Bel Air Tea Party organizer Tony Passaro loaded up two charter buses in the parking lot of the Harford County Government building in Bel Air this morning, headed for a health care protest in Washington D. C.
Passaro said he had about 100 people, whom he called “The Old Maryland Line”, ready to join a broader movement to oppose the health care bills currently under consideration in Congress.
The effort started with a call from Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann to “Storm the Capitol” today, November 5, 2009. Passaro says he has heard from Tea Parties in Texas, Ohio, Virginia, Delaware, Idaho, Kentucky, Florida, West Virginia and Pennsylvania who also plan to answer the call.
The idea is to meet on the Capitol steps today at noon, enter the halls of Congress to find elected officials, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in particular, and deliver letters adorned with tea bag tags and petitions protesting what Passaro calls “the abomination of Obamacare”.
Passaro’s group will also be handing out flyers outlining the health care reforms they do favor. The following is an excerpt from one of the flyers provided to The Dagger by Cindy Sharretts, a Harford County resident and self-described activist who is working with Passaro:
Insurance Reform: Allow insurance companies to compete across state lines and to offer varieties of policies, including “catastrophic,” so consumers can choose coverage to fit their budgets, rather than being limited by state regulations. Create new types of risk pools so that individuals, associations, and small businesses can access affordable coverage choices. Reform pre-existing condition and medical underwriting exclusions. Require that insurance companies cover high-risk patients, based on the company’s share of the consumer market, and in conjunction with tax incentives. Allow private insurers fair competition with the non-profits, which presently insure the majority of the market due to preferential tax treatment. Allow insurers to innovate with wellness incentives.
Medical Business Reform: Doctors, labs, hospitals, and other medical businesses should charge consistent prices for procedures, rather than negotiating different prices with each covered group. Prices should be posted and readily quoted so consumers can shop. Let consumers access care across state lines. Let health professionals practice across state lines. Allow normal business innovations, such as medical clinics in retail outlets and wellness programs.
Lawsuit Reform: Current liability insurance premiums over-burden doctors’ cost of doing business. Reform the legal process, by using medical panels and by implementing new guidelines for pain-and-suffering and punitive awards by juries. This will reduce the use of costly, defensive medical procedures.
Tax Code Reform: Let each person pay for insurance premiums with pre-tax dollars. Use mechanisms such as Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) to encourage consumers to prepare for their own care, while reducing tax on moneys used. Revise deductibility of medical expenses against income tax. There should be NO TAX on any medical expenses (services, goods, insurance premiums). Provide tax breaks for employers who bear the administrative burden of group health insurance.
Safety-Net Programs Reform: Use advance tax credits and subsidies to assist those with low income to purchase health insurance from private companies. Create penalties and incentives for insurance companies to provide affordable coverage for all, while still operating within the free market. Reform the current aid programs, including the role of state and federal governments. Rather than fining those who do not purchase insurance, enable the uninsured to get insurance upon need, by creating practical methods of financially participating in the existing pool, with appropriate co-pays.
Medicare Reform: Fix flawed payment policies. Reform payment schedules to reflect actual cost so that doctors will continue to treat Medicare patients. Clean up the bureaucratic mess that encourages deception, misuse, and waste. Allow people to opt out and choose private insurers without penalty.
Later today, Passaro said he plans to join a rally in Bel Air organized by Stephen Wright, president of the Rt. 40 Republican Club and a candidate for Harford county executive. Passaro and Wright had split over a proposed repeal of the impact fee, but Passaro says they will come together to protest the current health care proposals.
Wright made robo calls last night urging people to join him, the Rt. 40 Republicans, Americans for Prosperity and the Campaign for Liberty on Main Street in Bel Air from 4 – 6 p.m. for the rally to oppose what Wright called “socialized medicine.”
To quote a commenter on the New York Times article covering today’s protests:
“Let me see, people who have jobs that allow them to take time off to go to DC to protest probably also have health insurance. I expect a large number of them also have Medicare.
As for being “christians” I seem to remember something in the bible that goes like this…
Then Jesus will turn to those on His left hand and say, “Depart from me because I was hungry and you did not feed me, I was thirsty and you did not give me to drink, I was sick and you did not visit me.” These will ask Him, “When did we see You hungry, or thirsty or sick and did not come to Your help?” And Jesus will answer them, “Whatever you neglected to do unto one of these least of these, you neglected to do unto Me!””
Dave,
Please refrain from quoting that liberal Jesus, who fraternized with hookers and tax collectors.
You just might expose a conservative “Christian” as a hypocrite with undeniable evidence.
Bob, America is a Christian nation! Err, nevermind that Jesus guy, though…
Hi Dave,
Quoting the Old Grey Lady does not give you any credibility.
Many of us took off from work to attend this assembly. We felt that it was that important. Also, many of us belong to the over 60 group. That is the group Obamacare is discarding as not worth the money to save…Be advised, the Tea Party Movement in not against Health Care Reform, we are against Obama’s type of Health Care reform. All he and Pelosi have done is create the worlds biggest Pork Barrel. Had you taken the time to read the rest of my article, before rushing to make disingenuous quotes, you would have noted that The Tea Party has many, low coast alternative suggestions for REFORMING HEALTH CARE…..and it includes everyone, even cretins like you. Since you are quick to quote Jesus, you might want to take your quotes to the White House. They are the ones dumping on the Senior Citizens. Since you most likely still live with your folks this is not as important an issue for you it is for us.
Tony Passaro
Bel Air Tea Party – We want sensible reform
As part of your agenda you attempt to take the power of a citizen to sue away. This is absolutely the worst way to empower citizenry. Ultimately we have no power but to vote and sue. Take either of those away, and the constitution does not mean $#!%. Remember this when you trash the Democratic plan in congress. The Democrats are trying to add a right (the right to healthcare). The teabaggers and Repugs are trying to remove a right (our 2nd most solemn right, the right to challenge in a court of our peers).
“The power to sue” is a misnomer. With Tort reform, patients will be able to sue for actual damages and those are only limited by what you can prove. Lost hours of work, medical costs, etc.
A good reform of the tort law would fix the issue of punitive damages when doctors are simply trying to make patients better. To win punitive damages, the plaintiff doesn’t need to prove anything “beyond a reasonable doubt”. They need only convince a jury that they deserve money.
You might be more proud if you were more educated about the issues, Mr. ProudDemocrat.
Because of the tremendous cost of retainers, patients often choose to pay attorneys on a percentage basis. The only reason this hasn’t been fixed yet is because Trial lawyers control Congress.
Study after study has shown that the litigation issue adds only about 3-5% to the overall cost of our health care. I am not willing to give up my constitutional rights to drop 5% off my health insurance. Tort reform is a non-issue being thrown out by Repugs as they have no leg to stand on here. As usual… scare tactics and lies dominate the Repug/teabagger message.
ProudDemocrat is a closet Teabagger. He was seen Teabagging in Bel Air yesterday.
John
i have had enough of being called a c–k s–k-r (tea bagger) by the liberal left, including Obama. You have the right to your opinion but you do not have the right to continue your disgusting name calling. If you can’t engage in an intelligent debate on the issues you resort to foul name calling to take out your oposition … thats pathetic. Grow up and stop acting like school yard bully!
It sounds more like they want to put a stop to frivolous lawsuits and people making their living off of suing doctors (businesses, local governments, police agencies, individual officers, etc.) I have no problem with suing someone if there is a legitimate case, but there are people who support themselves by filing lawsuits every couple of years because they know local governments, insurance companies, businesses, etc usually settle out of court rather than go to trial because it costs less (in the short term) to settle than to go to trial, even if the lawsuit is completely bs.
Is the solution then for those groups to not settle and drag them to trial? I tis like the US doees not negotiate with terrorist. The reason that principal worked is because we held fast. If those groups did not settle it would not be so profitable.
Cdev – Your analogy comparing US government terrorism non-negotiation with medical lawsuits is a non sequitur since parties to a lawsuit must argue in court or settle…hence they must negotiate or defend.
Lawsuits are less about principle and more of an economic calculus for the defendant. Insurers and doctors (insureds) are interested in mitigating damages more than battling with plaintiffs (patients) and their attorneys.
Joe
The required negotiation is not the point. It is the use of lawsuits to make money. If they forced those with the small pockets, who are filling out frivolous lawsuits, to defend them then they might think twice about extorting money from a lawsuit. The cost of launching the offensive would be more and thus less financially rewarding. Not to mention continued loss could lead to sanctions and required paying of legal bills!
Cdev – The vast majority of these cases are on contingency whereby the plaintiff has little to no out-of-pocket expense.
Joe
If they cost more to try and the reward was less the lawyers would be less willing to get into this line of financial terrorism.
Cdev – I guess I fail to understand the practical application of your ideas. How would they work exactly?
Joe
OK….
currently the process for bad lawsuits.
1)Something quasi bad happens. $0
2)I want to make a buck at a rich guys expense who really didn’t cause my bad luck. $0
3) I see a PIA for a free consult $0
4) He says we have a case even though it is really not the rich party’s fault. $0
5) He files some paper work to file suit $Small
6) Rich guy or hospital goes to settlement after not winning summary judgement dismissal. $ Small
Pay out of larger amount of money for very little work.
By defending against the lawsuit the PIA pays for a trial and may spend more resources for a less then certian outcome. Thus the profit margin will grow smaller. When that happens the lawyer should become more discriminate aboout the law suits they take and leave the person filling frivolous law suits with less outlets to file them and thus make the practice not worth doing.
Cdev –
I don’t understand you plan.
Joe
CDev,
Yes, part of the solution would be for government agencies (specifically police agencies), insurance companies, and businesses to take the bs lawsuits to court, spend the money to fight it, and win. Once people learn that they aren’t going to get an out of court settlement for 10’s of thousands of dollars every time they file a lawsuit there will be fewer frivolous lawsuits. Upfront, it is much more expensive for the defendant, but in the long run they save significant amounts of money. There are a few police agencies who don’t settle frivolous lawsuits and after a couple years the number of lawsuits against dropped dramatically. Unfortunately, most agencies (businesses, insurance companies, etc) don’t have the willpower and/or resources to be able to do that and decide it’s cheaper to settle those $100k lawsuits for $40k rather than spend $150k fighting it in court.
Recruits are told while still in the police academy to assume that they will be sued at least once in their careers with a likelihood of being sued multiple times even if they follow policy and the law every time. It’s a shame that’s the case and unfortunately that trend has resulted in officers getting seriously injured and killed because they were more concerned about getting sued than going home safely at the end of the day.
Joe Do you understand DW’s application of my suggestion? That is it! It is comparable to the not negotiating with Terrorists because you do not give in to what is wanted by the other side.
Cdev – I do not believe that DW’s plan will work. When faced with a lawsuit a defendant and their insurer will calculate their cost to defend the matter and if they can settle for a within a range of acceptability and have a result certain they will. The idea that DW and you suggest is impractical.
Now if the US adopted a loser-pays rule or as it is often called the English Rule then plaintiffs and their attorneys would have to seriously consider the merit of their case.
Joe
The part that you are conveniently leaving out is that the lawyers filing the lawsuits are the bigger part of the problem. Tort lawyers make their living by the percentages they receive on each settlement with the least amount of court room time spent. According to the Cannon Code of Ethics lawyers are required to refuse to file frivolous lawsuits and are supposed to be sanctioned when they do…but who is gonna reprimand the lawyers that are unethical? The judge(was a lawyer first)? Other lawyers that make a living defending clients from frivolous lawsuits? Sure people can file complaints against the lawyers filing these frivolous lawsuits but who sits on the committee that oversees unethical behavior…their lawyer colleagues. The people that go to lawyers with bad lawsuits are just a small part of the current problem. Lawyers lining their pockets on both sides of the frivolous lawsuits are the real problem! The only solution is to legislate tort reform because they are not willing to do the right thing as long as they are getting rich doing the wrong thing! Unfortunately the democratic party in congress is heavily lobbied by lawyers if they weren’t lawyers themselves prior to their election to congress.
So chose to give in to the extrotion but don”t whine about it and make it my problem. If people don’t think they can make a quick buck off you they will stop trying.
After signing off earlier I thought … why even dignify the responses of the liberal left idiots when clearly they have no ability to grasp our thought process. I decided that its in my best interest to stop wasting time and energy attempting to explain or defend my position. As Glen Beck puts it, its just arguing with idiots. I think that it would be better to just carry on a conversation with those that have the same beliefs and ignore comments made by the idiots. That way my energy is better spent in working on how we can all best furher our agenda to stop wasteful government spending and a bloated government from expanding more and encroaching upon our lives even more than it already has. Plus there is a benefit to ignoring them other than not having a headache from banging your head into a brick wall… knowing that it bothers them more to be ignored than to be argued with cause they wont be getting the attention they crave by joining a blog just to stir up stuff. You will know when it gets to them when their name calling gets nastier. We would get the last laugh knowing how frustrated they are that no one responds back to them. LOL
Deborah I was not calling you any names….I don’t do that! Although you seem to believe me an idiot because we have differing opinions!
Proud Dem, they are not trying to add a right. To change the constitution you have to add an ammendment, you know, by a 2/3 majority. This is a serious question, why is it that whomever is in charge think it is OK to ignore that? Democrats and Republicans alike. It’s wrong, we have the constitution for a reason. Our military fight and die to defend that constitution, and our power hungry polititions and unknowledgeable public don’t seem to care. If it isn’t in the constitution then add an amendment, period!
Tony, I believe that it is a moral responsibility to do the best we can do for each other. There are many people who share this belief with me and disagree with how to go about it, but this is how I see it. None of us have been holding up this responsibility, as we have millions of people without insurance who are still dying due to that lack of insurance. In other words, they have no insurance to save them, the government is not saving them, and their neighbors are not saving them.
I am not sure where your assertions about “Obamacare” not caring about the over 60 crowd come from. I sure hope not from the thoroughly debunked “death panels” lie. What do you mean by this?
Why do people keep referring to the health care bills as “Obamacare”? These are bills created by the house and the senate. Obama has kept quiet on his position on both the bills, and has only stated that he is for some type of health care reform.
No Batman! These are bills written and color coded by lobbyists. AARP, One after another left wing nut group all worked to give a final copy to the speaker of the house and the chief poo bah of the Senate. Neither of them is anywhere close to smart enough to write a 2000 page bill. Every phrase and paragraph is the direct work of the Obamma staff. It will be obomacare, and that will be his legacy.
The New York Socialist is going down in history as the guy who opened the flood gates for socialism in this country. The big eared SOB from Texas then came in and added quantums more outright Marxist crap under the guise of the “great society.” All these programs have cost trillions and are outright failures.
What about the other guy from Texas who turned us into a police state?
And what police state would that be? Name one CITIZEN of this country who was harassed or hurt in any way because of the crackdown on terrorists. Oh that’s right they might have looked at your library records. BFD! There are in fact something like 1672 recorded terrorist attacks that were stopped or avoided because of the surveillance on known or suspected enemies of this country. I’m terribly afraid that the folks on the left side of the aisle, as usual, don’t recognize the real enemy and want to shoot the friendlies.
Remember when the MSP started spying on meetings of groups they thought where subversive? They also kept all those records which it took a court order to expunge?
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bal-te.md.spy18jul18,0,5659230.story
I am sure that was not the only case. In fact a quick search and here.
http://epic.org/privacy/virginia_fusion/
And that proves, what? The MSP and for that matter a lot of other police agencies have put people into groups in order to learn of any illegal behavior for as long as we have been around. It would not surprise me to learn that Homeland Security has people infiltrated into all suspected hot spots of Islamic terrorists. Unfortunately in this country the feel gooders would find that offensive. Once again, determine who the enemy is and leave the friends alone.
These people belonged in some cases to groups that simply opposed the concept of war and had no terrorist ties. Made possible by the Patriot Act. What about people on the no fly list because theyhave te same name as those people!
batman…because its obama promoted…directed…and concocted
Go Dagger !
You all just keep listening to what Fox News shoveling you.
Actually Batman you’re the one who is being deceived. You have obviously been listening to the unfiltered White House channels; ABC, NBC and CBS. Truly unbiased reporting. NOT
Dave –
So let’s see Jesus was an advocate of government run health care?
I think it is save to say that Jesus suggested people give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, however in the context of your New Testament quote he directed people to be individually charitable to one another, that we are our brother’s keeper and not to look to government for salvation.
Joe
I agree that we ought to be more charitable to one another. That most certainly has not been working for millions of Americans in need, however. I am not arguing that Jesus was an advocate of government run health care, as I’m sure Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Galilee had yet to blossom into existence. There can be an argument that the early Christians functioned in communes, but that’s another discussion and irrelevant to this.
I don’t think that looking after one another is necessarily equivalent to charity. There have been many pieces of legislation crafted to improve life for millions of Americans that are not charity.
My pet peeve for the day. Why does anyone think it is charitable to give everyone else’s money away? Thought for the day. If you want to be charitable, go help someone, with your own time, your own resourses, your own money, whatever. If you want to pretend to be charitable, fight for government to spend everyone else’s money and in most cases, waste it. Then you can pretent that you are a wonderful charitable person what has in fact done nothing but taken money away from people who truly help others.
Here’s an example. I watch 2 family members’ babies while they work. I don’t accept money. I do it to help them. One is a young single mom whose husband left her, the other is a young couple. It is hard to make a start in this world right now! The more taxes I have to pay, the harder it is for me to be able to stay home and not get a job to make ends meet for my family of 5. We are blessed my husband has a good job. But he is self employed, business is down, health insurance is up again for next year, and it’s hard to tell your 3 teenagers no, no, no, so you can help someone else. But they have plenty and it’s a good lesson, and anyway, they all love these babies to death as long as they aren’t crying.
So if you want to be charitable, go be charitable all by yourself. If you want to pretend to be charitable, then by all means, fight for the government to take everyone else’s money to be charitable with and pretend to be the good guy.
Very well said, Sandy.
Excellent piece Sandy. I love the folks who think tossing money at a problem will make it all better. They know that writing a check will make them “feel good”. The problem is who is going to do good? Maybe we should hire Acorn.
Dave,
Hey, at least they are writing their own check instead of trying to find a way to use MY money to do their pretend charity.
Executive makes 500,000 everyone gets flapped…..director of not for profit makes 500,000 and needs more govt grants…they give him more.
Go Dagger!
I have no problem with a CEO making over 500,000 if his company can afford it. What I have a HUGE problem with is a CEO of a company that is a failure and getting US Tax dollars because they failed while raping the US citizen consumer. Then I think a CEO is making to much money if his company is going into bankrupcy.
Very classy, TEA Party:
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/teapartyzoom.jpg
So health care reform, and trying for universal coverage, is akin to exterminating thousands of minorities?
He Dave….I know I can not fix stupid, but I will try. What are you trying to say??
Tony Passaro
Bel Air Tea Party
I was just pointing out that it’s pretty ridiculous and classless to compare universal health care to concentration camps.
The Nazis utilized nationalized medicine to implement their policies and to control the public. They exterminated “undesireables” in the name of public welfare or health, similar to the original intent of abortion. The warning is against allowing the government to confiscate your freedoms through a government-run system. They control your health; they can control pretty much everything, because most issues can be tied into health.
Oh yeah, and this Bachmann character sure seems like a good one to follow:
“And in one vote, the Speaker of the House and the President are asking this body, the people’s House, the United States House of Representatives to spend $4 trillion of their money for socialized medicine.”
“I find it interesting that it was back in the 1970s that the swine flu broke out then under another Democrat president Jimmy Carter. And I’m not blaming this on President Obama, I just think it’s an interesting coincidence.”
“Isn’t minimum wage really just superfluous? Why do we even have one?”
“Literally, if we took away the minimum wage—if conceivably it was gone—we could potentially virtually wipe out unemployment completely because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level.”
“You have a teacher talking about his gayness. (The elementary school student) goes home then and says “Mom! What’s gayness? We had a teacher talking about this today.” The mother says “Well, that’s when a man likes other men, and they don’t like girls.” The boy’s eight. He’s thinking, “Hmm. I don’t like girls. I like boys. Maybe I’m gay.” And you think, “Oh, that’s, that’s way out there. The kid isn’t gonna think that.” Are you kidding? That happens all the time. You don’t think that this is intentional, the message that’s being given to these kids? That’s child abuse.”
The nut parade continues…
You said it bro.
I saw that rally on Main St today. S_C_A_R_Y is all I can say.
Catherine what kind of nut are you? Do you not know history???
I find it a lot scarier that people who adulate a MASS MURDERER, CHAIRMAN MAO, want to control my health care and worse that people like you would sanction it! Do you like Hitler too?
Take off your white sheets progressives, just long enough to see clearly what these people are doing to us.
Now THAT’S scary!
Again, you’re absolutely nuts.
Folks please remember that great departed document by our current legislators called the “Constitution”. Yeah that document! The one that outlined controls on Government, not the other way around. Redistribution of wealth in this country is one of the most unconstitutional bi-products of over sized government. There is nothing in the constitution that guarantees “Free Healthcare”, or anything that MANDATES the government construct a public option. These ideals and concerns should be, and must be, decided by the states as voted on by citizens. Guess what if you want a public option..go to stinkin state that voted for it (and its citizens pay for it through a ballot). Those who don’t like it…guess what they leave the state.
Tea Baggers have every right to express their concern, and you will always have some that may bring the argument to an uncivil level, but the majority of folks WHO PAY TAXES, have every right to hold government accountable for its actions. How can you disperse tax cuts to people who don’t pay taxes…is that really a tax cut? Why is it the the teachers union is the largest delegate of committee next to the state of California as a whole? (Wonder why Vouchers is so hard to get put through do ya?) Vouchers forces schools to compete and thereby eliminate under performing schools. All this is due to overexpansion of government and handouts to make those who accept them indebted leaders come election time. Small business comprises over 80% of employers in this country, but yet we tax them the greatest. Enough is enough folks, its not about political affiliation, because honestly both parties (Republicans and Democrats) are on the same train….growing government and spending till the cows come home.
I think the last time government became oversized and tried to dictate the lives of citizens through illegal taxes un-proportionate controls it created a great country called…ummm…yeah thats it…America (American Revolution)
Proud Libertarian
Ron, there is absolutely no comparison in this to the American Revolution. The Boston Tea Party was protesting taxes levied upon a people who had no representation in the government that levied them.
I get the TEA acronym, but there is no connection to the protestors of the Revolution era.
May I quote a professor at the University of California’s Law School:
“Those who object to the health care proposals on constitutional grounds are making an argument that has no basis in the law. They are invoking the rhetorical power of the Constitution to support their opposition to health care reform, but the law is clear that Congress constitutionally has the power to do so. There is much to argue about in the debate over health care reform, but constitutionality is not among the hard questions to consider.”
Wow Dave, like I said under performing schools are alive and well. You make the statement
“there is absolutely no comparison in this to the American Revolution. The Boston Tea Party was protesting taxes levied upon a people who had no representation in the government that levied them”
I would like to know what history book you are looking at because the time frame for the American Revolution was from 1764-1785 roughly…but please allow me to give you some insight. The “American Revolution” was not a weekend show, but a period of time in history in which England decided to impose taxes and unjust laws limiting the extent of development and expansion of colonies. Here are some to name a few sir, if I may.
1764 – Sugar Act (started the colonies discontent for unfair rule)
Also don’t forget the Currency Act in the same year, disallowing colonies to create they’re own currency.
1765 – Stamp Act
1768 – Massachusetts Circular Letter (Samuel Adams challenges taxation without representation)
1773 – Tea Act and thus BOSTON TEA PARTY
1775 – New England Restraining Act
1777 – Battle of Princeton….am I getting through to you yet
You see you can quote all the California Law Professors you want, nobody is disagreeing health care can’t reformed. But government mandating what will and should be covered is an overreach, as well as the exclusion of states in the process and allowing the people to choose. If a majority is for Health care Dave, then by all means let the states decide through the voters. There are more cooperative reforms that can be met through state reform and interstate competition in the…oh wait…don’t get mad…the Free Market.
Dave, my friend, the Tea Party had everything and anything to do with the period we call the American Revolution…it was one straw in the camels back…out of many.
You can drop the attitude…I did quite well in school, thank you. The colonists had no real representation or means of voicing their frustrations with the tax beyond protest. You are not being oppressed by a tyrant, you are free to protest, and you vote for representatives in the very government who are going through our established democratic process of making laws.
For the third time, you’re freaking nuts.
Moderator: Please remove the offensive fake link this person is using as “their” website (catherineloveshitler.com).
Dave, but I think you forgot about the constitution. I’m pretty sure the federal government can’t force you to purchase health insurance or fine you and throw you in jail. I’ve checked twice and I can’t find anything that can be interpreted that way. So no matter how the Senate votes, it looks like the Supreme Court, if it does it’s job, and that’s a BIG if, will have to throw this one out. Unless, of course, congress passes an amendment, but they never bother with that anymore, they just ignore the constitution and do what they want. Such a shame. Such an amazing document to just be ignored.
Leaving it up to the states hasn’t quite worked out for us so far, has it?
In Idaho, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota and Wyoming, and the District of Columbia, women are denied coverage because being a victim of domestic violence is considered a “pre-existing condition.”
In 39 states, insurers can turn down anyone for virtually any reason, including pregnancy, as a pre-existing condition.
Only 27 states have mandated equitable coverage of prescription drugs, while the other 23 allow plans that cover Viagra but not birth control.
That’s not the point. We are governed by the constitution and if the majority doesn’t like it they can amend it,but they can’t IGNORE it!
Can you find anyone more liberal than a Professor at a CA school of law to quote?
Maybe there is a lesson here… the most educated amongst us is liberal. Hmmmm…..?????
Professors are not all liberal. Most econ professors acknowledge that socialism is flawed.
Econ lesson of the day:
When an individual purchases something, he pays x, and the seller receives x. In dollar value these are the same. However, in order to sell that item for x, it must have had value less than x to the seller. Similarly, it must have had value greater than x to the buyer. The difference to each party is known as producer surplus or consumer surplus.
When a taxing authority (government) collects a tax, there is a “deadweight loss” associated with it. This is not intuitive. One might think that seller’s surplus + buyer’s surplus + government revenue = total revenue, but this is not the case. The government interference causes a deadweight loss, where nobody gains as a result. This doesn’t imply that all taxes are bad, but it is important to remember when we are talking about taxing everybody – socialism leads to huge deadweight losses.
liberal does not equal socialism. I am most certainly liberal, but am not a socialist.
Do I need to point out that the most educated does not mean the smartest?
Proud Dem, Are you talking smart as in spending a lot of time in a classroom and parroting answers, or are you talking about someone who can actually think for themselves?
Actually PD, in today’s environment liberal and socialism are just about synonymous. The perversion of the language does that. Take the word “GAY” for example. Remember reading about the gay 90s? When I was a kid to be gay was to be happy. That’s what happens when perverts pervert the language.
Mabye the lesson …who the elite is…of course self proclaimed elite I referr to.
GD!
To your comment about the people having every right to hold the government accountable, I believe that’s exactly what the people do in elections, like the one last November. The majority of Americans are behind this health care initiative.
Dave, several questions for you:
If the majority of people are behind health care reform, why is it having such a hard time passing through Congress?
Did you express the same level of righteous indignation when people protested Dubya’s policies outside of the voting booth? Or should they have just kept their mouths shut and spoken only with a vote?
I am not expressing any righteous indignation. I am not telling anyone to keep their mouth shut. They have voiced their opinion, and have been given a ton of news coverage for it, and I am expressing my opinion in opposition.
Duly noted. How about the first question?
This is obviously a huge piece of legislation and things this large take quite a bit of time and debate. I have respect for anyone engaging in an honest debate and offering alternatives if they disagree. What is hard to respect is the misinformation, blatant lies, and obstructionist tactics many are employing while offering no alternatives.
Dave –
It seems to me based on your attacks on dissent and disingenuous proclamations about “honest debate” it is you who are blindly supporting H.R. 3962 and stifling any debate.
What do you have to say about massive tax increases, projected increased private insurance premiums, unfunded mandates to states, lack of tort reform and the ambiguity of abortion coverage in H.R. 3962?
Joe
Joe, I have not attacked dissent. If you like, I am dissenting from the opinions presented in this article. I don’t believe that I have been disingenuous. You ask some questions about the proposals, and I will give you my opinions. This is what I consider an honest debate.
Massive tax increases? As far as I know, the only firm tax increases that have been set/proposed are the excise taxes on the “Cadillac” health plans and the tax penalty for not having insurance.
Projected increased private insurance premiums? Well, so far the study commissioned by the insurance group lobbyist has claimed that will happen. To quote from an article in The Examiner, “The truth is you can find very smart economists to take both sides as to whether the Obama health care reform will increase costs. At the same time, I have not been able to find one economists who says the current system is sustainable.” Premiums have doubled since 2001 and it is projected that under the current system, spending on health care will go from 16% of our country’s income to 37% by 2050.
Unfunded mandates to states? This is tricky, and nobody’s sure how this will play out. The White House Budget Management Office (or whatever it’s official title is) claims that the reduction of health care costs in general will reduce burdens on states and that “some versions of the legislation, including the House bill, could slightly reduce state spending on Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program over the next 10 years.”
Lack of tort reform? This ought to happen.
Ambiguity of abortion coverage? First of all, abortion is legal. Consider that I could theoretically believe that alcohol and tobacco use is immoral, yet those substances are legal so my taxes are still used to help treat those suffering from the myriad of health issues those bring on. Secondly, it is a stretch to claim that your tax money will go to fund abortions:
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/21/national-right-life-committee/national-right-life-committee-claims-under-Baucus-/
Dave –
Based on your responses you have little to no idea of what the intended and unintended consequences of H.R. 3962 will be.
Doesn’t it bother you that the CBO has pointed out that H.R. 3962 takes 10 years of tax revenue to pay for 7 years of the health reform program?
Do you believe that H.R. 3962 can rely on huge savings on Medicare for funding by reducing waste, fraud and abuse?
Do you believe that H.R. 3962 is federal deficit neutral?
Do you think doctors and providers can be forced to accept Medicare/Medicaid/Public Option patients if the reimbursement are below market?
And while abortion is legal H.R. 3962 will effectively circumvent as an end-around the Hyde Amendment.
Joe
Joe, based on your responses, everyone you respond to must be an idiot. Take out the first sentence or two of every post you write, where you inevitably insult and belittle the previous commenter, and the discussion would be much more civil and productive. You make it so that most people wouldn’t want to discuss the issues with you.
You can’t have it both ways by mentioning the CBO in one sentence and then discrediting them a moment later.
http://news.aol.com/article/democrats-laud-congressional-budget/693221
Dave –
There you go again attacking dissent and discrediting opinions that disagree with yours. And you’re not disingenuous?
I asked you thoughtful and reasonable questions about H.R. 3962 and you either can’t or won’t address them.
Let’s face it the bill your championing of H.R. 3962 is based on flimsy and wishful evidence that you can’t take the time to articulate. H.R. 3962 is 2000 pages or so of unintelligible language cross referencing a host of other laws that even those that drafted it can’t explain what will happen with any degree of certainty…and you want the American people to blindly support this horrific legislation?
Joe
Joe, where exactly did I attack dissent or discredit opinion? The link I posted addresses many of your questions.
Dave,
How is the house health care bill a good idea?
John S.
John,
It will drive down the number of uninsured Americans, which is an incredibly good thing by all accounts. The public plan and health insurance exchange intend to keep costs down and introduce more competition in markets that are mostly monopolies. It is intended to eliminate waste in Medicare and Medicaid. It places restrictions on what insurance companies can deny you coverage for (they will no longer be able to consider being a victim of domestic violence a “pre-existing condition, for example).
Dave,
I don’t think their is any evidence that the house bill will reduce cost, in fact the cost in premiums to the insured and the cost to taxpayers will go up.
I think you wish the house bill will do what you think it will do.
John S.
John,
It would be cheaper to insure those who can’t afford insurance, like medicaid. Even if we have to expand it. And if we can save money by getting rid of fraud in medicare and medicaid, wouldn’t we be doing that now? Wake up to reality…..and much higher taxes for everyone, except those who don’t pay taxes anyway.
Please show some documentation for your claim that “the majority of Americans are behind this health care initiative”. I don’t buy it.
I think the majority of Americans are in favor of health care reform, just not this bloated version of it.
The public is divided (mostly along partisan lines) about many things in the proposal. However, the majority are not only for reform, but also for the “public option.”
In June “A clear majority of Americans — 72 percent — support a government-sponsored health care plan to compete with private insurers, a new CBS News/New York Times poll finds.”
“More generally, 64 percent of Americans say the government should guarantee health insurance for all Americans. Just 30 percent think this is not its responsibility. Those percentages have been stable for many years.
When presented with the option of a government-administered health insurance plan similar to Medicare to compete with private health insurance companies, 72 percent are in favor and just 20 percent oppose. Even 50 percent of Republicans favor that option.”
Obviously the polls vary by method and sample, but here’s a more recent one (from the Washington Post/ABC News in late October): “On the issue that has been perhaps the most pronounced flash point in the national debate, 57 percent of all Americans now favor a public insurance option, while 40 percent oppose it. Support has risen since mid-August, when a bare majority, 52 percent, said they favored it. (In a June Post-ABC poll, support was 62 percent.)”
I for one am for health care reform. Public Option? No but reforming healthcare based on the Dutch or Swiss System’s. I also am for eliminateing Social Security and Medicare. I am tired of subsidizing old people who could not properly plan for their retirements. If they did not have enough money to retire and live off of then they should have kept working. These programs are nothing more then Welfare for old people. The difference is we do not demonize the recipients for their choices. i.e. if you are on Welfare and go on a cruise we complain that you are poor and should not be cruising. Similarly people who could not afford to retire should not be wasting my tax money on a cruise either! I do not want to hear about fixed incomes and old people being dumped on, your medicare and social security; which I pay for out of my checks, and will NEVER recieve myself are a drain on our economy and make up most of the working classes tax burden.
Cdev – What a comical post…you made me laugh!
Joe
Glad I entertained you but I am serious. That is the way I feel.
Cdev, I’m never sure when to take you seriously, but you do know that those old people paid into social security too, right? It’s an insurance program. I would love to get rid of it, as well as most government programs, but what you said didn’t make sense to me.
They did not pay in the amount of money equal to what they will get back. If they did Social Security would be around when I retire. Essentially they are getting welfare for old people. I seriously think it needs to go maybe a phasse out such as we tell people 55 and younger you will not get it and we reduce social security taxes until we have paid it out and they die. Then that will eliviate tax burdens making all happy.
Cdev, I agree. I just don’t think we can blame the older people for going on vacations when they really are playing by the rules. Want to really get worked up? Walk into the senior center in Bel Air. They get new computers every couple years, pool tables, it’s amazing. Food is dirt cheap. And every car in the lot is more expensive than our 2 cars combined. Well our 4 cars combines, but my girls drive junky cars, they are safe, because they are teenagers and that is all they can afford.
I hope this senior center is privately funded if not then we need to discontinue some of the “tax breaks” for seniors. Again you illustrate my point that Social Security is drasticlly abused and needs to be scaled back I would not be opposed to paying it if it was going to be around when I retire and it was only going to the worker who was a victim of circumstance and he lost his retirement money due to no fault of their own. Not for the person to collect as a 4th check. I get more worked up when these things go on and when we have issues like this and people use them as a “victim” to hold up and use as propaganda for illustrating Death Pannals or Reform will ruin my seniors medicare. My grandma and I had this talk a while ago and she decided I was somewhat correct so she has started giving it to local charities.
Senior Centers are paid by for the county, they come under Parks and Rec.
Oh, my dad brought me home a flyer from the senior center a few years ago, they wanted to get legislation passed requiring all children to get flu shots so it wouldn’t spread and they won’t have to get them. How mean is that? And old person who would rather a child get stuck so they don’t have to lost all my respect. I wrote a rebuttal and had my dad post it. He said there was no more talk about it. It was like they only think of themselves until someone sets them straight, or at least embarasses them out of their arrogance. I was MAD!
I’m all for the elimination of misinformation, blatant lies and obstructionism. Truth be told, the tea party crowd can take things a little too far. But I’m going to have to point out that several alternatives were put forth by the “tea baggers” in the article(Hint: look for the blue highlighted section)
You did read the article before commenting, didn’t you?
Yeah, I read the article before commenting. You asked why it’s having such a hard time getting through Congress, and I think it’s the whole “it must be bipartisan” idea, while the one side doesn’t seem interested in offering anything except obstruction.
I think it is interesting the way we sit back and comment on things it appears we know little on. If we agree with the Tea Parties or not it is their right to do so, just as it is your right to do so.
As far as the as far as the bill is concerned I think it is safe to say that most of us haven’t read it and really don’t know what is in it, or how it will work. I have read 400 pages or so and it raises more questions than answers.
Personally I want health care reform in a big way but I fail to see the need to have a nearly 2000 page bill that bounces around all over the place. Canada reformed health care with 13 pages, Japan and England were a little over 100. That is the concern for me, what is hiding in those 2000 pages?
The big sticker for me is the nearly 100% increase in the states costs for health care, to help pay for it all. Yes they get rid of medicare costs for the state but they add on so much more.
So I think the Tea Partiers are a lot like me, I am a democrat who wants health care reform. But doesn’t like things crammed down my throat without fair and honest debate. I don’t think it is really a Republican vs. Democrat things when it comes to the Tea Parties, it is more of a “Congress Pull your head out of your butt!” thing.
Jon, I would be all for a 13-page bill to reform health care, but that most certainly would be a much more radical reform than anyone could get away with in our country. This is just me being cynical, but we seem to need to describe the reforms in whatever number of pages, then take up pages describing what this reform isn’t doing, just to placate a bunch of jerks stirring up emotions with lies; pages to show that this reform won’t be paying for abortions, insuring undocumented immigrants, forcing anyone to go before “death panels”, taking away private insurance from anyone, etc.
The actual cost of an education for a k-8 student at St. Joan of Arc in Aberdeen is $5,772.
http://www.saintjoanofarc.net/Enrolling/TuitionFees/tabid/112/Default.aspx
Maybe privatization is a good idea in Harford County.
How much of that is subsidized by the Archdiocese and Parish? I also bet the cost of living is different there in Illinois which is the link you provided! You didn’t think only one school in this country was called St. Joan of Arc? The cost there is actually 6,200 for a non-parishiner and that does not include the 800 in fees!
So Dave, if that is true (really, its anybody’s guess because the legislation is obscenely large and unnecessarily complex) why on earth would any private plan choose to participate in the health insurance exchange?
By the way, I personally AM for reform. Just not this mess that is being put before us. And lets not start up with the nonsense that there haven’t been other proposals because there have been but there is no way any conservative led proposal will see the light of day let alone an up or down vote right now.
Bottom line is until we reform the system in a way that REALLY promotes competition among the PROVIDERS costs will continue to escalate. The consumer has been removed from the equation with the insurance plans covering everything for a tiny copay. There is zero incentive for providers to compete with one another to provide excellent care for the best value for the dollar.
Good old fashioned competition does work…its just not ‘really’ what we have now when we are talking about our current health care system. We have it in a very limitted way with the insurance industry (could be improved by opening up competition across state lines) but too many people get health INSURANCE and health CARE confused. They are NOT one in the same, but its easy to see why most people cannot see that under our current system.
I really think our best option is to get rid of all health insurance except for maybe catastrophic care. Everyone would HAVE to lower their cost or they would have NO customers. Hospitals may be different, I don’t know the prices well enough to know if they could make it affordable to have the best equipment without too high of a cost. But, to have a Dr. charge $300 for a 5 minute visit is taking advantage. Patients should pay doctors out of pocket, and we could watch those charges come right down!
The Republican proposal in the House hardly addresses some of the most basic issues with our current system.
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/nov/05/debbie-wasserman-schultz/wasserman-schultz-says-gop-alternative-health-care/
So in other words, with the Republican plan, insurance companies can still deny a woman coverage if her husband beat her, considering it a pre-existing condition. If her state happens to have a high-risk pool, she would now most likely be allowed to join it under the Republican plan, but she would have to pay 150% the premiums the rest of us are paying. Doesn’t seem to solve that situation, if you ask me…
Dave –
Are you still beating your wife?
Joe
Joe, you disgust me. I have never done such a thing and it takes a scumbag to joke about domestic violence. It is impossible to carry on a decent, civil discussion or debate with you. It’s a shame you seem to take personal pride in insulting anyone without conservative/libertarian views who dares to post on The Dagger. Have fun keeping this a place for decent conservatives and dirt bags like you.
Just remember that the group posting here is not representative of this area or the nation as a whole, since most people with liberal views simply laugh and bother to comment when they read posts by folks like you. I’m interested in discussing politics with people holding various opinions, not arguing with childish scum.
Adios, Dagger.
“simply laugh and don’t bother to comment”, rather.
Dave –
I guess you are bit to thin skinned and have no understanding of what a logical fallacy is.
And I will go on to say that you have been most insulting and rude to people who oppose your views.
Joe
As always, when you see a comment with namecalling and personal insults, there’s a good chance it’s from a liberal. But I do understand – it must be tough to try to debate when you don’t have the facts on your side.
Freedom, so you can write a post telling me what’s in the bill, and then when I refute that you tell me that nobody can actually understand the bill
I quoted one provision that is actually in the bill. I don’t claim to understand all 1900 and some pages. The way this and many bills are written are a maze of sections referring to other sections and hence make it rather difficult for anyone (including those voting on it) to really understand it. Don’t tell me you actually believe this isn’t intentional..?
My question to congress is this, if the public option is so wonderful, will they, congress et al, be required to attain it also? The senate and house, the president and the cabinet and czars, too, all need to be on the same or as the proponents call the insurance, the non-caddilac plan. I would love to have the same plan that Sen. Cardin and Sen. Mikulski have…for life and taxpayers expense. Cdev, maybe they should be on medicare instead…
Nope, they have already exempted themselves from it.
Also, Vietnam Vet, if you have any specialties or just want to come out and work with the kids, we always need knowledgeable adults to teach them. Colorguard, marching, PFT, first aid, whatever. Certain combat that is approved, like beating each other up with those things that look like pool noodles, we had the kids build a ropes course. I don’t know what else, I avoid that, lol. Say the word any we would love to have the help. Nothing you’d have to commit to everyday, just whenever you feel like it.
Victory and defeat, like beauty, are in the “eyes of the beholder”…..
In the battle of Lexington, the Minute men were forced to leave the field by the British.
The great victory was in the “Shot heard Round The World”. It galvanized the Patriots.
In the battle of Bunker Hill, as the Americans, out of shot and powder, were leaving the field, an aid to the British General Clinton said “It appears Sir that we have won the day” The General remarked “I am afraid that if we win another battle such as this one we shall lose the war”. The Victory was in the fact that the British had 800 wounded and 257 dead, lost lots of officers. Fully 1/3 of their attacking force was destroyed. The American Colonials proved they could hold their own in a big fight.
General George Washington, in the Battle of Long Island, was able to save the entire Continental Army by escaping through Brooklyn as the Old Maryland Line held the British advance. That army that George saved came back latter to beat Cornwallis at the Battle of Yorktown and win the war eight years latter…..
When a Marine General was asked about the successful withdrawal of a U.S. Marine Division at the battle of the Chosan Reservoir in the Korean war, he remarked “U.S. Marines never retreat, they advance to the rear.”
So as I said, Victory and defeat, like beauty, are in the “eyes of the beholder”…..
Look at how well we did on November 7th 2009:
We came within 4 votes of defeating the mighty Democratic party. The were better funded, had greater numbers, and had a seasoned battle hardened organization. They who heretofore did not give us the chance of a snowball in Hell to make such a stand had to have been shocked. The Tea Party came within 4 votes of defeating the Bill.
We turned 39 Democrats to vote our way. By the way, take the time to thank them….we still need their support.
We forced them to shoot down the abortion portion of the bill.
We learned we can organize and show our power 9/12.
We showed we can rally on short notice 11/5.
We now are battle hardened and seasoned troops….We know how to adjust our tactics and organize effective rallies, pickets, e-mail, – fax, – letter, and phone campaigns.
The war is still on….we have not lost….
The Senate is next and there we have only 100 Senators to worry about. So muster your troops, pick out your Senators and give them Hell.
Use every thing we have, everything we have learned. Recruit “those who stand by and watch” recruit the young, the old, recruit everyone.
The final showdown will come when the House and the Senate vote for this Bill. Then and only then can we be defeated and I for one do not to intend to lose…..So, If you think you can or if you think you can not you are probably right.
DO YOU THINK YOU CAN??? THEN DO IT.
God Bless America
Tony Passaro
Bel Air Tea Party
443-350-0520
apassaro@crosslink.net
Wow. We’ve got Nazis and Jesus in this comment strain. Your argument is invalid.
Recap of 11/5 “Storming the Capital”
“I called and YOU came” echoed the voice of Michele Bachmann over the loud speakers….And from the throats of 150,000 Tea Party attendees came a resounding roar of approval. That was an experience to be part of. The front lawn of the Capital was covered by sign and flag waving Tea Party Patriots. The crowd extended from the edge of the Capital steps down to the edge of the reflecting pool. And we of the Old Maryland Line were part of it. We had traveled to Washington DC with two bus loads (110) of the Bel Air Tea Party Patriots, members of the Old Maryland Line. We had come to answer the emergency call to Arms….we came to help defeat the worst threat to out country since the German Axis of WWII.
I spied scores of state flags flapping in the chill afternoon breeze – George, Virginia, Tennessee, Delaware, New Jersey, Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama, Ohio, Idaho, Mississippi and of course our own Maryland Banner. The crowd was orderly, polite and well behaved. I did not see any pictures of Obama with a Hitler mustache…though there were plenty of colorful and clever OBAMACARE or PELOSICARE protest signs.
We all attentively listened to the speakers and then marched en-mass to the Congressional Office Buildings. In the afternoon, long lines of Patriots snaked out from the Cannon, Rayburn and Longwood Congressional Office buildings. The halls of each building were full of Patriots visiting their Congressmen. Each of us delved letters and petitions and all of us were delivering one clear and unmistakable message “THROW THIS BILL OUT”.
I was with the group that visited Congressman Kratovil’s office. IT WAS ENCOURAGING TO LEARN THAT OUR PRESSURE WAS CAUSING HIM TO VOTE AGAINST THE BILL FOR 4 OUT OF 5 REASONS…
I am also grateful that in order to catch my bus home, I did not join the group demonstrating at Speaker of the House Pelosi’s Office as had I done so I would have been an overnight guest of the Capitol Police Department. Yes, Madam PELOSI had the demonstrators taken away in handcuffs.
When we arrived back in Bel Air we were met by an ABC television crew that interviewed some of our people. When the interviews ended, we hot footed over to Main, to join with our brethren to take part in the Kratovil picket line. All in all the Old Maryland Line had a wonderful and productive day…..
The Bel Air Tea Party wishes to recognize the following Patriots:
Assistant Chair – Silvia Delong for her unstinting and invaluable effort in helping to bring this event together.
Bus Capitan – Jan O’Connor for getting us there and back and for making sure we got food and beverages.
Bus Capitan – Bernie Zgorski for getting us there and back and for making sure we got food and beverages.
Lead Bus Driver – Steve Reightler for making sure the busses where they needed to be to pick us up and bring us back and right on schedule….
Financial Assistance – Davis Schwartz of Americans for Prosperity for providing the bus fare.
Busses – Dillon’s Bus Company – Whose Motor Coaches are the best.
Parking – David Craig, County executive for letting County Workers leave 15 minuets early so that the parking lot behind 220
South Main was clear of vehicles. This permitted unimpeded access to the returning buses. It enabled us to safely discharge riders and provide uninterrupted interviews by ABC2 News.
Bel Air Tea Party Patriots – My heartfelt thanks to the 110 Patriots that made this trip, stormed the Capital and visited their Congressmen and delivered letters and petitions.
Tony Passaro
Bel Air Tea Party
Paranoia Strikes Deep
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Last Thursday there was a rally outside the U.S. Capitol to protest pending health care legislation, featuring the kinds of things we’ve grown accustomed to, including large signs showing piles of bodies at Dachau with the caption “National Socialist Healthcare.” It was grotesque — and it was also ominous. For what we may be seeing is America starting to be Californiafied.
The key thing to understand about that rally is that it wasn’t a fringe event. It was sponsored by the House Republican leadership — in fact, it was officially billed as a G.O.P. press conference. Senior lawmakers were in attendance, and apparently had no problem with the tone of the proceedings.
True, Eric Cantor, the second-ranking House Republican, offered some mild criticism after the fact. But the operative word is “mild.” The signs were “inappropriate,” said his spokesman, and the use of Hitler comparisons by such people as Rush Limbaugh, said Mr. Cantor, “conjures up images that frankly are not, I think, very helpful.”
What all this shows is that the G.O.P. has been taken over by the people it used to exploit.
The state of mind visible at recent right-wing demonstrations is nothing new. Back in 1964 the historian Richard Hofstadter published an essay titled, “The Paranoid Style in American Politics,” which reads as if it were based on today’s headlines: Americans on the far right, he wrote, feel that “America has been largely taken away from them and their kind, though they are determined to try to repossess it and to prevent the final destructive act of subversion.” Sound familiar?
But while the paranoid style isn’t new, its role within the G.O.P. is.
When Hofstadter wrote, the right wing felt dispossessed because it was rejected by both major parties. That changed with the rise of Ronald Reagan: Republican politicians began to win elections in part by catering to the passions of the angry right.
Until recently, however, that catering mostly took the form of empty symbolism. Once elections were won, the issues that fired up the base almost always took a back seat to the economic concerns of the elite. Thus in 2004 George W. Bush ran on antiterrorism and “values,” only to announce, as soon as the election was behind him, that his first priority was changing Social Security.
But something snapped last year. Conservatives had long believed that history was on their side, so the G.O.P. establishment could, in effect, urge hard-right activists to wait just a little longer: once the party consolidated its hold on power, they’d get what they wanted. After the Democratic sweep, however, extremists could no longer be fobbed off with promises of future glory.
Furthermore, the loss of both Congress and the White House left a power vacuum in a party accustomed to top-down management. At this point Newt Gingrich is what passes for a sober, reasonable elder statesman of the G.O.P. And he has no authority: Republican voters ignored his call to support a relatively moderate, electable candidate in New York’s special Congressional election.
Real power in the party rests, instead, with the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin (who at this point is more a media figure than a conventional politician). Because these people aren’t interested in actually governing, they feed the base’s frenzy instead of trying to curb or channel it. So all the old restraints are gone.
In the short run, this may help Democrats, as it did in that New York race. But maybe not: elections aren’t necessarily won by the candidate with the most rational argument. They’re often determined, instead, by events and economic conditions.
In fact, the party of Limbaugh and Beck could well make major gains in the midterm elections. The Obama administration’s job-creation efforts have fallen short, so that unemployment is likely to stay disastrously high through next year and beyond. The banker-friendly bailout of Wall Street has angered voters, and might even let Republicans claim the mantle of economic populism. Conservatives may not have better ideas, but voters might support them out of sheer frustration.
And if Tea Party Republicans do win big next year, what has already happened in California could happen at the national level. In California, the G.O.P. has essentially shrunk down to a rump party with no interest in actually governing — but that rump remains big enough to prevent anyone else from dealing with the state’s fiscal crisis. If this happens to America as a whole, as it all too easily could, the country could become effectively ungovernable in the midst of an ongoing economic disaster.
The point is that the takeover of the Republican Party by the irrational right is no laughing matter. Something unprecedented is happening here — and it’s very bad for America.
You can judge this pathetic commentary by one statement – “At this point Newt Gingrich is what passes for a sober, reasonable elder statesman of the G.O.P. And he has no authority: Republican voters ignored his call to support a relatively moderate, electable candidate in New York’s special Congressional election.”
Uh, I believe Gingrich endorsed Scozzafava. She may be a “relatively moderate, electable candidate” to the self-professed liberal Krugman, but that’s only saying that she’s “relatively moderate” through his filter. That’s the same as the often repeated, laughable statements on CNN and MSNBC that Snowe and Collins are “moderate Republicans”. The phrase “moderate” has no meaning unless used in the context of a person’s party. “Scozzafava” and “moderate” don’t even belong in the same sentence.
Insurance Company Drops Woman After Rape:
http://contexts.org/socimages/2009/11/09/insurance-company-drops-woman-after-rape/
No one said freedom was pretty
By Dana Milbank
Friday, November 6, 2009
The call to arms went out last week.
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), who made her name suggesting that Barack Obama and other Democrats have “anti-American” views, appeared on Fox News on Friday night and urged Americans to come to Washington to protest: “We need to pay a house call on Nancy Pelosi and tell her what she can do with the Pelosi health-care plan.”
They came as directed, about 5,000 tea-party regulars and antiabortion activists, to the West Lawn of the Capitol on Thursday for what Bachmann called a “Super Bowl of Freedom,” sponsored by Republican members of Congress. And what a game it was.
Many of the demonstrators chanted “Weasel Queen,” their pet name for the speaker of the House. Others wore masks of Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.); they were covered in fake blood and carrying dolls representing aborted fetuses, as the Grim Reaper led them in chains to hell.
In the front of the protest, a sign showed President Obama in white coat, his face painted to look like the Joker. The sign, visible to the lawmakers as they looked into the cameras, carried a plea to “Stop Obamunism.” A few steps farther was the guy holding a sign announcing “Obama takes his orders from the Rothchilds” [sic], accusing Obama of being part of a Jewish plot to introduce the antichrist.
But the best of Bachmann’s recruits were a few rows into the crowd, holding aloft a pair of 5-by-8-foot banners proclaiming “National Socialist Healthcare, Dachau, Germany, 1945.” Both banners showed close-up photographs of Holocaust victims, many of them children.
Immediately in front of this colorful scenery, various House Republicans signed autographs and shook hands with the demonstrators. Rep. Virginia Foxx (N.C.), who recently said the health-care bill is more dangerous than terrorists, gave out stickers saying “Govt Run Healthcare Makes Me Sick!”
“Who knew a casual comment on TV could generate this?” Rep. Jeb Hensarling (Tex.) exulted as he stood in front of the Dachau banner.
Now, objecting to the health-care bill is one thing. But doesn’t it send the wrong message for House Republicans to hold an event on the Capitol grounds full of hateful and gruesome words and images?
“I’m not worried about the message of freedom,” Hensarling replied, before joining his colleagues on the podium to the beat of the Who’s “Won’t Get Fooled Again.”
Technically, Thursday’s GOP-sponsored rally at the Capitol was a “press conference” (a Capitol Police spokeswoman explained that the lawmakers didn’t have a permit for a demonstration). The speakers took no questions at this news conference, instead calling, at least a dozen times, for the Pelosi bill’s death.
“Remember some of the other battles: Lexington and Concord, Hamburger Hill, Pork Chop Hill?” said Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa). “We’re not going to leave this hill until we kill this bill!”
“Who will kill this bill?” asked Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.). “You will!”
“Let’s kill this bill,” proposed Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-Ohio).
“This bill will be killed,” agreed Rep. Bill Cassidy (R-La.).
But, as with a similar rally by Democrats a week before, unpredictable things tend to happen in the wide-open spaces of the Capitol’s West Front. Minutes into the rally, a breeze toppled the American flag from the stage.
More ominously, a man standing just beyond the TV cameras apparently suffered a heart attack 20 minutes after event began. Medical personnel from the Capitol physician’s office — an entity that could, quite accurately, be labeled government-run health care — rushed over, attaching electrodes to his chest and giving him oxygen and an IV drip.
This turned into an unwanted visual for the speakers, as a D.C. ambulance and firetruck, lights flashing, pulled in just behind the lawmakers. A path was made through the media section, and the patient, attended to by about 10 government medical personnel, was being wheeled away on a stretcher just as House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) stepped to the microphone. “Join us in defeating Pelosi care!” he exhorted. A few members stole a glance at the stretcher. Boehner may have been distracted as well. He told the crowd he would read from the Constitution, then read the “we hold these truths” bit from the Declaration of Independence.
As you’d expect at a political protest, the messages on signs and buttons were provocative: “Waterboard Congress,” “A Commie Is in the House.”
But this protest was unusual because it was an official House GOP event, and because some of the remarks on the stage were as outrageous as those in the crowd. The actor Jon Voight, standing with the lawmakers, said of Obama: “Could it be he has had 20 years of subconscious programming by Reverend Wright to damn America?”
Even the Rev. Stephen Broden, at the microphone to deliver the closing prayer, fumed about “death panels inside this death care,” adding: “It is tyranny! It is socialism!”
The lawmakers set the tone early, when Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.) asked for the Pledge of Allegiance because “it drives the liberals crazy” to hear the “under God” part (his bravado was premature, for he left out the word “indivisible”). The tone continued to the end, when Rep. John Carter (R-Tex.) beckoned to the House office buildings and shouted, “Go get ’em!” Some took him literally: Ten people were arrested at a sit-in at Pelosi’s office in the Cannon Building, where they were crumpling up the health-care bill one page at a time.
By the time it was over, medics had administered government-run health care to at least five people in the crowd who were stricken as they denounced government-run health care. But Bachmann overlooked this irony as she said farewell to her recruits.
“You,” she said, “are the most beautiful sight any of us freedom fighters have seen for a long time.”
The GOP is trying desperately to take over the Tea Party movement, to get it back under control.
I’d a lot rather have new parties entirely. Libertarians should take over from Republicans, as Republicans took over from Whigs in Lincoln’s time. I was a lifelong Republican till 2006, but lost faith with all the incompetence and perversion shown by Republican elected officials.
Once again, could you have picked any writers more liberal than Krugman and Milbank? Didn’t Olbermann have any “Special Commentaries” that you could have lifted?
Think about it, freedom is everything.
Thanksgiving is next week and we are supposed to be thankful.
Freedom is attached to everything, without it there is nothing, whether it is freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom to travel, freedom of choice, freedom to own property, you name it and we are losing it.
Our representives are supposed to represent our freedom of choice by the majority, it is being ignored, taken away and they decide what is supposed to be our choice.
B.O. is appointing Judges who will impose his choice not our freedom of choice.
Redistribution of wealth, take it away from those who made a freedom of choice to work for it and give it to the ones who didn’t.
Everything is attached to freedom and he is taking it away.
What can we do without freedom when we don’t have freedom to choose?
Jimmy Stillwell, you make no sense. What are you talking about taking away the freedom of choice by the majority? Appointing judges, redistribution of wealth, all to take away your freedom of choice? In what fantasy land are you living?
This train left the station at 1am last night. As my ole buddy Jethro Tull used to sing:
“In the shuffling madness of a locomotives breath,
Runs the all time looser, headlong to his death.
He feels the pistons scraping, steam breaking on his brow.
Ole Charlie stole the handle, and the train it won’t stop going, no way to slow down.”
I hope the whole lot of them end up looking for a job next year, after they’ve been tarred and feathered!
—– Original Message —–
From: Bird
To: RALPH BASSMASTER SORT OF SORT OF ; Grassycreek@aol. Com ; WEAVER WORKS WONDERS ; REX THE WHINING DOG WHINING DOG ; THE BIG DOOR PRIZE Jones ; TRAIL TWISTER ; TOM STARK SADLY SADLY ; THE BUBSTER BUBBINS ; Betty Lou Tucker ; LLOYD NEWMAN ; HERB AND SHELA WEST VA ; HOYT CORKINS ; HEADHUNTER 3 ; HOUDINI
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2009 1:55 PM
Subject: health care
Very interesting.
I pulled this article from the “Investor’s Business Daily.” It provides some very interesting statistics from a survey by the United Nations International Health Organization.
Percentage of men and women who survived a cancer five years after diagnosis:
U.S. 65%
England 46%
Canada 42%
Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received treatment within six months:
U.S. 93%
Englandï 15%
Canada 43%
ï
Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who received it within six months:
U.S. 90%
England 15%
Canada 43%
Percentage referred to a medical specialist who see one within one month:
U.S. 77%
England 40%
Canada 43%
Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people:
U.S. 71
England 14
Canada 18
Percentage of seniors (65+), with low income, who say they are in “excellent health”:
U.S. 12%
England 2%
Canada 6%
I don’t know about you, but I don’t want “Universal Healthcare” comparable to England or Canada .
Moreover, it was Sen. Harry Reid who said, “Elderly Americans must learn to accept the inconveniences of old age.”
SHIP HIM TO CANADA OR ENGLAND !
This train left the station at 1am last night. As my ole buddy Jethro Tull used to sing:
“In the shuffling madness of a locomotives breath,
Runs the all time loser, headlong to his death.
He feels the pistons scraping, steam breaking on his brow.
Ole Charlie stole the handle, and the train it won’t stop going, no way to slow down.”
I hope the whole lot of them end up looking for a job next year, after they’ve been tarred and feathered!
—–
Very interesting.
I pulled this article from the “Investor’s Business Daily.” It provides some very interesting statistics from a survey by the United Nations International Health Organization.
Percentage of men and women who survived a cancer five years after diagnosis:
U.S. 65%
England 46%
Canada 42%
Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received treatment within six months:
U.S. 93%
Englandï 15%
Canada 43%
ï
Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who received it within six months:
U.S. 90%
England 15%
Canada 43%
Percentage referred to a medical specialist who see one within one month:
U.S. 77%
England 40%
Canada 43%
Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people:
U.S. 71
England 14
Canada 18
Percentage of seniors (65+), with low income, who say they are in “excellent health”:
U.S. 12%
England 2%
Canada 6%
I don’t know about you, but I don’t want “Universal Healthcare” comparable to England or Canada .
Moreover, it was Sen. Harry Reid who said, “Elderly Americans must learn to accept the inconveniences of old age.”
SHIP HIM TO CANADA OR ENGLAND !
Why March on Annapolis??
“The several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government.”
–Thomas Jefferson
The real way to resist Washington D.C. s not by begging politicians and judges in Washington to allow us to exercise our rights…it’s to exercise our rights whether they want to give us “permission” to or not.
Over the years, wise men and women warned us that the Constitution would never enforce itself. The time is long overdue for people to start recognizing this fact, and bring that enforcement closer to home.
The real way to resist …is to insist on our rights at the STATE level whether WASHINGTON wants to give us “permission” to or not.
Nullification – state-level resistance to unconstitutional federal laws – is the best way forward.
When a state ‘nullifies’ a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or ‘non-effective,’ within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as that state is concerned.
It’s peaceful, effective, and has a long history in the American tradition. It’s been invoked in support of free speech, in opposition to war and fugitive slave laws, and more.
Regarding nullification and health care, there’s already a growing movement right now. Led by Arizona, voters in a number of states may get a chance to approve State Constitutional Amendments in 2010 that would effectively ban national health care in their states. My sources indicate that we should expect to see 20-25 states consider such legislation in 2010.
So when we March on Annapolis, encourage, no insist that our DELEGATES pass legislation DECLARE OBAMACARE NULL AND VOID in the state of Maryland….Do it now, do it on 1/13, let us bring pressure to bear on our State Delegates and cause them to do our will….OUTLAW OBAMACARE IN THE STATE OF MARYLAND. Let’s tell Washington D.C. that the people of the State of Maryland will not have OBAMACARE pushed down our throats. Lets do it and do it now. March with us to Annapolis and declare our freedom from the Federal bullies. Declare our resolve to spit out OBAMACARE once and for all. Let us show the rest of America that the people of Maryland will not be pushed around by the FEDERAL THUGS and that we will not yield to Chicago Style Politics.
Led by Maine in early 2007, 25 states over the past 2 years have passed resolutions and binding laws denouncing and refusing the implement the Bush-era law which many expressed concerned about privacy, funding and more. While the law is still on the books in D.C., its implementation has been “delayed” numerous times in response to this massive state resistance, and in practice, is virtually null and void.
Why take the OBAMACARE Battle to Annapolis??
Tenth Amendment Talking Points
1. The People created the federal government to be their agent for certain enumerated purposes only. The Constitutional ratifying structure was created so it would be clear that it was the People, and not the States, that were doing the ratifying.
2. The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the people to the federal government, and also that which is absolutely necessary to advancing those powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution of the United States. The rest is to be handled by the state governments, or locally, by the people themselves.
3. The Constitution does not include a congressional power to override state laws. It does not give the judicial branch unlimited jurisdiction over all matters. It does not provide Congress with the power to legislate over everything. This is verified by the simple fact that attempts to make these principles part of the Constitution were soundly rejected by its signers.
Marylanders, get your Delegates to make a resolution to REJECT OBAMACARE
MARYLAND…..FREE YOURSELF
Tony Passaro
Bel Air Tea Party Patriots
Alliance of American Patriots
443-350-0520
apassaro@crosslink.net
Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
REGISTER
CONSERVATIVE VOTERS
We Need Ballots, Not Bullets
——————————————————————————–
This e-mail is the property of NaviSite, Inc. It is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Distribution or copying of this e-mail, or the information contained herein, to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited.
The crazy-train’s headed to Annapolis…
Calling all tin-foil hat-wearers…
How did the people ratify the constitution. I could of sworn the state legislatures did the ratifying. There was no ballot initiative. The US Constitution became effective once Maryland ratified it despite the fact some larger states hadn’t signed off on it yet.
What in the name of all that is good and holy is that supposed to mean?
It means his facts are in error. The people did not ratify the Constitution. The states each ratified the Constitution. Infact Article 7 of the Constitution required 9 STATES to ratify it. I was in error it was not Maryland it was New Hampshire who was the 9th state.
Furthermore his call to “Nullify Obamacare” is actually Unconstitutional under Article 6 if passed in the manner described in the US Constitution!
He professes to honor the Constitution but seems to find it convienent to ignore Article 6 for his own agenda and is unaware of Article 7. I guess he will be calling for succession next!
I still miss your point Cdev. Ratification of the Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with the separate states defining a law of Congress to be unlawful or unconstitutional. Article 6 has absolutely nothing to do with the points raised above. In your last sentence you used the word “succession”, did you mean secession as in leaving the federation?
Actually what Mr. Passaro suggests is very “American” and in now way conflicts with the Constitution. It is unusual in that we now think that since some mortal puts something into law it is “good and right.” That has never been true. Ostensibly, the separation of powers would keep that from happening but as our system has evolved in the last fifty years of so the separation is no longer there. The only recourse left is for the people to demand good government. Failing that anarchy is our last recourse.
We in Maryland who disagree with the actions of congress, particularly with respect to this health care debacle, are caught in a situation of taxation without representation. Neither of the 2 senators and the majority of the representatives have a political philosophy with which I and a huge number of my friends and associates disagree. Be glad at this point that the TEA movement has evolved. It could just as easily been a group of hotheads who began the movement and they would have gone directly to the anarchy approach.
I suggest that you take a hard look at your constitution and stick to reading the words that are in it. If you want to interpret the words start quoting the Federalist Papers.
Dave you also do have representation. You may not like whom has been elected to represent you since your opinion is clearly the minority of your congressional district and the state; but you have representation unlike the District of Columbia who truly gets NO vote on the issue but gets impacted all the same! I would also add Anarchy is anti-constitutional and the Federalist Papers are not the law of the land!
I have no representation in DC! Contacting the three who are supposed to at least act as though they care is a drill in mental masturbation. They now consider themselves omnipotent.
Back to article 6 of the Constitution. For the benefit of the other folks who may be trying to follow this, I’ll excerpt the last two paragraphs The first paragraph of article 6 only bound the new government to honor all old debts. The other 2 paragraphs are as follows:
“This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made, in Pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath of Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
Let’s not stop there but take a look at the 10th amendment as well: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Now all of that is relatively easy to read. Where does the Congress find the right to tell us what to buy? Where does the Constitution give the Federal Government any right to meddle in our health care? The Congress only has those “rights” because too many of our citizens have been taught by a system that doesn’t understand the basic principles upon which this Nation was created. The public school system has done a fine job of teaching our children what to think, but not how to think. Comments like yours, “I would also add Anarchy is anti-constitutional and the Federalist Papers are not the law of the land!” are a great example of this last thought.
According to the Tenth Amendment I have a responsibility to tell the emperor when he has no clothes. Our current emperor is buck naked and so are his court jesters, the Congress.
Dave, You quote it all very well. NOW…I tried to post this earlier but somehow this site is going through a loop and eating posts (as ones I know you and I wrote in this civil discourse are not here).
As we all know from Civics 101 the Supreme Court interprets the US Constitution and what it says. Furthermore according to Marbury v Madison we all know they esstablished Judicial Review. In a 1983 SCOTUS ruling between PGE and the state of California (I posted earlier) SCOTUS ruled the Atomic Energy Act, which dictated that Nuclear Power Plants are in fact legal, did allow PGE to build a nuclear power plant that the state of California did not want built. It did not say CA had to help pay for it but they could not block it. In this cse and ruling they ruled specificlly about the Supremcy Clause and how Article 6 was applicable. They also ruled that the 10th ammendment which did not delgate energy distribution or atomic energy to federal govt., does not atomatically mean that congress can not pass laws regulating it as was the case.
Essentially what they said is that your very strict view of the 10th ammendment does not do what you are trying to say. Essentially the Federal Govt. is free to pass laws regulating insurance and other items.
Admitedly I have not read the whole senate bill so maybe they are leveraging funding to force compliance, like NCLB did or The Federal Highway Act did and we could go on and on. If tht is the case like UTAH did with NCLB states can opt not to participate and suffer what ever the funding loss is. In the Utah case they get no FARMS money for lunches and have funded that themselves much cheaper then the money spent on testing etc.
Still beyond that Dave would you agree Tony is mistaken in point 1 when he said “the people ratified the Constitution” and that in fact it was the States that did? Bsed specifically on Article 7?
You may not like your representation but you do have them and are free to vote them out or run against them but like it or not in 2004 the majority of voters voted for Mikulski, in 2006 the majority of voters elected Cardin (I didn’t vote for him) and in 2008 the majority of voters in your Congressional District elected whomever (For me that is Kratovil)
I do agree that Tony misstated the ratification portion. Like everything we need to consider intent. Unfortunately the nine old geezers wearing black bathrobes have failed to use that norm when ruling. The case you cite is a perfect example of the court becoming activist and creating law. Of course there are many other examples of the court overstepping its rightful bounds. The Dred Scott case, Plessy v. Ferguson, Roe v. Wade are just a few. In the first two later courts turned the decision on its head.
My personal political philosophy is that the Constitution does stand as the “law of the land” and we are supposed to be a country of laws. If some part of the Constitution is unpopular (2nd amendment perhaps) then amend the Constitution. The amendment process is arduous and takes a lot of time and effort and if yo are the omnipotent supreme ruler, elected to decide how the country ought to be, very inconvenient. This Congress and the last several s well have shredded the Constitution when some part was just too darned inconvenient. I hate that. I hate activist judges.
With respect to elections; there is simply no way that any of us in this State can unelect a Senator or Representative. The three big jurisdictions have the power and are comprised of government sheep. I’m is 2nd district and the idea of tossing Dutch makes me salivate. dutch has told me to my face that all he cares about and thinks about is “end game,” defined as getting reelected. Those of us who are politically conservative will never be represented in Maryland!
I would say the X Amendment is pretty succinct in dealing with State’s Rights verses the hegemony of the Federal Government. To whit:
“The powers not delegated to the United States (sic. the Federal Government) by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it (sic. the Constitution) to the States are reserved to the States respectively or to the PEOPLE…..”
This Amendment is beautiful in it’s brevity and scope. Short, sweet and to the point. “Power resides with the American People”. And if 70% of the American People say Obamacare sucks “IT SUCKS” despite what Obama, Pelosi and Reid or their minions and sycophants claim…
On 1/13 I am marching on Annapolis with some dedicated Patriots to begin getting that distinguished group of gentlemen and ladies to enact legislation that declares “The Sovereign State of Maryland rejects in its entirety and in all its forms the travesty known as Obamacare, and categorically refuses to abide by its provisions and or mandates under the powers granted the State of Maryland by the wisdom of our Founding Fathers, God and the power of the 10th Amendment of the Constitution of these United States.”
Amen….
Tony Passaro
Bel Air Md….
Fantastic goods from you, man. I’ve be mindful your stuff prior to and you are simply too magnificent. I actually like what you’ve bought here, really like what you are saying and the way wherein you say it. You are making it entertaining and you continue to care for to stay it smart. I can not wait to read much more from you. That is actually a great web site.
maqui berry benefits http://www.squidoo.com/natural-foods3