"Have you seen the evidence to suggest that 0bamaDontCare is, at least in large part, a way to register new (Democrat) voters? Not sure if it's been discussed in this thread; it's hard to keep up with our president these days."
yep. This bill is the ONLY location of any legislation, regulation, mandate or clarification where the term 'Illegal' is specifically used. Every other instance the 'accepted' term is "UNDOCUMENTED" ....
and how do you 'document' someone ? you register them for state sponsored services.... go look to see what California is doing - and you will know indeed, that 'illegals' are being converted to 'documented' - en mass and in bulk.
ps, IF you have made it through all of the screens of enrollment - you will get to a voter registration page - and if you have not registered..... it will give you a hard edit.
At least that is what the demo showed when I did Navigator training 3 months ago. I doubt it has changed. why did I register and pay to get certified as a 'Navigator' ? because if you want to know what your enemy is up to - it is best to get it from the source. (and yes - as far as I am concerned - this guy is an enemy to the Constitution and the Republic)
two_seasons: I agree with you. It is OK to vent (I do it also) but the act accomplishes nothing but to generate individual, hence powerless, rage. Keeping us isolated in our political anger helps keep these bozos in power.
That is precisely why we must be considerate to people here who disagree with us. Some of them will actually jettison their misguided political philosophy when they awaken.
We must win through a voting process that is stacked against us. The only alternative is armed insurrection where ALL Americans lose. No one wants that but that wind is blowing once the Socialist American policies leads us to "On Beyond Greece" (with apologies to Dr. Suess).
There are solutions to this mess. But none want to hear it None want to pay for it and None want to implement it
I have spent 5 years battling this beast. I know exactly how to circumvent it, and push a commercial economy past these socialist geremandering politicians. But none want to commit to putting a round in the chamber and pulling the trigger on it. Pity.
Happy to watch it burn shame it takes the dollar and the economy with it. DAMHIK.
haha... no, in my dream... it was Biden that first saw the signs of the breakdown and he led the way for the takeover. Maybe we will find out about something like it in 3 years or so.
I really find it unbelievable that people would even consider voting for Hillary Clinton if she decides to run. Unbelievable that she would even attempt it..., and unbelievable that people would actually vote for her.
That's a great sentiment, amigo. However: What efforts are presently underway to true the vote in '16?
I'm all in favor of voting the bums out. Without an honest election process, however, it's never gonna happen.
Do you see any nationwide effort to insure the integrity of the presidential election in '16? If this issue is making the news, I've missed it. Now you are just trying to scare us.
As corrupt as the Virginia governorship election was, the Democrats are literally crapping in their pants. Cuchinelli was behind 20 points and only lost at the last minute by a miniscule amount because of political corruption of the Clinton backing of a "Libertarian" third party and the reaction against Obamacare. Voters are waking up to the lies, scandals, and absolute corruption of the Democrat Party and their minions. Obamacare is hitting them directly in the pocketbook and that is what is changing the vote. Corruption can only steal elections if the vote is close (Obama/Stuart Smalley/McCauliffe/West/etc) but can't cover up with a landslide elections short of overtly declaring dictatorial power.
This is why we have to help the misinformed to become educated. Here, there, and everywhere.
Exclusive--IRS Offers True The Vote Tax Exempt Status, Files to Dismiss Lawsuit The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has offered election integrity group True The Vote its tax-exempt status in what appears to be a bid to keep the group from proceeding with discovery on its lawsuit against the agency, Breitbart News has learned exclusively.
Awesome: It only took True the Vote three years and two months to be granted tax-exempt status (and only after suing the Gestapo, er, I mean IRS). Good news for the integrity of '14 and '16, very, VERY bad news for the integrity of '12...
Election Day Fraud PJ Media, Published on Nov 5, 2013
It's election week in an off-year. There are big races around the country, including Virginia and New York City. Trifecta asks whether election fraud will influence these elections. Hear more as Tammy Bruce joins the Trifecta team.
The Enforcement Arm Of The Obama Administration Mike McDaniel ~ Nov 6, 2013
With Obamacare sucking much of the oxygen out of the public interest room, the IRS scandal is being more or less swept under the rug. This despite what seems incontrovertible evidence that Barack Obama and the Democrats used the IRS–and continue to use it–as a thuggish enforcement wing of the Democrat party. There is now no doubt that the IRS was instrumental in suppressing conservative fundraising and anti-Obama advocacy in the 2012 election. Without the IRS as his personal Gestapo, Barack Obama might have lost the election, and surely would have hard a much harder time of it.
And now, the IRS is hiring thousands of new employees–in essence, increasing its power and decreasing the ability of anyone to effectively oversee it–as the primary enforcement agency of Obamacare. Consider that: the tax agency that has proved itself a partisan political operation, violating federal law at whim, is in charge of American’s health care via the power to imprison, seize assets, and generally financially ruin anyone obscure IRS functionaries decide they don’t like. But hey, what’s to worry about?
This one is for you Bush haters out there. Maybe you should redirect your energy to impeach a real "liar".
Bush (Iraq War) vs. Obama (ObamaCare): Who 'Lied'? By Larry Elder · Nov. 7, 2013
When the weapons hunters failed to find stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, so began one of the greatest slanders on a president in history: “Bush lied, people died.”
Never mind that, in building the case for war in Iraq, President George W. Bush relied on the unanimous opinion of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies.
Never mind that the bipartisan Robb-Silberman commission examined the intelligence on which Bush relied, and unanimously found that “the Intelligence Community did not make or change any analytic judgments in response to political pressure. … We conclude that it was the paucity of intelligence and poor analytical tradecraft, rather than political pressure, that produced the inaccurate pre-war intelligence assessments.”
Never mind that Bush retained the same CIA director, George Tenet, who served under Bill Clinton. Tenet gave Bush the same intelligence assessment: that Saddam Hussein, the dictator of Iraq, possessed WMD is a “slam dunk.” Indeed, according to The Washington Post's Bob Woodward, Bush was initially skeptical of the intelligence that reached that conclusion. When, on December 21, 2002, Tenet laid out the intelligence purportedly showing the existence of WMD stockpiles, Bush said, “This is the best we've got?”
Never mind that former secretary of State Hillary Clinton, then a New York senator, was particularly adamant about the threat posed by Saddam: “In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical- and biological-weapons stock, his missile-delivery capability and his nuclear program. … If left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”
Finally, never mind about then-President Bill Clinton's Persian Gulf expert on the National Security Council, Kenneth Pollack. While he opposed the war's timing, Pollack said “no one doubted” Saddam's stockpiles of WMD: “The intelligence community convinced me and the rest of the Clinton Administration that Saddam had reconstituted his WMD programs following the withdrawal of the U.N. inspectors, in 1998, and was only a matter of years away from having a nuclear weapon. … Other nations' intelligence services were similarly aligned with U.S. views. … Germany … Israel, Russia, Britain, China and even France held positions similar to that of the United States. … In sum, no one doubted that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.”
“Bush lied, people died” – or some version of it – was uttered at the highest levels in the opposition party. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., called W. a “loser” and a “liar.” He later apologized – for the “loser” part. Liar stands. The so-called Lion of the Senate, Ted Kennedy, bellowed, “Before the war, week after week after week after week, we were told lie after lie after lie after lie.”
If Bush is a “liar,” having relied in good faith on the unanimous opinion of the U.S. intelligence agencies, what do you call President Barack Obama? In building the case for Obamacare, Obama promised: “No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what.”
Did Obama “lie”?
Obama's health care team, according to NBC News, knew that more than half of the people who buy their plans on the individual market would lose their plan: “Millions of Americans are getting or are about to get cancellation letters for their health insurance under Obamacare, say experts, and the Obama administration has known that for at least three years.”
NBC News' sources estimated that 50 to 80 percent of Americans who buy individual insurance will find their policies cancelled, because those existing policies don't meet Obamacare standards. And for many of those – now forced to buy new policies – the price tag will give them “sticker shock.”
The Affordable Care Act stated that an insurance policy in effect before March 23, 2010, was to be grandfathered in – provided insurance companies have made no “significant change” to the plan. But if the plan, say, had a change to the deductible, co-pay or benefits, the plan was no longer eligible to be grandfathered, and the policyholder would have to purchase a new plan.
Obamacare's July 2010 regulations included an estimate that “40 to 67 percent” of customers wouldn't be able to keep their policy because of normal annual turnover in the individual insurance market. And, because many policies will have been changed since the March 23, 2010, date, “the percentage of individual market policies losing grandfather status in a given year exceeds the 40 to 67 percent range.” Yet Obama continued to tell Americans that no one would lose their plan or doctor, a promise without which Obamacare would never have passed.
For his part, Obama now says: “What we said was, you can keep it if it hasn't changed since the law passed.” A lie is an untruth told with intent to deceive.