, calling names was no big deal. You know, "sticks and stones..." Now, though, if I call someone is called a ‘mean' name, I can be brought up on hate crime charges. We have really gone overboard. The healthcare system is broken. We do not have a ‘right' to healthcare, but the federal government can make healthcare available for all Citizens by giving a tax credit for individuals and families so that they have a direct write-off of all insurance costs. At this time, we cannot buy insurance across state lines. Health insurance costs vary widely from one state to the next for exact same coverage. With a free market for health insurance, prices would drop and services would improve. That is what happens with competition. Likewise, patients and only patients should decide what provider to use. We should be able to choose between a medical doctor, an osteopath, an herbalist, an acupuncturist or chiropractor or any other healthcare practitioner. It should be the patient's decision only. Insurance companies have no business rationing our healthcare. People with cancer on Oregon Healthplan are denied coverage for chemotherapy, but are allowed palliative care including euthanasia (euphemistically referred to as ‘assisted suicide'). Is this what we want? In Germany, the ‘elderly' are given a little pill to take so they ‘go to sleep' and never wake up. Is this what we want? It is cheaper to let people die (or help them to die) than it is to treat them. This is what Socialized Medicine (a.k.a. Universal Healthcare) is. I grew up in a border city with Canada, which has socialized medicine. Canadians cross the border in droves to pay cash for medical care for life-threatening health issues. Even for elective surgeries, they come to America. Why? Because the waiting list is several years long. They are hoping you die first! It's cheaper that way. Is this what we want? When Ted Kennedy was diagnosed with a brain tumor, one of the doctors was on FOX who agreed that if we had the healthcare program that Ted Kennedy is promoting, he would have died. He would not have had a choice in hospitals, doctors or in treatments. Socialized medicine does not allow cash deals. This is essentially where we are with HMOs now. I cannot talk about healthcare, however, without talking about our vets. This is the one and only place where I believe healthcare should be provided by our taxpayers. All Americans owe our vets for the sacrifices they made for our freedoms (which Congress is systematically taking away). These men and women have put their lives on hold; they risked their lives for our country. We owe it to them to make sure that their needs, healthcare and otherwise, are met. I also think that they should be able to use the health care providers and facilities of their choice at taxpayer expense. Often, vets need to travel many, many miles to see VA doctors and go to VA hospitals which is inconvenient for them and is a costly waste of fuel. These proposed veteran Government paid healthcare benefits do not extend to government employees unless, of course, they are also veterans. Besides these things, our founding fathers did not intend this position being a full time, career. The idea was to go to congress for a session, deal with the issues that the enumerated powers gave you to deal with (again, Article 4, section 8) and go home to your ‘real' job. I support term limits, but they must be enforced by "We the People". Every 2 years is a chance to get another true representative in the House and every 6 years in the Senate. They don't need several terms to learn the job. It is outlined in the Constitution! I was in healthcare for 25 years in various capacities, was a teacher for 3 years (1 in a private school and 2 in government schools), homeschooled for 11 years. In addition, I was a single parent for 10 years. I am married to a Vietnam veteran. I have had and do have a ‘real life' allowing me to be a true representative of the people. There are too many issues to cover here, but I welcome the chance to speak, in person, to groups small and large, organized or not. Personal contact with people is the best way to have effective communication, as questions can be asked and answered.
Categories: Election News, Action Item, US Constitution Tags: |
Comments (1)
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> HR 1207 UPDATE!: Arkansas is 4 for 4 Throughout the state of Arkansas, we pounded our feet on the pavement in sometimes rainy or sweltering weather to gather signatures urging our four Congressmen to cosponsor HR 1207, The Federal Reserve Transparency Act. Once we had collected enough signatures for that specific week, we then hand delivered the signed petitions to our Congressmen’s local offices (video links below). All these actions were in addition to the electronic petition on Campaign for Liberty. One by one our Congressmen became cosponsors of HR 1207, which I believe is a direct result of the patriot Campaign for Liberty individuals who cared enough to get involved. Our hard work and hands on dedication to the cause finally paid off because as of yesterday (June 23), the long time lone holdout, Congressman Vic Snyder, finally added his name to the cosponsor list. That’s right, after several “Melt-the Phone” days, a couple thousand or so hand delivered signatures, and at least two sit down meetings with Congressman Snyder, he finally saw the light. And I’m so proud of those C4L patriots in the second region who wouldn’t give up, who wouldn’t take no for an answer, and who gave it their all in seeing this through. They could’ve given up at anytime, and some probably did. However, those who didn’t give up on Snyder, people like our Region 2 Coordinator Rob Richard and Pulaski County Co-Coordinator Mark Phillips, make me so proud. Soon, because of a pledge I made on my radio show (Patriot Pastor’s Radio), my hair will be buzzed, taken down to stubs similar to a five o’clock shadow. My pledge was that if all four Arkansas Congressmen cosponsored HR 1207, I would permit my son (who helped me everyday collect signatures) to remove the hair from my head with the barber clippers. This will most likely will take place at a C4L HR 1207 celebratory party event on or around July 7th. I hear there will be champagne, cake, and ice cream. Oh, and someone, please bring me a wig and a Klondike Bar. I would prefer a 1980’s Jon Bon Jovi wig and a butter pecan Klondike...:-) Videos: Rob Richard/Mark Phillips Signatures (2nd Region) Caleb Kinley/Evan Soule' Signatures (4th Region-Mike Ross) Almost anything for Liberty, Caleb Kinley, AR State Coordinator Campaign for Liberty
Categories: Ron Paul, Campaign For Liberty, Grassroots News, US Constitution, Just For Fun, Revolution Tags: Federal Reserve, Arkansas, Fed, Liberty, End the Fed, HR 1207 |
No comments yet.
Just got back from speaking with Rep. Kurt Schrader, Dem., 5th CD Oregon. It was a brief meeting due to location (outdoors at a farmer's market) with many others waiting. We presented him with some more petitions supporting HR 1207 and mentioned that it's now supported by over 230 rep's. He says he hasn't had time to read 1207 yet, but is generally in favor of some kind of oversight of the Fed. He said he recently asked Rep. Frank about how the Fed seems to have so much independence and Frank shared his concerns. Schrader says he's busy working on other things such as climate change and health care for now, and probably won't have time to get to 1207 for another month or two.
Due to being very tired I wasn't swift enough to ask him if he makes a general habit of withholding support for any bill until he's read it; that would be a good followup question IMO and I'll ask him next time I meet with him if someone else doesn't beat me to it by then.
Michael Matthews, our state coordinator, was there with me and did most of the talking. Additionally he got the meeting on video (thanks to another friend who was there) so we may have that available later. Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Finance, Democratic Party, Grassroots News, Federal Legislation, Economy, Monetary Policy, Congress Tags: |
Comments (3)
Chalk up yet another successful outreach for The Campaign for Liberty. Luckily we were situated directly across the the most populated section of the gun show...the ammo table. We had internet access and a huge moniter so plenty of Ron Paul and 2nd amendment videos picked alot of hits from us playing them over and over again. We welcomed tons of questions, thanks, petition signatures, handshakes, smiles, you name it, they loved us...again. We're now becoming a familiar face at the gun shows, so people were coming up to us glad to see us again. The easiest way to grab attention was the "Gun Owners of America" brochures. When asked what we are all about, the response was, "protecting your 2nd amendment right." That always brings a smile to a gun owner's face. From there we directed attention to Campaign for Liberty, and of course H.R. 1207 and S. 604. Everyone who stopped to talk to us was extremely receptive and very grateful for our efforts. Big thanks to everyone who volunteered to help out this weekend, Stacy Litz of the Drexel University Student Liberty Front, Frank Szabo of We The People Congress, and of course, the PA C4L coordinators, Rob Pepe, Lisa Armellino, Michael Molloy, and Mike Salvi (yea i just shouted myself out).
No one missed our sign...or the "Don't Tread on Me" license plate covers.
Stacy soliciting donations...or schooling someone...either way she held it down!
What a fantastic display of freedom.
Close up of freedom: Constitutions, C4L brochures, "Who we are" sheets, T-Shirts.
More freedom: Gun Owners of America brochures, Common Sense: Revisited, Voter's Choice Act info.
"Credibility" for the skeptics...none of which were found. This friday's (6/12/09) Wall Street Journal, the top headline reads, "Fed to Keep Lid on Bond Buys" .... followed by us saying "here sign this Audit the Fed petition."
These things rock the house...great attention grabber. I've yet to be pulled over for this by the way.
See you at the next one!!! Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Grassroots News Tags: Gun show, Valley Forge |
Comments (25)
A special Interim Committee has been formed in the Missouri House of Representatives to investigate the recent MIAC report (the report that named conservatives as terrorists). Following is a recent article from the Springfield News Leader indicating that Committee Chair State Rep Bob Dixon will be holding meetings across the state this summer and fall - Here is the list of Committee members - http://house.mo.gov/content.aspx?info=/bills091/commit/com535.htm. Categories: Civil Liberties, Domestic Policy, Grassroots News, Action Item, Current Events, State Legislation Tags: miac, MIAC Report, state committee, hearings, investigation, Domestic Terrorism |
No comments yet.
Tenth Amendment Rights Does anyone care? In recent decades, we Americans have silently watched as federal agencies, Congress and our Presidents have relentlessly eroded the fundamental, constitutionally protected rights of the states and the American people. Whether we are liberals, moderates or conservatives is immaterial. Constitutional law is non-partisan. We are red (Republicans), white (Independents), and blue (Democrats) Americans, and we love our state, our country and we honor the United States Constitution. It was written to limit the power of the central government and thereby protect the rights of the states and the people. Yet, the federal government has assumed authority over state issues such as, regulating our forests, farms and fisheries, managing Oregon's public lands and beaches, maintaining a clean environment, defining marriage and domestic partnerships, and regulating abortions and end-of-life decisions. These are issues not granted or "enumerated" in the Constitution and are therefore, retained by the states and the people, and should not be dictated by distant bureaucrats in Washington D.C. This debate over federalism goes to the very heart of the American experiment. Are we citizens of 50 states, united in the common goal of ensuring "that this government of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish from the earth," or are we subjects of the federal government, divided into 50 provinces, subservient to the "mother country"? The promise of America, as enumerated in America's "birth certificate," the Declaration of Independence, and in its foundational charter, the United States Constitution, proclaim we are a free people who have created a central government with limited power. In the past few years, the power of the federal government has grown dramatically. Whether you believe it necessary or not, consider for a moment the significance of nationalizing the banking system, the automobile industry, Wall Street, $12 Trillion of additional national debt, and the current discussions for a federally controlled health care system. As Bob Dylan crooned when I was young, "the times, they are a-changing." Change is inevitable, yet without a compass our nation and our freedom can be lost. The compass that has guided us for 222 years, that has kept America the land of the free and the hope of the world, is the United States Constitution. As an Oregon legislator, I have sworn to uphold and defend it. You can too. Oregon's current legislative session is drawing to a close, and there is one bi-partisan, pro-constitution bill that needs to be debated and passed by all Representatives and Senators who honor and sustain the Constitution. The bill is House Joint Memorial 17. It is a letter to our elected officials in Washington D.C., and it states the following:
If you care about preserving the 10th Amendment of the Bill of Rights, please vote in the brief survey located here. The results will be circulated to your Representatives and Senators, asking them to consider your feelings about the 10th Amendment of the Bill of Rights of the U. S. Constitution.
Categories: Education, Action Item, Philosophy, State Legislation Tags: |
Comments (9)
