Link to Story:
Tagged: health care Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts
IL 17 CD doesn’t care about the constitution
Repost for my friend Obamachrist:
Subscribe to my NEW channel
Slow down the video for all the information and how to contact your reps. The passage of this bill will be the LAST NAIL in the coffin of the USA as we know it. We will be knocked out and what life is left will be completely sucked out. Prepare! God bless.
Paul Joseph Watson
Monday, March 1, 2010
Microsoft founder Bill Gates told a recent TED conference, an organization which is sponsored by one of the largest toxic waste polluters on the planet, that vaccines need to be used to reduce world population figures in order to solve global warming and lower CO2 emissions.
Stating that the global population was heading towards 9 billion, Gates said, “If we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services (abortion), we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 per cent.”
Quite how an improvement in health care and vaccines that supposedly save lives would lead to a lowering in global population is an oxymoron, unless Gates is referring to vaccines that sterilize people, which is precisely the same method advocated in White House science advisor John P. Holdren’s 1977 textbook Ecoscience, which calls for a dictatorial “planetary regime” to enforce draconian measures of population reduction via all manner of oppressive techniques, including sterilization.
“I’m not sure what the nothing-to-see-here explanation is for Bill Gates’ theory that “new vaccines” can help lower the population of the world,” points out the Cryptogon blog, “But I thought about the incidents from the 1990s where the World Health Organization was providing a “tetanus vaccine” to poor girls and women (and just poor girls and women) that contained human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG). For those who don’t want to delve into that, in short, it was a World Health Organization experiment; a test of a vaccine against pregnancy.”
After presenting an equation that included the number of people on the planet and CO2 emissions, Gates said, “Probably one of these numbers is going to get pretty near to zero.”
Later in the presentation, Gates mentions picking a vaccine, “which is something I love,” that would be used to lower global CO2 emissions.
He also advocates pouring more money into the global warming scam by way of the United Nations, as well as a “CO2 tax” and cap and trade, while making it clear that the developed world would have to reduce its living standards by cutting back on essential services that generate CO2.
Gates said that a 20 per cent reduction in CO2 emissions was necessary by 2020, a 50 per cent reduction by 2050, and ultimately that there had to be zero CO2 emissions globally, a measure that would completely reverse hundreds of years of technological progress and return man to the agrarian age, all in the name of preventing an alleged miniscule temperature increase that has been proven to be based on fraudulent data models in light of the Climategate scandal.
One of Gates’ proposals for reducing CO2 emissions is the use of biofuels, which as a new report highlights, has resulted in millions of acres of forests being destroyed, which ultimately means a net increase in CO2 emissions from biofuels when compared to fossil fuels, not to mention the massive devastation caused to wildlife.
As we have documented, a CO2 reduction of 50-80 per cent, not to mention 100 per cent, would inflict a new great depression in the United States, reducing GDP by 6.9 percent – a figure comparable with the economic meltdown of 1929 and 1930.
Additionally, the “post-industrial revolution” being proposed by Gates and his ilk would lead to massive job losses.
The implementation of so-called “green jobs” in other countries has devastated economies and cost millions of jobs. As the Seattle Times reported back in June, Spain’s staggering unemployment rate of over 18 per cent was partly down to massive job losses as a result of attempts to replace existing industry with wind farms and other forms of alternative energy.
In a so-called “green economy,” “Each new job entails the loss of 2.2 other jobs that are either lost or not created in other industries because of the political allocation — sub-optimum in terms of economic efficiency — of capital,” states the report.
The fact that Gates would be so open in his call to use vaccines to lower global population (without a word as to the human rights considerations), probably has a lot to do with the audience attending his speech.
The TED organization admits that it is elitist, “in a good way,” and charges a whopping $6,000 dollars membership fee which must be paid by conference attendees. TED also charges nearly $1,000 just for its live conference web stream. The organization’s sponsors include IBM and military-industrial complex kingpin General Electric, which has a notorious history of environmental misdeeds, being ranked fourth-largest corporate producer of air pollution in the United States, with more than 4.4 million pounds per year (2,000 Tonnes) of toxic chemicals released into the air. GE is also a major contributor to the toxic waste problem, rendering its sponsorship of an organization that claims to be seeking solutions to environmental problems completely hypocritical.
Watch Gates’ speech below.
Paul Joseph Watson
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Eye surgeon and senatorial candidate Rand Paul warns that under ObamaCare, Americans could be forced to wait a year and a half merely to see a doctor due to Canadian-style rationing of health care being imposed.
As an eye surgeon with his own private practice, Paul warned that senior citizens could be forced to endure debilitating conditions as a result of health care rationing under the system being readied for passage, and be forced to wait as long as 18 months just to see a doctor as happens in Canada and Britain.
“There are 1 million people waiting for any kind of elective surgery in Canada at any one time,” he told Newsmax.TV’s Ashley Martella.
“Canada’s so bad that they have a lottery, there are some little towns that have one family doctor, they do a lottery and you can sometimes wait a year and a half to see the doctor,” said Paul. “I have friends who are eye surgeons in Canada, they’ve finished their surgery by September, they’re allotment, they’re given a number of surgeries they can do, when they’re finished in September some of them come to the U.S. and do elective cosmetic eye surgery in the U.S. because they’re not allowed to operate any more in Canada.”
In his article, There’s No Such Thing as Free Health Care, Journalist John Stossel highlights how even people with life-threatening conditions are told to wait. A woman with a blocked artery that prevented her from digesting food was told by doctors in British Columbia that she had only weeks to live, but that the surgery was still “elective.”
“The only thing elective about this surgery was I elected to live,” said the woman, who traveled to the United States to receive treatment.
It’s true that America’s partly profit-driven, partly bureaucratic system is expensive, and sometimes wasteful, but the pursuit of profit reduces waste and costs and gives the world the improvements in medicine that ease pain and save lives.
“[America] is the country of medical innovation. This is where people come when they need treatment,” Dr. Gratzer says.
“Literally we’re surrounded by medical miracles. Death by cardiovascular disease has dropped by two-thirds in the last 50 years. You’ve got to pay a price for that type of advancement.”
Canada and England don’t pay the price because they freeload off American innovation. If America adopted their systems, we could worry less about paying for health care, but we’d get 2009-level care—forever. Government monopolies don’t innovate. Profit seekers do.
On this note, Paul stressed that problems in health care were created by too much government interference, and that the only way to fix the system was to increase competition, not restrict it.
The Republican candidate for Senate highlighted FEMA’s botched efforts to distribute water bottles at the superdome after Hurricane Katrina as an example of the failings of government-run health care.
“They can’t even distribute water, there’s no way they can distribute health care,” said Paul.
The Senatorial candidate also said that with 46 million new people on government assistance, the new system could bankrupt medicare and lead to rationing for everyone. Doctors who have already tolerated shrinking wages for the last fifteen years would also leave the U.S. warned Paul, creating a vacuum.
“It’s intellectually dishonest for Democrats to say it’s going to cost $874 billion, but it’s really not going to add anything to the deficit. I don’t think the American public believes that,” added Paul.
Paul pointed out that the longer the debate raged about health care, the more people opposed the government’s proposals, emphasizing why the Obama administration is hell-bent on ramming through the legislation later this week on Christmas Eve.
Watch the video below.
Tenth Amendment Center
December 21, 2009
For the past few days, I’ve received loads of emails urging me to get active regarding the healthcare vote – most of which had a subject line similar to: “Last Chance to Stop National Healthcare!”
Well, if you believe the only way to protect your rights is by begging federal politicians to do what you want, then these emails are certainly right. The vote went as expected, and so will the next.
So if you think marching on D.C. or calling your Representatives, or threating to “throw the bums out” in 2010 or 2012 or 20-whatever, is going to further the cause of the Constitution and your liberty – you might as well get your shackles on now. Your last chance has come and gone.
But, those of you who visit this site regularly already know that the Senate’s health care vote is far from the end of things – and you also know that even when it goes into effect (which I assume some version will), it’s still not the end of the road for your freedom.
The real way to resist DC is not by begging politicians and judges in Washington to allow us to exercise our rights…it’s to exercise our rights whether they want to give us “permission” to or not.
Nullification – state-level resistance to unconstitutional federal laws – is the way forward.
When a state ‘nullifies’ a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or ‘non-effective,’ within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as that state is concerned.
It’s peaceful, effective, and has a long history in the American tradition. It’s been invoked in support of free speech, in opposition to war and fugitive slave laws, and more. Read more on this history here.
Regarding nullification and health care, there’s already a growing movement right now. Led by Arizona, voters in a number of states may get a chance to approve State Constitutional Amendments in 2010 that would effectively ban national health care in their states. Our sources here at the Tenth Amendment Center indicate to us that we should expect to see 20-25 states consider such legislation in 2010.
20 States resisting DC can do what calling, marching, yelling, faxing, and emailing has almost never done. Stop the feds dead in their tracks.
For example, 13 states are already defying federal marijuana prohibition, and the federal government is having such a hard time dealing with it that the Obama administration recently announced that they would no longer prioritize enforcement in states that have medical marijuana laws.
Better yet, in the last 2+ years more than 20 states have been able to effectively prevent the Real ID Act of 2005 from being implemented. How did they do that? They passed laws and resolutions refusing to comply with it. And today, it’s effectively null and void without ever being repealed by Congress or challenged in court.
While the Obama administration would like to revive it under a different name, the reality is still there – with massive state-level resistance, the federal government can be pushed back inside its constitutional box. Issue by issue, law by law, the best way to change the federal government is by resisting it on a state level.
That’s nullification at work.
Over the years, wise men and women warned us that the Constitution would never enforce itself. The time is long overdue for people to start recognizing this fact, and bring that enforcement closer to home.
The bottom line? If you want to make real change; if you want to really do something for liberty and for the Constitution…focus on local activism and your state governments.
Thomas Jefferson would be proud!
December 6, 2009
President Obama will head to Capitol Hill on Sunday to meet with Senate Democrats as the health debate rages, officials say.
The meeting is set for 2 p.m. ET, a White House official and a senior Democratic source told CNN.
Senate Republicans failed Saturday to eliminate $42.1 billion in cuts to Medicare home health care service in the health care bill.
The 53-41 vote shot down a motion offered by Sen. Mike Johanns, R-Nebraska, that would have sent Majority Leader Harry Reid’s sweeping $848 billion reform plan back to the committee with instructions to remove all home health care cuts.
December 1, 2009
A quick search of the Senate health bill will bring up “secretary” 2,500 times.
That’s because Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius would be awarded unprecedented new powers under the proposal, including the authority to decide what medical care should be covered by insurers as well as the terms and conditions of coverage and who should receive it.
“The legislation lists 1,697 times where the secretary of health and humans services is given the authority to create, determine or define things in the bill,” said Devon Herrick, a health care expert at the National Center for Policy Analysis.
For instance, on Page 122 of the 2,079-page bill, the secretary is given the power to establish “the basic per enrollee, per month cost, determined on average actuarial basis, for including coverage under a qualified health care plan.”
The HHS secretary would also have the power to decide where abortion is allowed under a government-run plan, which has drawn opposition from Republicans and some moderate Democrats.