CoerciveCare: 20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms

Below are the first five. See the source for the rest. Then ask yourself why insurance companies (who establish rates by mathematical models of probabilities of risks and costs) would lower premiums, and not raise them, when they are forced to provide insurance for those with pre-existing conditions, or for all irregardless of physical condition or health risk. Answer: they will immediately begin to raise rates, like Blue Cross has done, irregardless of the number of new enrollees (which will increase their revenues significantly), because the number of enrollees never effects health insurance rates and premiums, which are built upon individual and collective risks.

Further, mandating that everyone buy health insurance from private companies, under threat of law, is not "providing better health care" for "millions of Americans", it is violating their Constitutional rights and freedom from arbitrary government powers for which Attorney General Darrell McGraw (who swore to uphold the Constitution when entering office) should join the other 13 States in suing for an injunction. McGraw stated that he would not join the lawsuit because the lawsuit is "political". But this is dishonest, for it is for "political" reasons that he will NOT join the lawsuits, even though his duty as AG is to uphold our legal rights and the U.S. Constitution, irregardless of political pressures, including the 10th amendment and the principles of private property. The government has no lawful power to command free American citizens to purchase anything whatsoever from private companies.

20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms

1. You are young and don’t want health insurance? You are starting up a small business and need to minimize expenses, and one way to do that is to forego health insurance? Tough. You have to pay $750 annually for the “privilege.” (Section 1501)

2. You are young and healthy and want to pay for insurance that reflects that status? Tough. You’ll have to pay for premiums that cover not only you, but also the guy who smokes three packs a day, drink a gallon of whiskey and eats chicken fat off the floor. That’s because insurance companies will no longer be able to underwrite on the basis of a person’s health status. (Section 2701).

3. You would like to pay less in premiums by buying insurance with lifetime or annual limits on coverage? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer such policies, even if that is what customers prefer. (Section 2711).

4. Think you’d like a policy that is cheaper because it doesn’t cover preventive care or requires cost-sharing for such care? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer policies that do not cover preventive services or offer them with cost-sharing, even if that’s what the customer wants. (Section 2712).

5. You are an employer and you would like to offer coverage that doesn’t allow your employers’ slacker children to stay on the policy until age 26? Tough. (Section 2714).

Mandatory Provision of Health Care Bill is Authoritarian, Unconstitutional

clipped from www.georgewashington2.blogspot.com Liberals and Conservatives Question Constitutionality of Healthcare Legislation Both progressives and conservatives question the constitutionality of the healthcare bill. Specifically, people from across the aisle say that the government cannot force people to buy private health insurance. On the left, progressives such as law school professor Sheldon Laskin, anti-war activist David Swanson, and Miles Mogulescu are calling the bill authoritarian and unconstitutional. On the right, Senators John Ensign, Mike Johanns, Lindsay Graham and Jim DeMint and the state attorneys general of Michigan, Washington, South Carolina, and perhaps other several other states are contesting the constitutionality of the mandatory insurance provision in the healthcare bill.

Both liberals and conservatives are challenging its Constitutionality.

To claim to "provide health insurance for thousands of Americans", by simply making it mandatory and threatening a fine (as the Senate bill does) is not a "public service", but tyranny.

Listen to this powerful argument, from the left (David Swanson):

The Constitution provides Congress with certain enumerated powers in Article I and explicitly leaves all other powers to the states or the people in the 10th Amendment. So, the constitutional question, for those who still care whether laws are constitutional, is whether the power to force you to buy a horrible product you do not want from a disreputable monopolistic corporation that pays regular bribes to your elected representatives in the form of campaign "contributions" is specifically listed anywhere in Article I.

Great point, is it not?

Danger--America Becoming Statist: First Bush, Now Obama

Note: First the Security or Police State then the Nanny State. This is a must-read article, and hopefully an eye-opener to those still stuck in the "left" or "right" paradigm of thinking of partisan politics, both of which pick and chose which parts of the Constitution they want to dismantle for desired ends.

Put the Bush and Obama policies together, sprinkle in a couple more terrorist attacks, and one or two more state-caused financial calamities, and you have a recipe for . . .

* The destruction of American liberty
* The blossoming of a Leviathan State

clipped from www.downsizedc.org The End of Statism (after its rise) President Bush and the Republican Congress expanded government more than any administration in history. They also laid the basic foundations for a future police state. Now, President Obama and the Democratic Congress have . . . Retained, and in some cases expanded, all the Bush-era policies -- the wars, the PATRIOT Act, warrantless spying, REAL ID, imprisonment without due process, extraordinary rendition, etc. Begun to extend the already existing foundations for a future socialist state with things like direct government ownership of businesses, the health care bill, cap and trade, and a host of other measures big and small Put the Bush and Obama policies together, sprinkle in a couple more terrorist attacks, and one or two more state-caused financial calamities, and you have a recipe for . . . The destruction of American liberty The blossoming of a Leviathan State Read the signs . . . We are living through a Statist revolution.

HillaryCare? Freedom Means Personal Responsibility, not Paternal Government

Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state lives at the expense of everyone.

-- Frederic Bastiat

The Constitution (the supreme law sworn to by both democrats and neo-republicans) makes no provisions for a national healthcare system, which also invades state's rights, and forms communist collectivism ("it takes a village") rather than preserving liberty and freedom. This was proposed in the past, and no doubt, would lead to a national ID card (as all insurance requires), while we are already trying to remove REAL ID from the neoconservative side. (We are surrounded by communist socialism on the left and by fascism from the neo-republicans on the right). A dictatorial, paternal government is contrary to freedom and individual liberty.

This is precisely how Roosevelt's communist Social Security system (government theft by force) was implemented as well, just another national insurance program. The details do not matter. HillaryCare represents communist, socialist government akin to Canada and the UK. If people want to live under that paternal system they should move there instead of trying to change America. America needs change, but not this kind.

Here is what Cato Institute has just released on the subject. Anytime the government "requires" you to do something "for your own good" you are not free.

Clinton to Offer Health Plan

"Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton is unveiling a sweeping health care proposal Monday that would require everyone to carry health insurance and offer federal subsidies to help reduce the cost of coverage," reports the Associated Press. "Fulfilling a pledge to bring health care to all, Clinton's 'American Health Choices Plan' has a price tag of about $110 billion per year. It represents her first major effort to achieve universal health coverage since 1994, when the plan she authored during her husband's first term collapsed."

In a statement issued today on the Clinton health proposal, Michael Tanner, Cato's director of health and welfare studies, writes: " Here we go again. HillaryCare is back, and its apparent that Sen. Clinton has learned little since the American people overwhelmingly rejected her last attempt to overhaul the U.S. health care system. Once again her plan, which would cost $110 billion per year in new taxes, calls for greater government control over American health care. If her plan were to pass this time, it would mean higher taxes, lost jobs, less patient choice, and poorer quality health care."

For Tanner's full statement, click here.

-----------------

THE U.S. CANNOT AFFORD ANY MORE BIG GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS, AND ACCORDING TO THE U.S. COMPTROLLER, IS IN A FISCAL CRISIS ALREADY.

Updated: NHPR Interviews Ron Paul; Paul says U.S. abandoned "just war theory of Christianity" is Greatest Moral Problem

By Laura Knoy on Tuesday, June 5, 2007.

listen to interview here:

The longtime Texas Congressman is low in the polls, but has made a name for himself as THE anti-war candidate on the Republican side. Paul’s also known as a libertarian, espousing limited government and a free market and who has long advocated a return to the gold standard. He joins us in studio to talk about his presidential aspirations. We'll talk with him about the issues, including Iraq, and get his thoughts in advance of the Republican debate later this evening.

Guest

• Ron Paul, Republican Congressman from Texas and presidential candidate

Interview is great, discusses WAR, HEALTH CARE, THE CONSTITUTION AND ROLE OF GOVERNMENT, MONEY, ECONOMICS, FOREIGN POLICY, CONGRESS, "FEAR-MONGERING", THE RECENT JFK "terror plot", HIS PERSONAL AND FAMILY BACKGROUND AS DOCTOR, AIR FORCE SURGEON, GROWING UP ON FARM, ETC.


LISTEN TO NEW HAMPSHIRE PUBLIC RADIO HERE--REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE #3

Congressman Ron Paul (Protestant, strict constitutionalist) defends Christian doctrine of "just war" (i.e. self defense, last resort, etc.) against what "Neocons preach"

GULIANI (Roman Catholic imperialist and fascist) SAYS U.S. Military Role is for "NATION BUILDING" (see video below).