Thousands Protest Obamacare

Reagan's Warning on Obama Care: He Predicted This

Our great president Ronald Reagan passed away in 2004, but he said something that still resonates today.

Reagan said: " One of the traditional methods of imposing  statism or socialism on people has been by way of medicine.It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can't afford it."

Boy does that resonate!

It sure sounds like Reagan had the foresight to see the dangers of Obamacare.

Even more amazing is that Ronald Reagan spoke those words in 1961, before he ever ran for office.

But Reagan's comments are not surprising if you understand liberalism.

Creating a national healthcare system has been a major priority for the left wing for over 50 years! Time and again the Congress and the American people have rejected socialized medicine.

Now Obama is pushing  for a radical takeover of one-sixth  of the U.S. economy.

But Obama is perhaps the most clever liberal ever. He knows the American people will never go for a national system like they have in Britain or Canada. So his plan calls for several steps for Obamacare  to become reality.

 

First, he lies and tells people "you keep your doctor, you keep your insurer." At the same time he creates a "public option"-- allowing  any business to move its employees into the public system.He knows what you know-- this will create a mass exodus from private insurers to the cheaper, taxpayer subsidized public system.

Meanwhile, he plans to add 50 million new patients--INCLUDING ILLEGAL ALIENS-- to the system.

Reagan understood that schemes like Obama's are not about providing quality health care. It is about statism. It is about government control and dependence. It is a threat to your freedom.

As i write this, millions of Americans are going on vacation. But Obama and his allies are preparing for a major assault on Congress next week. He has called for a dramatic full session of Congress. He is not calling this session to offer compromise. He plans on using his national address to Congress as a giant pep rally to ram his radical program through Congress.

He wants the hoopla of a Congressional speech to overshadow his plummeting poll numbers,the mass protests we saw this summer at town halls across the nation and growing anger toward his plan by Seniors.

We can't compromise with Obama and the radical Democrats.

As Reagan said:" If not us, who? If  not now, when?"

REAGAN ON LIBERALS

I wanted to share a quote from arguably the greatest president that our nation has ever had, definitely the most conservative.

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're  ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."  --Ronald Reagan

"Our" Tax Dollars to sell Obama's Health Care Plan

The White House hired a private communications company based in Minnesota to distribute mass emails, helping to shed light on how some recipients received e-mails in support of President Obama's health care plan without signing up for them.

The company, Govdelivery, describes itself as the world's leading provider of government-to-citizens communication solutions and says its email service provides a fully-automated on-demand public communication system.It is still unknown how much taxpayer money the White House provides to Govdelivery for its services.

The revelation comes after the White House acknowledged this week that people were receiving  unsolicited emails from the administration about health care reform and suggested the problem was with third party groups that placed the recipients' names on the distribution list.

Republicans quickly pounced on the news."This is yet another ominous chapter in the administration's rabid campaign to jam its radical health care plan scheme onto an unwilling public by any means necessary," Rep. Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan said in a statement.

The White House also recently pulled the plug on a controversial email address, flag@whitehouse.gov, that was established for supporters to report "fishy" information about heath care reform.

The fact is that the firm sending out these mass emails is the same as the White House sending them, but only now with the issue of tax payer money being used. 

Kathleen Kennedy attacks the Pope

Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, the former lieutenant governor of Maryland, has sparked controversy-- and outrage-- by writing that President Barack Obama reflects the views of American Catholics better than the Pope.

Kennedy-Townsend, eldest of Robert Kennedy's 11 children, asserted: "Obama's pragmatic approach to divisive policy.........and his social-justice agenda reflect the views of American Catholic laity much more closely than those vocal bishops and pro-life activists." She noted that while Obama and Pope Benedict XVI "disagree about reproductive freedoms and homosexuality,"American Catholics "know Obama's on their side. In fact, Obama's agenda is closer to their views than even the Pope's."

Among the voices decrying Townsend's column is Judie Brown, president and co-founder of the American Life League, a pro-life organization. She calls Kennedy-Townsend's views "misguided" and states: "Reproductive freedoms, for those unfamiliar with the culture of death's propaganda, is a code phrase for abortion on demand,sex instruction in schools, birth control for kids, and all manner of bizarre propositions that help the purveyors of smut to define the human person as an animal incapable of self-control....."One can easily tell that her thought process has little to do with Catholic identity and, in fact, is contrary to all that is Catholic. There is no other explanation for her inane claim that Obama is somehow more in tune with American Catholics than the Pope."

Townsend goes on to say that the Church hierarchy "ignores women's equality and gays' cry for justice because to heed them would require that it admit error and acknowledge  that the self-satisfied edifice constructed around sex and gender has been wrong."

She went on to blast the Pope's recent encyclical, "Charity in Truth," claiming it gives "moral credence to Obama's message."

But Brown counters, "In  fact, the encyclical's message is something else entirely......'Without respect for the human person, it is impossible to bring about a just society, and in a just society, there is no room for heinous crimes such as abortion. This is the underlying theme of the entire encyclical, which Kennedy-Townsend apparently overlooked entirely."

Obama Admits he's Foggy on Healthcare Bill

Members of Congress haven't read the 1.018-page proposed healthcare-reform legislation, but then, apparently neither has the president.

He recently confessed that he's "not familiar" with key provisions of the legislation. Obama's embarrassing admission came during a conference call with left-leaning bloggers.

Obama urged the bloggers to continue pressuring Congress to pass healthcare reform immediately. During that call a blogger referenced an article in Investor's Business Daily indicating Section 102 of the House bill would "outlaw" private insurance.

"Is this true?" the blogger asked Obama. "Will people be able to keep their insurance and will insurers be able to write new policies even though H.R. 3200 is passed?"

The president's response on behalf of the legislation he is pushing through Congress:"You know, i have to say that i am not familiar with the provision you are talking about."

The response prompted the think tank to state: "This is a truly disturbing admission by the president, especially considering that later in the call, Obama promises yet again:'If you have health insurance, and you like it,and you have a doctor that you like,then you can keep it. Period."

So i rhetorically ask, "How can Obama continue to make this promise if he is not familiar with the healthcare legislation that is being written in Congress?"

No version of the legislation "outlaws" private insurance coverage. However, it increases its cost relative to public subsidized plans in a way that leads some experts to believe private insurance would no longer be a viable option.

A Heritage Foundation-Lewin Group report released Monday found that close to 100 million policy holders may be forced to change insurance plans if Congress passes the bill supported by Obama.

Does Wall Street Hate Capitalism?

What if  you discovered that the vet who takes care of your dog was Michael Vick? Would you think twice about bringing Fido back for his annual shots?

Or what if you discovered that your auto mechanic was a member of Greenpeace? Would you think twice about having him work on your SUV?

Of course you would. Just as, I hope, you would think twice about trusting your retirement savings to someone who secretly despised-- or simply didn't understand-- the free-market capitalist system that makes profits and prosperity possible.

Yet that, believe it or not, is exactly the position millions of Americans are finding themselves in today-- as they discover that Wall Street, far from being a stronghold of "rich Republicans" and "laissez-faire capitalists," is actually dominated by liberal Democrats who support, overwhelmingly, the prosperity-wrecking big-government policies of Barack Obama and his neo-socialists.

Think this is an exaggeration? Consider the following facts and statistics:

*According to an analysis of Federal Election Commission records by the Center for Responsive Politics, the 2008 Obama campaign received $12.6 million from Wall Street "Securities and Investment" firms versus McCain's $7.9 million.

*The top three corporate employers of donors to Obama, Joe Biden, and Rahm Emanuel were Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, and JP Morgan.

*Employees of Lehman Brothers alone gave Obama $370,000, compared to about $117,000 to Mc Cain.(No wonder Bush let them go under)

* Since 1998,the financial sector has given a total of $37.6 million to Obama, compared to $32.1 million to Mc Cain. But Obama ran for his first national office only in 2004. So Mc Cain got less from the financial industry in a decade that included two runs for president than Obama did in four years.

What's this all about? Well, you see, the financial industry takes care of Democrats-- and as we've seen in recent months, the Democrats take care of the financial industry. After all, it's a lot easier to get rich by taking money from taxpayers than to do it by choosing  consistently profitable investments for your clients.

9/11 PLOT FOILED, FBI SAYS, 'ISOLATED INCIDENT'

The United States may have narrowly missed a repeat of the 9/11 attacks in June- and, apparently, even the FBI doesn't realize it.

On June 4, a 24-year old Muslim man named Raed Abdul-Rahan Alsaif was arrested for trying to bring a seven-inch knife on board a U.S. Airways flight at Tampa International Airport, destined for Phoenix. The blade was seen by a screener and Alsaif was caught before he could get onto the airliner. Of course, he says he is innocent, as some forgetful friend gave him the luggage bag and failed to mention that a knife was embedded inside the material. The weapon was artfully concealed in such a way as to allow for it to be retrieved once the flight took off.

Alsaif graduated from the Islamic Saudi Academy in Virginia in 2003. For those that don't remember, this school has been embroiled in a little bit of controversy the past two years. In October 2007, the U.S. Commission on International Religion Freedom requested that the State Department close the school,citing the use of textbooks filled with extremism. The commission again reported on the school's radical curriculum in June 2008. One graduate has been convicted of working with al-Qaeda, while two former students were kicked out of Israel upon landing due to clear signs they were planning suicide bombings.

Private investigator Bill Warner notes that when Alsaif was booked and photographed by police in October on his second arrest on drug charges, he had a beard- a beard that was shaven off before he attempted to board the U.S. Airways flight. For those of you who think this is all attributed to coincidence, there's another key element to consider.

On the same day, June 4, two other individuals, Roshid Milledge and Damien Young, were arrested in Philadelphia  after sneaking a handgun onto a flight. The airline? U.S. Airways. The destination? Phoenix.  The departing time? About 35 minutes from the flight Alsaif attempted to board, using the same airliner and with the same destination.

The FBI immediately cast doubt on questions that the two were part of a terrorist plot or even connected to Alsaif.

"This investigation represents an isolated incident, involving only these two individuals," the FBI press release states.

I don't know what's more frightening: the fact that the FBI so readily the remarkably similar arrests as unconnected, or the fact that in the latter case, the handgun actually made it  on board the aircraft and the suspects were only apprehended after another passenger reported them as engaging in suspicious behavior.

The good news is that a 9/11 plot may have been thwarted. The bad news is that the public and possibly the FBI are unaware that they even have had success.

If the coincidences of these cases are not addressed and if they are attributed to chance, then we've truly fallen out of the post-9/11 mindset and only a disaster will wake us up, AGAIN.

Rasmussen Poll: Obama's Popularity Plunging

The last Rasmussen daily tracking poll shows that President Barack Obama for the first time has a negative approval index-- more Americans disapprove of his job performance than approve.

Rasmussen also disclosed that, if the economy does not improve over the next year,Obama's numbers will deteriorate even further-- and Democrats will suffer in 2010.

The raw numbers are pretty straightforward--31% of Americans strongly approve of the way Barack Obama is handling his job,33 % strongly disapprove. Prior to last week there hasn't been a circumstance where the number who disapprove outweighs the number who approve. Currently, we are in new territory. Right now the approval index,at minus 2, is as low as it's been.

What we're seeing is a growing number of people who strongly disapprove, and we're seeing it at a time when the president's honeymoon is coming to an end and people are beginning to look at the policies that he's promoting.

Our nation is mostly divided on many national issues like healthcare reform, but those who tend to have strong opinions tend to oppose the plan more than support it. But, on cap-and-trade legislation(to reduce carbon emissions), 42% believe it's going to hurt the economy.Only 19% believe it's going to help.

The government takeover of General Motors is also strongly opposed, which had a huge effect on the approval index.

Just over one month ago, 62% of Americans said that no matter what's happened in the last six months, George Bush is still more to blame for the economic mess than Obama. That number has now fallen to 53%, and the more  of Obama's policies that are put in to place, the more the blame or perhaps the credit, will shift to Obama.

The truths of our Founding Fathers

" I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." --Thomas Jefferson

HAPPY 4th of JULY!!!!

Please let us remember and appreciate how great our nation truly is! 

The Roar in Obama's backyard

I am proud of these folks for their post tea-party rally right here in Obama's backyard, Chicago. Let all of us listen, learn, and wake up!!

8 GOP votes pave way for Obama 'Climate Change Bill' in House

President Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi scored a major victory with the House's approval of a landmark climate bill-- thanks to a little help from a handful of Republicans.

Friday's vote was 219-212. The legislation was supported by 211 Democrats and eight aisle-crossing GOP members: Reps. Mary Bono(Calif.), Michael Castle(Del.),Mark Kirk (Ill.),Leonard Lance(NJ),Frank LoBiondo(NJ), John McHugh(NY), David Reichert(Wash), and Christopher Smith(NJ). Forty-four Democrats voted against the bill, making the eight GOP votes all the more crucial.

I personally can see the point of House Minority Leader John Boehner, who said, "this is the biggest job-killing bill  thats ever been on the floor of the House of Representatives. Right here, this bill.""I don't think that's in the best interest of the American people."

The 1,200- plus-page bill now goes to the Senate, where it faces an uncertain future.

According to the Associated Press, the "cap-and-trade" legislation places the first the first national limits on emissions of heat-trapping gases from major sources like power plants, refineries, and factories.

As written, the bill will cost American households an estimated $175 a year by 2020.

Many Republican refer to the legislation as a "national energy tax."

Sorry for the month hiatus, but we're back and still pissing off liberals and spreading the conservative truth. Please enjoy this post on Reaganomics Vs. Obamanomics, and thanks for all the hits. -SD

REAGANOMICS Vs. OBAMANOMICS

You know what really irritates me about liberals? 

They always think liberalism fixes the problem -- even when it was liberalism that caused the problem in the first place!

Case in point, the Financial Meltdown of 2008 (and counting). To hear liberals tell it, it all goes back to Ronald Reagan -- who with his seductive "B-actor" charm fooled America into thinking that by slashing taxes, regulation, and government spending we could unleash free enterprise and create a new wave of prosperity.

Sure, liberals concede, that seemed to work for, oh, the better part of three decades, but now we're paying the price for all that "greed." The solution? A return to the pre-Reagan policies of Jimmy Carter, LBJ, FDR... Speaking of which, what will victory look like in the "War on Poverty"? When are they going to produce an "exit strategy" from that quagmire?

Unfortunately, the facts -- as always when you're talking about liberal theories -- tell a different story. A story in which all the major villains, it turns out, have one thing in common: government.

That's right. From the "Community Reinvestment Act" that pressured banks into affirmative-action lending, to those "government-sponsored enterprises" Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- who bought up all the resulting subprime loans and repackaged them as "investment grade" securities -- the greasy thumb-prints of government were all over this fiasco from beginning to end.

But those, as I say, are facts. And facts have no place in the fantasy world of Democratic policy-makers. Nor does history -- true history, that is, as opposed to the public-school propaganda that teaches, for instance, that FDR's New Deal got usout of the Great Depression, when in reality it only deepened and prolonged it.

But the question remains: What can those of us in the fast-dwindling, Reality-Based Community do to survive financially as the Obamacrats prepare a "New New Deal" that threatens to outspend the original by about ten thousand to one?

SENATE FOLLOWS HOUSE IN SHOOTING DOWN OBAMA'S BID TO CLOSE GUANTANAMO

In a rare, bipartisan defeat for President Obama, the Senate voted overwhelmingly  Wednesday to keep the prison at Guantanamo Bay open for the foreseeable future and forbid the transfer of any detainees to facilities in the United States.

Democrats lines up with Republicans in the 90-6 vote that came on the heels of a similar move a week ago in the House, underscoring widespread apprehension among Obama's congressional allies over voters' strong feelings about bringing detainees to the U.S. from the prison in Cuba.

The President readied a speech for Thursday on the U.S. fight against terrorism, at a time when LIBERALS have chafed at some of his decisions. Yes, you read that right, even his fellow liberal colleagues think he's extreme. 

Obama has vowed to close the prison by January 2010, and the Senate's vote was not the final word on the matter.It will take congress at least a month to complete work on the legislation, giving the  White House time to pursue a compromise that would allow the president to fulfill his pledge. I'm against both obviously, but closing Gitmo is one thing and bringing terrorists to the U.S. is another. Regardless if a compromise is agreed upon, and Gitmo is eventually closed, i believe this legislation will prevent the terrorist detainees from ever touching U.S. soil.

Obama's maneuvering room was further constrained when FBI Director Robert Mueller told a congressional panel that he had "serious concerns" about bringing Guantanamo Bay detainees to prisons in the Unites States.He said that among the risks is "the potential for individuals undertaking attacks in the U.S." You think? All due respect but you don't need to be the FBI director to have that concern. It seems most Americans do, except the one that most Americans chose to lead us.

Additionally, U.S. District Judge John Bates ruled this week that some prisoners--but not all--can be held indefinitely at Guantanamo without being charged, thus increasing the pressure on the administration to develop a plan for the men held there.

After the Senate vote, the White House released a statement saying that, "The president understands that his most important job is to keep the American people safe and he is not going to make any decisions or any judgement that imperils  the safety of the American people."

Of course he's not, now that Congress somehow has come to their senses.

Republicans, for the first time since the election, are gaining the upper hand against the White House, with demands that none of the remaining 240 detainees should end up on American soil." The American people don't want these men walking the streets of American neighborhoods,"Senator John Thune said."The American people don't want them held at a military base or federal prison in their backyard, either."

Harry Reid,the Senate majority leader, rattled my Republican aggression, said that he wanted a "comprehensive, responsible plan" from the White House for closing Guantanamo.

We know it's a bad idea when Harry Reid is agreeing with us.

AMERICA IS NOW A 'PRO-LIFE' NATION

A new Gallup poll shows a stunning reversal in American perceptions on the question of abortion.

For the first time since Gallup started surveying the country on this subject, more Americans self-identify as being "Pro-Life" than "Pro-Choice." And the turn around has been marked over the course of the past year. 51% of those surveyed now say they are "Pro-Life" whereas a year ago that number was just 44%. Those who declare themselves "Pro-Choice" saw their numbers fall from 50% in 2008 to just 42%.

So, what accounts for this change? Could the election of Barack Obama have something to do with it? A staunch supporter of abortion rights who won in November by a margin of 8 million votes, it would seem unlikely that Obama's rise to power would coincide with a dramatic shift away from "Pro-Choice" identification. Then again, Obama has played the abortion issue differently from many politicians of the past, attempting to find common ground with anti-abortion supporters, and striving to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies.

But a deeper look at Gallup's numbers reveals that the real movement in the polling history is coming from Republicans and Independents who lean rightward. The percentage of Republicans(including Independents) calling themselves "Pro-Life" rose by 10 points over the past year, from 60% to 70%, while there has been essentially no change in the views of Democrats and Democratic leaners.

The thing i like the most about that statistic is that it shows that there are certainly enough Republicans left in America to make a statistical difference.

REPUBLICANS MUST STAND FIRM ON PRINCIPLES

Contrary to Gen. Colin Powell's belief that the Republican Party must move to the center, all Republicans  need to stand firm on their conservative principles until this nation again comes around to the GOP's way of thinking. This process will be driven by the consequences of Obama's program.

The challenge brought by Obama is no longer just theoretical:He means to pass the ultimate leftist agenda and has the votes to do so.

As a result, our nation will be unrecognizable well before the 2010 elections. Business will march to a beat drummed in Washington.

The top producers will be hounded by confiscatory taxation. A majority will pay nothing or receive government welfare. Our health care system will be destroyed. Illegal immigrants will be well on their way to citizenship.

Obama's 'Brave New World' will be the subject of the 2010 elections. We are confident that his congress will be swept from power as a result.

Unfortunately, i believe that inflation will join a lingering recession and that high unemployment will continue.

Voters will recognize the damage to their health care as bureaucrats weigh in to prevent them from getting the care they need, and were PROMISED.

Our security and defense failures may well have cost us Pakistan, and the  nightmare of a nuclear-armed state may have already come true, even before Iran.

All America will be watching the Obama fallout, and Republicans must be seen as a clear alternative--- a strong voice for reversal of the harm the president will have inflicted.

If the GOP is seen as a moderate party, as ' TRAITOR' Powell suggests, a party just looking to split the difference, voters will conclude that there is no distinction between the parties.

The liberal Obama Democrats have posed the challenge. It's up to the Republicans to fight along these lines. Compromise is NOT an option, YET.

SHERIFF JOE ARPAIO'S LETTER TO REV. AL SHARPTON

Below is a letter written by Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County,Arizona to Rev. Al Sharpton. Sheriff Joe, as i have previously posted, is one of the toughest enforcers of illegal immigration laws in the country. I should say one of the FEW enforcers. Arpaio has drawn much criticism from many liberal immigration activists, but has been elected to five consecutive 4-year terms by the 4 million citizens of Maricopa County. He is a true American hero, and we need more like him.

              Dear Reverend Sharpton,

I have read about you with much interest since learning of the protest you plan to lead against me in Maricopa County in June as a way to force my resignation or removal from office.

Your public proclamation leads me to the conclusion: Not only do you not understand Arizona; you also do not understand democracy.As the elected Sheriff who, so far has been elected to five consecutive four-year terms,i answer to the four million residents of Maricopa county. I do not answer to the whims of the media,or locally or nationally elected officials who want open borders and who have their own agendas.Nor do i answer to a publicity hound outside interloper who has demonstrated no interest in looking for the truth before making loud uninformed noises.

While your public outcries are colorful, there are several instances where you have inserted yourself into other people's affairs without knowing any of the facts.Poor judgement has caused you plenty of trouble in the past and promises to do so again.Most earnest people want to learn by their mistakes.You seem to glory in repeating them.

I would like to help you avoid further embarrassment by assisting in your understanding of the illegal immigration problem here in my country.When and if you do make the trip here, i invite you to call me to talk about these false allegations.

We can discuss how my deputies are extensively trained by the Federal government to properly combat illegal immigration and how the laws of this state allow this sheriff's office to question and investigate the immigration status of those people deputies detain in the course of our everyday law enforcement duties.

Don't make the same mistake made by the four Democratic congressmen calling for a U.S. Department of Justice investigation of this office.They and other politicians relied solely on media reports and anti-law enforcement handouts that are replete with inaccuracies.They have brainwashed a handful of local residents to believe these lies.Rest assured that the men and women of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office do not racially profile anyone.

However,we do enforce the state and federal illegal immigration laws.And we will continue to do so as long as these laws are on the books.You can parachute into town, stomp your feet up and down and hold more press conferences against me--that is a hallmark of democracy too--but you will not stop me, nor slow me down for one second,from doing what is right.

Before you bring your circus to town and take to our streets by marching against this Sheriff, let's get you fully informed for a change.Congressman John Conyers did not have the courtesy to respond to my invitation to visit with me personally. I hope you will consider my invitation.Surely, a man like yourself--a reverend--who famously preaches from the church pulpit understands the infinite wisdom of these words:You shall know the 'truth' and the truth will set you free. Let's talk about the 'truth', Reverend. I await your response.

Sincerely,

Joe Arpaio

Sheriff, Maricopa County

                 

              

  

UNIVERSAL 'OBAMACARE': WILL IT BANKRUPT AMERICA?

A growing chorus of experts is warning  the Obama administration's plan to add 47 million people to the health-insurance rolls may kill hopes for a sustained economic recovery.

Obama's health care plan would follow the $700 billion TARP bailout, the $787 billion stimulus, and a $410 billion,earmark-laden budget appropriation-- at a time when the national debt already exceeds $11 trillion. Such staggering deficits are leading economists to question whether enough investment capital would be left over once the expected economic recovery takes hold.

Any economic recovery could stall or be seriously limited, economists say.Alarms over the cost of the program are sounding just as senators begin a series of discussions on health care.

Democrats hope those discussions will lead to a bipartisan agreement.Republicans contend that any health care reform must be made in a fiscally responsible way.They say that the the Dems' proposals are far from fiscally responsible and will only continue the borrowing and spending trend.

GOP leaders in congress says that spending billions more on health care will hurt job creation during a period of already high unemployment.

In its January report on the budget outlook, the Congressional Budget Office warned that even without Obama's health plan, the double whammy of high deficits and rising health-care costs could throttle the recovery.They concluded that the greatest single threat to budget stability over the long run is the sharp rise in Medicare and Medicaid.

So, you may ask, just how much will health care reform cost?  Until the details are worked out, no one can say precisely. But if the ultimate program resembles at all the one that Obama laid out during the campaign, the price tag will be staggering.Low-end estimates project a cost of $1.17 trillion over the first 10 years of the program-- far more than the $684 billion in Obama's preliminary budget framework.Another estimate, which is figured at a 7% annual inflation rate in medical costs, holds that the plan would cost $6 trillion over the next decade.

The bottom line here, in my opinion and the opinion of many others, is that we can't afford to have the government run anything else in our lives, because it doesn't do it well, and it makes it much more expensive. The economic status of our nation is playing into the hands of a liberal socialist administration who is finding it easy to implement the nationalization it craves.

And to those Obama supporters who voted for the "lollipops & rainbows" promise of universal health care, you're about to get your wish at a steep price, the possible bankruptcy of America. Thanks!!