Posts Tagged ‘opt out’

The Real ObamaCare Battlefield: Godless Liberals DETERMINED To Impose Their Atheist Secular Humanist Values On America

March 18, 2014

I noticed an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times that basically reads thus: religious values ought to be private, whereas atheism is public.  You are “free” to be as “religious” as you want – provided that you never dare try to emerge from the tiny little black box we liberals force you into.  And whether you know it or not, everyone who forms a corporation has to abide by the tenets of secular humanist atheism and is literally immoral for trying to live out their religiously-informed moral values in any way, any shape or any form if they in any way run contrary to liberalism.

I have to ask the question: if liberals hadn’t taken these incredibly intrusive steps “to control the people” (the REAL purpose of ObamaCare), would our society be in this situation in which “a dangerous precedent is created” to allow the constitutional freedom of religion?  The obvious answer is “NOT.”  But of course religious people should really be viewed as the bad guys because when godless liberal fascists punch us in the mouth before they stab us in the heart we dare to try to defend ourselves.

Here’s the op-ed (note the highly-biased wording of the intro: should the people we hate have the right to evilly “violate” people’s rights?”):

These claims shouldn’t have a prayer
Two challenges to Obamacare on religious grounds would create a dangerous precedent.
By David H. Gans
March 18, 2014

Are secular, for-profit corporations free to violate the rights of their employees by claiming that the law violates their corporate religious conscience? That’s the big question at the heart of the two blockbuster challenges to a key provision of Obamacare that will be heard by the Supreme Court next week. In its 225-year history, the Supreme Court has never held that secular, for-profit corporations are entitled to the free exercise of religion. It should not start now.

Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood claim in their lawsuits that the Affordable Care Act’s requirement that employers’ health insurance plans cover preventive care for women, including the full range of FDA-approved contraceptives, violates their right to the free exercise of religion. Houses of worship and other religiously affiliated employers already are entitled to a religious accommodation. Some secular businesses, such as Hobby Lobby, claim that they too exercise religion and should be exempted from the obligation to pay for contraceptive coverage for their employees.

Corporations have a number of constitutional rights, mostly connected to property rights and commerce, but the free exercise of religion has never been one of them. The Constitution’s protection of religious liberty always has been seen as a personal right, inextricably linked to the human capacity to express devotion to a god and to act on the basis of reason and conscience. In this respect, the free exercise right shares much in common with the 5th Amendment’s privilege against self-incrimination, which too safeguards dignity and conscience and does not protect corporations.

Corporations lack the basic human capacities — reason, dignity and conscience — at the core of the free exercise right. Corporations cannot pray, do not express devotion to God and do not have a religious conscience. The fundamental values at the heart of the free exercise right simply make no sense as applied to corporations.

Corporations are created so business owners can take advantage of the special privileges of the corporate status, such as limited liability. What Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood are seeking is to have their cake and eat it too: to be treated as a corporation to receive special privileges, but then be treated as an individual for the purposes of the fundamental protections our Constitution guarantees to secure freedom of conscience and human dignity for all Americans. Corporations should not be permitted to game the system in this way.

Extending free exercise rights to corporations would undercut the rights of actual living, breathing Americans. At stake in this lawsuit is whether corporate chief executives are entitled to impose their religious beliefs on their employees and deny important federal rights to those employees. Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood hire workers of all religious faiths and persuasions, but refuse to respect that many of their employees may have a different set of religious views and want and need access to the full range of contraceptives.

Far from vindicating the Constitution’s promise of religious liberty, a ruling that corporations have the same right to the free exercise of religion as individuals would be a grave setback for the rights of Americans in our nation’s workplaces. It would also create a dangerous precedent with dramatic implications far beyond the Affordable Care Act.

A business run by Christian Scientists might refuse to pay for healthcare at all, other businesses run by devout individuals might refuse to pay for the costs of stem cell therapy, or refuse to extend family leave to same-sex married couples, or even fire employees for engaging in activities, such as terminating a pregnancy, that do not conform to the religious code of the company’s owners.

The justices should reject the notion that a corporation is a person that exercises religion.

David H. Gans is director of the Human Rights, Civil Rights and Citizenship Program at the Constitutional Accountability Center. He is a coauthor of the center’s amicus brief in Sebelius vs. Hobby Lobby Stores and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. vs. Sebelius.

I never realized that no religious person ever formed a business, but that every single business that ever became a corporation was inherently “secular” (i.e. defined as having no part with ANY religious values)?

I’ve never actually formed a corporation before, so maybe I’m wrong and every time – dating back to the days of our VERY RELIGIOUS founding fathers – people formed a corporation they had to sign some kind of statement agreeing to surrender their constitutional rights to their freedom of religion.

I note the wording of Gans, who says, “The Constitution’s protection of religious liberty always has been seen as a personal right, inextricably linked to the human capacity to express devotion to a god and to act on the basis of reason and conscience.”  And, again, having never formed a corporation, I can’t say with certainty that a “human” or “humans” have ever formed a corporation before.  Maybe only robots devoid of any “human capacity” have the right to form corporations.

I wonder who forms corporations.  Apparently, it’s NOT human beings.  But then again, liberals DO view what they colloquially refer to as “human beings” as soulless meat puppets.

According to Gans, the expression of “reason and conscience” are forbidden to corporations or to anyone who works for a corporation.  He asserts, “Corporations lack the basic human capacities — reason, dignity and conscience…”  Well, that actually explains a LOT.  Because, for example, THAT allows you to understand why GM – which of course is protected by the bankruptcy Obama bequeathed upon it should be allowed to knowingly sell a car with a faulty ignition switch that may at any moment may stall the car causing death or disaster.  God – oops, I’m sorry, that’s been banned – I mean Obama forbid that any corporate officer should be allowed to have moral conscience (that only humans should be allowed to have and never corporations) which would keep him or her from making a decision purely based on the “property rights” and “commerce” that liberals say they should be restricted to having.

If you’re atheist, you have rejected the imago Dei – the image of God – in you.  It is the recognition OF the image of God in the souls of human beings that makes morality possible – unless you think cockroaches and the rest of the beasts have “morality.”  We can consider the fruits of atheism in the reigns of officially state atheist regimes such as the USSR and the other communist countries to see how depraved, perverted and IMMORAL atheism truly is in the murder of at least 100 million of their own citizens even during peacetime.  And then we consider Japan (the most atheist nation on earth) and the Bataan Death March and demonic acts such as what Unit 731 perpetuated on living (screaming) human beings.  We think of the Nazis and their proven atheism.

So please don’t lecture me that you atheists are going to hold corporations “morally responsible” when you simultaneously deny those selfsame corporations the very foundation for what makes morality possible.

It is for this reason that our founding fathers wrote, “Of all the habits and dispositions which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.  In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars.”  It is for this reason that our founding fathers wrote, “We have no government armed with the power capable of contending with human passions, unbridled by morality and true religion. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Basically, what Gans is asserting is that no religious person ought to be allowed to form a corporation if they want to be allowed to practice their values; only atheist, secular humanist liberals ought to be allowed to incorporate.  Which George Washington pretty much directly stated was an act of treason.  Oh, you could look at it this way (with liberals playing the part of the Pharisee’s Temple guard punching Jesus in the mouth and mocking Him by saying, “Prophesy, who is the one who hit You?”). On this view, Hobby Lobby should have prophetically KNOWN when they chose to incorporate back in 1972 that one day demon-possessed liberals would force them to abandon and betray their Christian moral values and decided not to incorporate.

The alternative is to suggest that Christians and other religious people really have no business forming a business and should not have the right to incorporate unless they agree to abide by the moral values of Hitler, Stalin and fascist liberals.

Why is it that if I form a corporation I don’t have any right to imprint it with my values, but must instead bow down to Obama’s values?

I ask who died and made liberals “god”?  Because one thing is crystal clear: they HAVE made themselves God such that they can depose God’s moral values and install their own rival values in place of God’s values.

You need to understand what is happening and why.  Back in 1972 when Hobby Lobby incorporated, none of this crap was an issue.  What has happened since is that godless liberals have seized more and more and more dictatorial power for their fascist Government-as-God and have put God and those who value Him and His values into a smaller and smaller little box.  And what liberals are saying today is that we won’t take away your “freedom” to believe in your stupid little “god” – as the overwhelming majority of Americans still do – provided you live your life as if you DON’T believe in God.

I think about the Little Sisters of the Poor who oppose having the atheism of ObamaCare abortion murder forced upon them.  Oh, they can get out of it – providing they undergo a “Pontius Pilate-esque” ceremony in which they sign a form “washing their hands” of the babies who would be killed on their behalf by an insurance company.

And in this age of atheism as the official policy of the United States, how dare these nuns not play the part of Pilate?

Religious people have no right to impose their moral values; that is a right that only godless liberal Nazis ought to have.

The sad thing is that very soon the Antichrist – the beast prophesied in the Books of Daniel and Revelation – will take power.  And these liberals will have their way.  But you can see it coming today if you have eyes to see and ears to hear.

The beast is coming.  And after liberals vote for him to impose the mark of the beast, by which no man or woman may participate in the economy unless they worship the beast and take his mark upon their right hands or their foreheads, believe you me that “religious values” will NOT be legitimate grounds to escape.

Advertisements

Hypocrite IRS Union That Wants To Force All OTHER Americans To Purchase ObamaCare Demands Opt-Out FROM ObamaCare

July 26, 2013

The dishonesty, hypocrisy and arrogance of the government elite class stands fully revealed.

What was ObamaCare ever about?  It was all about making massive, all-powerful, all-controlling liberal fascist government even more massive and even more powerful and give it even more control over every detail of the peoples’ lives.  Before the beast of the Book of Revelation comes to finish the government-as-god job Obama started.

Obama wanted one nation, under Government.  And liberals crawled from every corner to help him attain that.  ObamaCare is a mess (even DEMOCRATS know that!) and everybody knows that it is a complete disaster.  But health care was never their goal; control was their goal and they got what they wanted.

So now the union that represents the IRS – and which overwhelmingly supported Barack Obama AND his demonic ObamaCare takeover of our health care system – demands that they not be held accountable to the stinking pile of ObamaCare “train wreck” that they massively grew to impose on all other Americans.

Let’s get this straight: this is an INCREDIBLY partisan union that overwhelmingly supported Obama in 2008 and again in 2012:

As the Washington Examiner’s Tim Carney and others have pointed out, the agency’s employees are heavily engaged in politics and lean considerably to the left. Records show that IRS employees in 2012 donated more than twice as much to the Obama as to the Romney campaign. Nearly two-thirds of all employee contributions over the last three elections cycles have gone to Democrats.

Sweetness and Light reports the press releases of this heavily partisan and biased union for heavily partisan and biased IRS employees.  This is a group of people who worshiped Obama and took his mark on their right hands or their foreheads.  But they won’t accept the signature achievement of the turd they supported.  Because that’s fecal matter that only LITTLE PEOPLE should have to be forced to eat.

Here’s the story from Forbes:

7/26/2013 @ 10:55AM |76,660 views
IRS Employees Union Is ‘Very Concerned’ About Being Required To Enroll In Obamacare’s Health Insurance Exchanges
Avik Roy Avik Roy, Contributor

In the private sector, many workers are concerned about losing their employer-sponsored health insurance coverage, and being dumped into Obamacare’s subsidized insurance exchanges. Two weeks ago, representatives of three large labor unions fired off a harsh letter to Democratic leaders in Congress, complaining that Obamacare would “shatter…our hard-earned health benefits” and create “nightmare scenarios” for their members. Today, we learn that the National Treasury Employees Union—the union that includes employees of the Internal Revenue Service—is asking its members to write letters to their Congressmen, stating that they are “very concerned” about legislative efforts requiring IRS and Treasury employees to enroll in the Obamacare exchanges.

“I am a federal employee and one of your constituents,” the letter begins. “I am very concerned about legislation that has been introduced by Congressman Dave Camp to push federal employees out of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) and into the insurance exchanges established under the Affordable Care Act (ACA).”

Rep. Dave Camp (R., Mich.), the representative referred to in the letter, is chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, the committee in the House that is responsible for tax legislation. (Obamacare’s insurance subsidies are technically tax credits.) In April, Camp introduced legislation to put all federal employees on the exchanges, in response to reports that members of Congress and their staff were seeking an exemption from the provision in Obamacare that requires them to enroll in the exchanges.

“If the ObamaCare exchanges are good enough for the hardworking Americans and small businesses the law claims to help, then they should be good enough for the president, vice president, Congress, and federal employees,” said Camp’s spokeswoman in a statement at the time.

There is one legitimate issue regarding members of Congress and their staff enrolling in the exchanges. Today, federal employees are offered subsidies, or vouchers, which they can use to shop for insurance on the popular federal employees’ exchange, called the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program. Because Obamacare was drafted so hastily, it’s not clear whether the law allows similar subsidies to flow to federal employees on the Obamacare exchanges.

We’re still awaiting a ruling from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management on that front. For inexplicable reasons, OPM has not clarified whether or not the government will be allowed to funnel subsidies through the Obamacare exchanges.

Nonetheless, it would be a very good thing for some federal employees to eat their own cooking, especially those who work for Congress, the IRS and the Department of Health and Human Services. They’re the ones who are writing the Obamacare regulations; they’re the ones who, in many cases, wrote the law itself. The IRS enforces Obamacare’s individual mandate and eligibility for the exchange subsidies, among other provisions.

They should be required to enroll in the same Obamacare exchanges that tens of millions of private citizens will have to. They should have to experience the same premium increases and limited flexibility that other Americans will endure there. Maybe then, we’ll start to build a constituency for market-based reform.

Here’s what the NTEU (The National Treasury Employees Union that represents the IRS employees who savagely and fascistically targeted Obama’s political enemies said of their efforts for their messiah Obama:

Press Release
NTEU Leader Applauds Obama Victory; Turns Immediate Focus to Upcoming Lame-Duck Session
Wednesday, November 7 2012

Washington, D.C.—The leader of the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) today applauded the re-election of President Barack Obama.

“NTEU supported the re-election of President Obama as being in the best interests of our country and of the dedicated men and women of the federal workforce,” said NTEU President Colleen M. Kelley. “NTEU is also pleased that so many of our candidates for Senate seats and our staunchest supporters in the House won their races.”

NTEU’s efforts on behalf of President Obama and key candidates spanned the country. “Our 2012 election plan has been in place since the beginning of the year,” said President Kelley. “Many chapters and members were actively involved educating and organizing various types of activities around the country including candidate nights and volunteering for campaigns.”

NTEU’s efforts focused on battleground states where races for the presidency, Senate and House seats were competitive and where the union has substantial numbers of NTEU members including Virginia, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and Indiana.

In the days before the election, NTEU members volunteered for phone-banking and canvassing, with a particular focus on contacting other NTEU members and urging them to vote for candidates who support federal employees and federal employee issues.

“Federal employees heard our message loud and clear that everything about the lives of the federal workforce is determined by those elected to office,” said Kelley.

Unlike his opponent in the presidential election, Kelley said, the president is keenly aware of the risks to the effective delivery of vital government services posed by proposals to sharply reduce the federal workforce and cut the budgets of federal agencies.

“In a very real sense, these are make-or-break issues for our country,” Kelley said. “Federal agencies simply must have the resources and personnel they need to carry out their missions,” she added, noting the effective work of the Federal Emergency Management Agency in the wake of the storm that battered the east coast in late October.

Of course, these dishonest government cockroaches who want to impose by raw government power that which they arrogantly and hypocritically refuse for themselves doesn’t mention that part of their electioneering activities for their messiah included targeting Republican candidates, Romney campaign donors, more than 500 conservative and Tea Party groups, Christian organizations, Pro-Israel Jewish organizations, and pretty much anybody who didn’t worship their messiah Obama.  If you don’t believe that Obama sicked the Internal Revenge Service on these groups out of pure partisan hatred, you are pathetically stupid and please don’t waste my time with your idiocy.

They also dishonestly failed to mention that “candidates who support federal employees and federal employee issues” wanted ObamaCare – which they now say is evil.  Nor do they want the government “to carry out their missions” of imposing that evil, demonic ObamaCare on the unions that so ardently worshiped Obama and helped impose his evil agenda on the rest of America.

These people are roaches crawling on the most rancid dung pile.  They are from the government, and they are here to hurt you.

This is the essence of liberal socialism: they use other people’s money to impose other people’s healthcare on other people – as long as they be exempted from what they want to impose on other people.

Pardon my language here, but this is the bottom line: you people who cooked this vile shit up, you need to eat it too.

Democrats Abandon All Respect For American Voter And Electoral Integrity

October 11, 2010

The independent-minded American says, “Let the parties and candidates express their platforms in the open marketplace of ideas, and may the best candidate win.”

Unless you’re a Democrat, of course.

“If you’re a Democrat, it’s, “We stand for absolutely nothing but power over the people, we believe that ends justify means, and so go ahead and do whatever you need to do to win.”

Democrats need tyrant-power in order to shove terrible and evil legislation such as the $3.27 TRILLION stimulus which incredibly hasn’t even created any meaningful jobs; and ObamaCare, which is turning out to be so shockingly bad that even LIBERAL UNIONS tat supported this boondoggle are now pleading to be opted out; and Democrat environmental regulations that are destroying upwards of a million jobs and counting (and again, even UNIONS are begging for relief from these incredibly destructive policies).

You can’t destroy a country unless you have the total power to do so.  In America, the Constitution gives the people the right to rise up and throw off their shackles every two years.  At least, as long as we have a Constitution, and as long as judicial activists can’t interpret that Constitution any damn way they want to.

So Democrats have to cheat to get their “fundamental transformation.”  And cheat they do.

We think of Chicago and other Democrat strongholds, where dead people and inmates don’t only get to vote, they get to vote twice.  And apparently, Democrats are even paying dead people and inmates for their votes now.

We think of ACORN and years and years of voter registration shenanigans until they were finally caught on video doing something so vile that even many (but certainly not all) Democrats found them despicable beyond the pale.

We think of the Al Franken Senate election in Minnesota, in which a lead by the Republican candidate was overcome after new, uncounted ballots just kept magically turning up in the back seats of cars.  And then, lo and behold, we find that inmates’ ballots – well over the Franken margin of victory – were illegally counted.

We think of the vile Democrat Rep. Alan Grayson and the shockingly dishonest campaign ad that he ran, in which he deliberately tried to smear his Republican candidate for the exact opposite of what the man clearly actually said.

And now we’ve got Democrats trying to undermine the will of the American people by fraudulently running candidates to leech votes from the Republican and steal an election:

Report: Dems planted NJ tea party House candidate
By GEOFF MULVIHILL
The Associated Press
Saturday, October 9, 2010; 5:36 PM

MOUNT LAUREL, N.J. — A New Jersey Republican congressional candidate criticized his Democratic opponent Friday amid mounting evidence that Democratic officials planted a tea party candidate in the race to siphon off conservative votes.

“My opponent, John Adler, represents everything that is wrong with politics in our country today,” Republican Jon Runyan said. “I would ask for an apology. But frankly, an apology from someone like Congressman Adler would be so meaningless that it’s not worth seeking.”

He spoke at a news conference as Adler, a first-term Democratic lawmaker, and his campaign remained mum about a report in the Courier-Post of Cherry Hill in which Democratic operatives speaking on the condition of anonymity confirmed what Republicans have believed for months: That tea-party candidate Peter DeStefano was put on the ballot by Democrats.

The operatives said a county Democratic employee is running at least the Web elements of DeStefano’s campaign.

Tea party organizations, which have denounced DeStefano since he entered the race in June, called on him Friday to quit. About 50 tea party activists gathered in protest outside a restaurant in Medford where DeStefano had scheduled a fundraiser Friday night.

DeStefano arrived at the fundraiser after the protesters left and told reporters he would remain in the race, but he would not answer specific questions about the newspaper’s report, dismissing the allegations as “hearsay.”

“I’m an average guy who’s running for Congress on the independent ticket,” DeStefano said.

One tea party group, the West Jersey Tea Party, said it plans to file a voter-fraud lawsuit against Adler next week.

Adler has previously denied the accusations. Adler and top officials in Adler’s campaign and did not return calls or e-mails from The Associated Press on Friday.

In an August interview with the AP, DeStefano excoriated both Adler and Runyan.

He fended off questions about Republicans’ accusations and tea party organizations’ claims that he wasn’t even a member, though he was running for Congress with the slogan “New Jersey Tea Party.” While there are several tea party groups in New Jersey, none goes by that name. Some tea party groups are supporting Runyan.

“Any American citizen can run for any office they want,” DeStefano said. “I think it’s time we get past this crap.”

He refused to answer questions about precisely when he decided to run.

In August, Adler told the Courier-Post: “I know we weren’t part of it.”

Runyan said his campaign was looking into whether there’s any legal action that could be taken against Adler.

The operatives told the Courier-Post that the plan was shared with members of the South Jersey Young Democrats, and some in that group gathered signatures for DeStefano – while others didn’t because they thought the plan was unethical.

Republicans started raising suspicions about DeStefano months ago when they found many of the signatures on his nominating petitions were from Democrats, including a former Adler campaign staffer.

I wrote about a related issue a little over a week ago, pointing out the fact that Democrats Don’t Give A DAMN About The Constitution Or Any Limits On Their Power.

In that article, I cited the audio of Democrat Robin Carnahan openly mocking the election process and the will of the voters in an exchange that went as follows:

Carnahan: “We’re going to also have a libertarian and a Constitution Party candidate running.  And I will tell you no one’s going to know who they are, but it’s not going to matter, because Glenn Beck says you’re supposed to be for the Constitution, and there is some percentage of people who will go vote for them.  And in our internal polling about six or seven percent goes like that to the Libertarian and Constitution Party.  So I’m quite sure that whoever wins is going to do it with less than fifty percent of the vote.” […]

Donor: “You just don’t sound like those Constitution Party votes are going to come out of your account.”

Carnahan: “What do you think?” (Audience laughter)

Donor: “I think you’re right.” (Audience laughter)

These Democrats don’t care about fairly and honestly winning elections; they care only about power and totalitarian control over government.  And they will use every UNFAIR and DISHONEST tactic to gain the power over the people that they seek.

And if you care about your country’s Constitution, why, you’re just an idiot schmuck to these contemptible Democrats.

I also wrote about some of the utterly contemptible examples of fraud that are besetting the Democrat Party, including the fact that ALL EIGHT of the vile little cockroaches in Bell, California, who stole millions from a town whose per capita income was only half the national average, were DEMOCRATS.

And it’s not a matter that Democrats did this a long time ago, or that they just did it recently; it’s about the fact that they are doing these things RIGHT THE HELL NOW.

If you think that Democrats have demonstrated that they deserve the right to continue governing, all I can say is that you personally are disgusting.

Obama Allows Muslims To Opt Out Of ObamaCare; Christians Still Screwed

March 31, 2010

Interesting factoids on the Hussein-in-Chief’s ObamaCare opt-outs:

If you are Muslim you can opt out of the Obamacare health care reform laws with no penalties
March 26, 2010
Phoenix Small Business Management Examiner
by Gil Guigna

Isn’t this nice. If you are of the Muslim religion, you don’t have to give all the new Obamacare healthcare reform regulations and penalties another thought. Because the concept of being compelled to participate in such a healthcare program offends Islamic sensibilities, Muslims are specifically exempt.

As a matter of fact if you are Amish, American Indian or a Chistian Scientist you do not need to participate or pay the taxes associated with healthcare reform. That means not having to be forced to buy healthcare insurance, not paying the taxes or the penalties if you don’t get it. Nice!

Here is what the regulations say:

EXEMPTIONS FROM INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.

—In the case of an individual who is seeking an exemption certificate under section 1311(d)(4)(H) from any requirement or penalty imposed by section 5000A, the following information:

In the case of an individual seeking exemption based on the individual’s status as a
member of an exempt religious sect or division, as a member of a health care sharing ministry, as an Indian,
or as an individual eligible for a hardship exemption, such information as the Secretary shall prescribe.”

Senate Bill, H.R. 3590, pages 273-274

There are several reasons why an individual could claim exemption, being a member of a religion that does not believe in insurance is one of them. Islam is one of those religions. Muslims believe that health insurance is “haraam”, or forbidden; because they liken the ambiguity and probability of insurance to gambling. This belief excludes them from any of the requirements, mandates, or penalties set forth in the bill. More…

This means that if you are Christian and abortion is against your religion tough luck.

If you are Jewish tough luck as well.

We wonder why these certain groups get a free ride. We also wonder why the largest religious block in North and South America the Christians are discriminated against like this. Very odd indeed.

There is a lot of food for thought here and a lot of ways to object to this healthcare bill isn’t there.

So I could get out of this terrible ObamaCare boondoggle if I declared myself a Muslim?  Doesn’t that just figure with this guy?

Well, that’s not going to happen.  But I’m not sure not going to willingly accept Obama’s version of the Mark of the Beast, either.

Wonder how many more “Muslims” there will be as this asinine program starts to implode?

Maybe I’ll declare myself as Amish.  That doesn’t sound so bad.

ObamaCare Factoid: Access To Health Care Doesn’t Mean Squat When Hospitals, Doctors And Pharmacists Bail

March 22, 2010

As an introduction, let me just say this: In this article, I detail that doctors and hospitals and pharmacies are going to bail out of Medicare and Medicaid – if they don’t just go out of business altogether.  They aren’t bailing out on private insurers – the free market businesses that Obama and the Democrats have continuously demonized and demagogued – they’re bailing out on the very government health care systems that liberals want to erect in the place of the free market health care system that they are destroying.  And as a matter of fact, the poorest and neediest are the ones who will likely suffer the most due to this terrible ObamaCare bill.

Congratulations, Democrats.  Thanks to the passage of ObamaCare, you and all your useless slacker friends who love to parasitically leach off of society will have access to health care.

Mind you, that “access” won’t mean squat as doctors, pharmacies, etc. stop accepting patients from Obama and his crappy government.

Don’t believe me?  Well, here’s some info from the New York Times:

EARLY this year, Barbara Plumb, a freelance editor and writer in New York who is on Medicare, received a disturbing letter. Her gynecologist informed her that she was opting out of Medicare. When Ms. Plumb asked her primary-care doctor to recommend another gynecologist who took Medicare, the doctor responded that she didn’t know any — and that if Ms. Plumb found one she liked, could she call and tell her the name?

Many people, just as they become eligible for Medicare, discover that the insurance rug has been pulled out from under them. Some doctors — often internists but also gastroenterologists, gynecologists, psychiatrists  and other specialists — are no longer accepting Medicare, either because they have opted out of the insurance system or they are not accepting new patients with Medicare coverage. The doctors’ reasons: reimbursement rates are too low and paperwork too much of a hassle.

When shopping for a doctor, ask if he or she is enrolled with Medicare. If the answer is no, that doctor has opted out of the system. Those who are enrolled fall into two categories, participating and nonparticipating. The latter receive a lower reimbursement from Medicare, and the patient has to pick up more of the bill.

Doctors who have opted out of Medicare can charge whatever they want, but they cannot bill Medicare for reimbursement, nor may their patients. Medigap, or supplemental insurance, policies usually do not provide coverage when Medicare doesn’t, so the entire bill is the patient’s responsibility.

The solution to this problem is to find doctors who accept Medicare insurance — and to do it well before reaching age 65. But that is not always easy, especially if you are looking for an internist, a primary care doctor who deals with adults. Of the 93 internists affiliated with New York-Presbyterian Hospital, for example, only 37 accept Medicare, according to the hospital’s Web site.

Two trends are converging: there is a shortage of internists nationally — the American College of Physicians, the organization for internists, estimates that by 2025 there will be 35,000 to 45,000 fewer than the population needs — and internists are increasingly unwilling to accept new Medicare patients.

Sorry to throw you out on your ass, old timer.  But the government health care system sucks, and Zero is going to make it even suckier.

And here’s how Zero will make it suckier:

Updated January 14, 2010
Why Doctors Are Abandoning Medicare
By C.L. Gray, M.D.
FOXNews.com

Physicians will not be bullied into bankruptcy. Our system needs reform, but what’s being hammered out in Washington is not the answer.

Two weeks ago the Mayo Clinic shocked the nation when it closed the doors of one of its Arizona clinics to patients on Medicare. Just this past June President Obama himself praised Mayo as a model of medical efficiency noting that Mayo gives “the highest quality care at costs well below the national norm.” If Mayo feels compelled to walk away from this government-run program, others will surely follow. The nation must understand why.

Doctors are leaving Medicare for two reasons: one obvious, the other more concealed.

The first is simple—the math
:

1) For the past decade Medicare consistently paid physicians 20% less than traditional insurance companies for identical service.

2) On January 1, 2010 Washington made hidden cuts to Medicare by altering its billing codes.

3) Medicare will cut physician reimbursement by another 21% on March 1. The CBO said this cut must take place if the Senate healthcare bill was to “reduced the deficit.”

4) Even more, Congress pledged to cut Medicare by yet another $500 billion. Again, the CBO said this additional cut must take place if the Senate healthcare bill was to “reduced the deficit.”
Many physicians were operating at a loss even before this series of massive cuts. In 2008, Mayo Clinic posted an $840 million loss in caring for Medicare patients. No businesses can survive when patient care expenses exceed revenue.

The second is more ominous—Washington’s increasingly abusive posture toward physicians.

President Obama reflected this attitude last summer. On national television, he stated as fact a surgeon is paid between $30,000 and $50,000 for amputating a patient’s foot.

In reality, a surgeon is paid between $740 and $1,140 to perform this unfortunate, but often life-saving procedure. This reimbursement must cover a pre-operative evaluation the day of surgery, the surgery, and follow-up for 90 days after surgery—not to mention malpractice insurance, salaries for clinic nurses, and clinic overhead. It is frightening to think our president is so wildly misinformed even as he stands on the cusp of overhauling American health care. But it gets worse.

Given massive federal deficits, Washington now faces increasing pressure to cut Medicare spending. One way to do this is to intimidate physicians into under-billing. To do this Washington intends to spend tax payer dollars to ramp up physician audits using Recovery Audit Contractors (RAC audits) to randomly investigate private physician’s Medicare billing.

A physician group at my hospital recently experienced an AdvanceMed audit, an earlier version of the RAC. For a year Medicare auditors made their practice a living hell, making them question if it was worth caring for Medicare patients at all. [click to keep reading]

Do you remember that bit about the Mayo Clinic no longer accepting Medicare patients in Arizona?  That’s a trend the rest of the country is going to follow.  From the Wall Street Journal:

President Obama last year praised the Mayo Clinic as a “classic example” of how a health-care provider can offer “better outcomes” at lower cost. Then what should Americans think about the famous Minnesota medical center’s decision to take fewer Medicare patients?

Specifically, Mayo said last week it will no longer accept Medicare patients at one of its primary care clinics in Arizona. Mayo said the decision is part of a two-year pilot program to determine if it should also drop Medicare patients at other facilities in Arizona, Florida and Minnesota, which serve more than 500,000 seniors.

Mayo says it lost $840 million last year treating Medicare patients, the result of the program’s low reimbursement rates. Its hospital and four clinics in Arizona—including the Glendale facility—lost $120 million. Providers like Mayo swallow some of these Medicare losses, while also shifting the cost by charging more to private patients and insurers.

Sorry, senior.  But you can’t get your prescriptions refilled, either.  From the Seattle Times:

Walgreens will stop taking new Medicaid patients in Washington state as of April 16, saying it loses money filling their prescriptions.

Effective April 16, Walgreens drugstores across the state won’t take any new Medicaid patients, saying that filling their prescriptions is a money-losing proposition — the latest development in an ongoing dispute over Medicaid reimbursement.

Now that ObamaCare has passed, get ready to see more and more doctors say bye-bye:

If ObamaCare passes, you may lose your family doctor.  Oh, and good luck finding a new one.

That’s the stunning conclusion of a new study by the Medicus Firm, as reported by Recruiting Physicians Today, a newletter published by the publishers of the New England Journal of Medicine.  Medicus, a national physician search firm, surveyed 1,195 practicing physicians about the health reform plans pending in Congress.  The doctors, representing a wide range of specialties and career levels, were asked to assess the possible impact of ObamaCare on their careers, including “income, job satisfaction, and future career plans.”1

The bottom line of that investigation, titled Physician Survey: Health Reform’s Impact on Physician Supply and Quality of Medical Care, is summed up by Medicus managing partner Steve Marsh:  “What many people may not realize is that health reform could impact physician supply in such a way that the quality of health care could suffer.  The reality is that there may not be enough doctors to provide quality medical care to the millions of newly insured patients.”2

Why?  Put simply, doctors fear that ObamaCare would make the business and practice of medicine more trouble than it’s worth.  The surveyed physicians foresee in their future under ObamaCare a decrease in income coupled with an increased work load, a toxic combination of new regulations and taxes plus millions of newly insured individuals swelling their patient rosters.

The doctors assessed the possible impact of several iterations of ObamaCare.  For example, 72 percent felt their income would decrease under a health reform bill that included a public option, while 50 percent predicted a decrease in income under a health reform regime without a public option.

Not surprisingly, “an overwhelming 63 percent of physicians prefer a more gradual, targeted approach to health reform” as opposed to the massive, one-size fits all plans favored by the President and Congressional leaders.3 An astonishing 46 percent of responding primary care physicians claim they would leave or try to leave medicine as a result of ObamaCare, gravely exacerbating the existing shortage of primary care doctors (according to the American Academy of Family Physicians, the number of U.S. medical school students choosing primary care has already dropped 52 percent since 1997).4

The Medicus results echo a similar Investors Business Daily poll of over 1,000 practicing physicians, 65 percent of whom expressed opposition to the President’s health reform plan, and 72 percent of whom doubted the administration’s claim that the government could significantly expand coverage and provide better care at lower costThe IBD poll, conducted in September of 2009, also found a startling number of physicians, 45 percent, who would consider quitting if ObamaCare becomes law.  The grim conclusion of the IBD survey:  “Two of every three practicing physicians oppose the medical overhaul plan under consideration in Washington, and hundreds of thousands would think about shutting down their practices or retiring early if it were adopted.”5

If ObamaCare would drive practicing doctors out of work, it would also devastate efforts to recruit new physicians.  After all, how do you persuade talented young people to enter a business that promises high taxes, regulation, risk and stress – without commensurate compensation? For the average health care consumer, the result of this shrinking pool of physicians would be long waits and rationed care, to say nothing of overworked, unhappy doctors.

A CNN Money article details that children and the poorest and most vulnerable adults are going to increasingly suffer as doctors bail out of Medicaid.

There’s another inherent rub there.  Democrats pitched ObamaCare as taking care of “47 million Americans” who can’t afford insurance.  But the poor always had access to coverage under Medicaid.  The only reason many of these people don’t use Medicaid is because the government program is such a total disaster, or they can’t find a doctor who will lose money treating them.

I’ll quote myself from an earlier article to make a couple more points about the “47 million Americans” lie:

If you believe that the government is going to create a trillion dollar entitlement that ensures 47 million more people – (John Larson, chairman of the Democratic caucus, used the “47 million” figure on ABCs “This Week” just yesterday; he used it again on CNNs “State of the Union”) and spends less money than is spent now, you are an abject fool.

And that “47 million” clearly includes 17 million illegal immigrants.  The Democrats’ incredibly cynical plan is to take health resources from you and from your children and grandchildren and give those resources to illegal immigrants so they can capture the Hispanic vote.

The bottom line about ObamaCare is that it is a government program, in which the government demonizes and destroys the private system of insurers and doctors and hospitals and pharmacists that make the system work, and offer in its place an utter disaster.

This ObamaCare boondoggle is going to be a holocaust.  God only knows how many people – especially the poorest and most vulnerable – are going to die.  It’s going to be legalized murder.

They say the road to hell is paved with good intentions.  I don’t think the Democrats’ intentions are all that good, but I do know that this is a road – scratch that, a superhighway – to hell.