Palin doubles down on 'death panels' By: Andy Barr August 13, 2009 07:05 AM EST
Former Alaska GOP Gov. Sarah Palin
defended her claim that the Democratic health care proposal would create
“death panels” in a statement Wednesday night slamming President BarackObama.
“Yesterday President Obama responded to my
statement that Democratic health care
proposals would lead to rationed care; that the sick, the elderly
and the disabled would suffer the most under such rationing; and that under
such a system, these ‘unproductive’ members of society could face the
prospect of government bureaucrats determining whether they deserve health
care,” Palin wrote in a note on her Facebook page.
“The provision that President Obama refers to is
Section 1233 of HR 3200, entitled ‘Advance Care Planning Consultation.’ With
all due respect, it’s misleading for the president to describe this section
as an entirely voluntary provision that simply increases the information
offered to Medicare recipients,” she continued.
“Section 1233 authorizes advanced care planning consultations for senior
citizens on Medicare every five years, and more often ‘if there is a
significant change in the health condition of the individual ... or upon
admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility... or a
The White House and Democratic lawmakers have blasted Palin
in recent days for suggesting that her own son, Trig, would have had to face
a bureaucratic panel to get access to health care under the provision in the
House health care proposal because he was born with Down syndrome.
“The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with
Down syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s
‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment
of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of
health care. Such a system is downright evil,” Palin
wrote last week.
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs identified Palin
on Wednesday as one of the GOP leaders he says is spreading “wrong”
information about the health care debate.
Additionally, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is using Palin’s “death panels” claim in a fundraising plea to
supporters, calling the former governor’s statement “disgusting” and
But Palin seemed undeterred in her latest
statement, pointing to columns by The Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson and
others to support her suggestion last week that the Democratic proposal is
“President Obama can try to gloss over the effects
of government-authorized end-of-life consultations, but the views of one of
his top health care advisers are clear enough,” Palin
wrote. “It’s all just more evidence that the Democratic legislative proposals
will lead to health care rationing and more evidence that the top-down plans
of government bureaucrats will never result in real health care reform.”
Palin Defends "Death Panels" Statement on
Health Care, Challenges Obama
by Steven Ertelt LifeNews.com Editor
August 13, 2009
(LifeNews.com) -- Former Alaska governor and possible 2012 presidential candidate
Sarah Palin is not backing down from her charge
that the House health care bill includes "death panels." Palin faced significant criticism after saying provisions
in the measure could lead to euthanasia or rationing of medical care.
posted a well-received note on Facebook
saying she worries the health care bill will be paid for on the backs of the
elderly and disabled, who could be pushed into euthanasia and
assisted suicide via rationing of medical treatment.
"And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the
elderly, and the disabled, of course," she said.
America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down
Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's
'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment
of their 'level of productivity in society' whether they are worthy of health
care," Palin says. "Such a system is
The Obama administration, joined by
liberal groups and Internet activists, attacked Palin
for the comments and claimed the bill did not contain such concerns.
response issued today on the popular social networking web site, Palin offered no apologies for her frank assessment of
the problems with the bill.
Obama can try to gloss over the effects of
government authorized end-of-life consultations, but the views of one of his
top health care advisers are clear enough," she said.
all just more evidence that the Democratic legislative proposals will lead to
health care rationing, and more evidence that the top-down plans of
government bureaucrats will never result in real health care reform," Palin added.
comments hearken back to her first remarks and pertain to Ezekiel
Emanuel, an Obama advisor who works
at the Office of Management and Budget and is the chief architect of the
health care bills. He has come under criticism from pro-life advocates for
views that are considered well outside the mainstream.
Palin's new comments are very analytical and
they include 11 footnotes, linking to bill texts, government reports,
articles and supportive commentary.
Palin's earlier comments and her rebuttal are focused on Section
1233 of the bill, which has been criticized as making it so physicians are
given financial incentives to urge patients to hold end-of-life discussions
with them that could pave the way for euthanasia or rationing.
all due respect, it's misleading for the President to describe this section
as an entirely voluntary provision that simply increases the information
offered to Medicare recipients. The issue is the context in which that
information is provided and the coercive effect these consultations will have
in that context," Palin writes. That's
similar to the views expressed by not only leading pro-life groups but Charles
Lane, an editorial page writer for the liberal Washington
OBAMACARE AND THE RIGHT TO LIFE: ELDERLY PATIENTS MAY FACE
PRESSURE TO DIE Posted: Thursday August 13, 2009 at 12:07 pm EST by Judie
This article was published in the August 9-22,
2009 issue of the National Catholic Registerand is presented as a guest
commentary, with the Register’s kind permission.
By Robin Rohr
As the pro-life movement fights to keep abortion out of the health-care
reform bill, an undercover attack on the elderly may be taking place
At issue is a provision that calls for end-of-life counseling of senior
citizens every five years. That counseling can include topics such as how
to decline nutrition and hydration, antibiotics and basic care treatments
for specific conditions such as flu or pneumonia, and how to choose
palliative and hospice care for the terminally ill.
“I’ve read about a third of HR 3200 and the counseling parts are designed
to encourage euthanasia,” claimed Dr. Katherine Schlaerth,
an associate professor of family medicine at Loma Linda University School
of Medicine. “Seniors will be counseled every five years, and more often if
they get sicker.”
Schlaerth, who emphasized that she does not speak
said that a frail, elderly, ill and depressed patient or that patient’s
family “may easily agree to withhold antibiotics or fluid without realizing
the full implication.”
“Patients who have a worsening of their chronic condition, but who may not
even be pre-terminal, are included in this strong-arm counseling, and their
respect for authority figures could pave the way for agreement with
cessation of care not in their interest at all,” Schlaerth
said. “Health-care providers, meanwhile, may be forced to give counseling
directly opposed to their religious or moral beliefs.”
Key lawmakers are in agreement with Schlaerth.
“Section 1233 encourages health-care providers to provide their Medicare
patients with counseling on ‘the use of artificially administered nutrition
and hydration’ and other end-of-life treatments and may place seniors in
situations where they feel pressure to sign an end-of-life directive they
would not otherwise sign,” said the House Republican leader, John Boehner,
R-Ohio, and the Republican Policy Committee chairman, Thaddeus McCotter, R-Mich., in a July
23 statement. “This provision may start us down a treacherous path toward
Death as Cost Savings At first glance, the counseling of elders for care options seems like
an innocuous requirement. But Schlaerth says the
purpose of the counseling has darker roots.
“The real reason for these draconian provisions directed against elders who
are not terminal, I believe, is to save on Social Security payments as well
as Medicare payments,” Schlaerth said. “The math
is obvious. If you kill the disabled and give ‘quality preventive care’ to
the well, your health-care statistics will look excellent.”
Bill May, chairman of Catholics for the Common Good, also views the
mandatory counseling sessions as an outrageous cover to introduce assisted
“We need to pay attention to issues related to shortening the lives and
hastening death for the elderly, infirm and disabled – another way of
getting rid of undesirable, non-useful and costly people,” he said. “This
bill creates a platform for assisted suicide for the elderly,
infirm and disabled at times they are most vulnerable, depressed and open
to suggestions of ending their lives early. Compassion & Choices, the
former Hemlock Society, wants to get into the end-of-life counseling
business, and it looks like the health-care bill will open the door for
them to become government contractors as purveyors of the culture of
The legislative language of the bill regarding counseling is vague and open
to interpretation. “I’m a lawyer, and I find this language
incomprehensible,” stated Wesley J. Smith, associate director of the
International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide. “I believe it
is done maliciously. What is clear is that seniors will receive counseling
– read ‘re-education’– every five years or
whenever their health status changes. The point is to reduce cost. While
the language doesn’t require it, these mandatory sessions will often be
directed towards not wanting care, in much the same way that genetic counseling
of a mother carrying a Down [syndrome] fetus often is directed toward
Smith said patients could be referred to organizations like the assisted
suicide advocacy group Compassion & Choices to help sort out their
choices. “In practice, if not in law, ‘counseling’ will usually be a
one-way street,” he said.
Compassion & Choices is an organization that describes itself as
working to improve care and expand choice at the end of life. “Wesley J.
Smith says the bill is ‘incomprehensible,’ which may explain why he
repeatedly misstates what the bill does,” said Steve Hopcraft,
a spokesman for Compassion & Choices. “It’s a myth that C&C or any
organization [would] be the counselor. The bill specifically says M.D. or
Section 1233 does state the consultation will be performed by a medical
provider; however, included in the topics to be discussed is direction to
provide “suggested people to talk to” and “a list of national and
Concerns about Obama’s health-care reform
adversely affecting older Americans are not new. Earlier this year, the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the “Stimulus Bill”) appropriated
$1.1 billion for research into “comparative effectiveness,” which compares
clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of medical treatments,
procedures and strategies. One aspect of this comparison is a concept
called “Quality Adjusted Life Years,” where the value assigned to life
varies with the health state of the person. This method is controversial
because it means that some people will not receive treatment if the
calculated cost is not warranted by the benefit to their quality of life.
Burke Balch, director of the RobertPowellCenter
for Medical Ethics at the National Right to Life Committee, explained that
a person’s Quality of Adjusted Life Years determines if a procedure is
allowed. “Of significant concern is the phrase ‘comparative
effectiveness,’” he said. “This becomes [how] you end up discriminating
against a disability. The language in the health-care bills being
considered by the House and reported out of the Senate Health, Education,
Labor and Pensions Committee can be used for wide-open interpretation of
cost-effectiveness leading to denial of treatment based on quality of life.
The funding for the promises made in these bills cannot be sustained, and
that will create the atmosphere for rationing.”
May agrees and says that health-care rationing takes place in Oregon, one of two
states where physician-assisted suicide is legal. People fighting
life-threatening illnesses there regularly receive letters saying that the
state insurance plan would not cover their medication but would pay for a
lethal prescription to end their lives, he said.
Boehner and McCotter also warn that with Oregon and Washington
having legalized assisted suicide, “Section 1233 could create a slippery
slope for a more permissive environment for euthanasia, mercy killing and
physician-assisted suicide because it does not clearly exclude counseling about
the supposed benefits of killing oneself.”
Robin Rohr is a National Catholic Register correspondent and writes from Willits, California.
On Thursday's Mark Levin Show: The federal government can't even
control basic things, so why
would we let them try to handle the massive health care system? Mark goes
step by step through various parts of the bills and explains them. Mark also urges everyone to
call their Congressman and tell them
that you reject the proposals that are being passed around, and that you will
work against, vote against, and won't
contribute to any politician that will support these Marxist
philosophies. The American people are angry because this is our liberty, our
Constitution, and our society!
Please check out page 203 of the main House
version of health care reform. It contains all the evidence you need that the
entire bill is a nasty bait-and-switch.
"The tax imposed under this section shall
not be treated as tax imposed by this chapter. ..."
Yes, it really says that. The tax shall not be considered a tax. Or at least
not "... for purposes of determining the amount of any credit under this
chapter or for purposes of Section 55."
Gee, that really clears things up. It is especially helpful to know that the
bill itself does not even contain a Section 55; the bill begins with a
section numbered 101. (Section 55 apparently refers to the Internal Revenue
Code, which it wouldn't do if the health care bill were not a tax bill, too.)
The bill does contain new taxes -- plenty of them. Pages 167 and 168 impose
an income tax of 2.5 percent on any individual who chooses not to buy
government-approved health insurance. Pages 149-150 impose a tax of between 2
percent and 8 percent on the payrolls of all companies whose payrolls exceed
$250,000. Pages 197 and 198 outline income tax surcharges to be imposed on
individuals with incomes over $350,000, rising to a highest surcharge of 5.4
Meanwhile, as the bill specifically acknowledges imposing a tax without
counting it as a tax, it also imposes all sorts of requirements that act as
indirect taxes under names such as "mandates" and
"requirements." Page 146 requires employers to provide insurance
even for part-time workers. Page 280 begins to outline a penalty for
hospitals that are adjudged to have "excess readmissions." Federal
bureaucrats, of course, will determine which patient readmissions are
reasonable and which are excessive. The bureaucrats will do this by following
the simple rules for such determinations laid out on pages 281 and 282 ...
and 283 ... and 284, 285, 286, and ... oh, forget it; we got lost.
The legalistic gobbledygook in that section is mind-numbing. For instance:
"IN GENERAL. -- Except as provided in subparagraph (B), for purposes of
this subsection, the term 'base operating DRG payment amount' means, with
respect to a hospital for a fiscal year, the payment amount that would
otherwise be made under subsection (d) for a discharge if this subsection did
not apply, reduced by any portion of such amount that is attributable to
payments under subparagraphs (B) and (F) of paragraph (5)."
All of which is further modified by an "adjustment factor" and a
"risk adjusted ratio" and further "adjustments" that are
"normalized to a benchmark."
Is it any wonder that ever-larger majorities of polled Americans are quite
literally afraid -- not just worried, but actually frightened -- by the
prospect of a central bureaucracy, mired in the red tape of inscrutable
governmental lingo, deciding what treatments can and can't be provided, by
which doctors, at what costs, and at what time in the far-distant future
after the waiting lists have been exhausted?
If it wants, Congress can try to impose a tax but not "treat" it as
a tax. But the American people know when they are getting taxed -- and when
they are getting mistreated. And the American people still can, and will,
vote out of office the congressmen responsible for the mistreatment.
New York Times
Taken to Task, Covers Up Abortion Funding in Health Care Bills
by Steven Ertelt LifeNews.com Editor
August 13, 2009
(LifeNews.com) -- The New York
Times is the latest mainstream media outlet be taken
to task for covering up the abortion funding found in the Congressional
health care bills. The Times joins the Associated Press, which flip-flopped
after pressure from LifeNews.com, and CBS
News in presenting a false picture.
Wednesday piece titled "Frequently Asked Questions" is printed as
an editorial from the newspaper. "Abortion
opponents say the legislation would use taxes to subsidize insurance that
could cover the procedure," the newspaper says.
the House bill, health plans could choose to cover abortion, but they
generally could not use federal money to pay for the procedure and instead
would have to use money from the premiums paid by beneficiaries," the
sentence of the three sentence response to the question of having health care
dollars pay for abortions let's a pro-abortion lawmaker from Colorado defend the
Diana DeGette, Democrat of Colorado, said the bill would keep current
restrictions on the use of federal money for abortion," the Times says.
Douglas Johnson, the respected legislative director for the National Right to
Life Committee, tells LifeNews.com that the Times story is,
"unfortunately, all too typical of the sort of superficial, lazy treatment
of the issue we are seeing in the mainstream media."
many of these self-styled 'watchdogs' are really lapdogs for the abortion
lobby. They are really gullible when it comes to swallowing misinformation
that comes from their friends," Johnson explains.
pulled no punches in criticizing the Times for relying on one of the biggest
abortion proponents in the House to make its claim that there is no abortion
funding in the bill.
speaks volumes that the Times thinks the source for the straight dope on what
a thousand-page bill does on abortion is Congresswoman DeGette, one of the
leading pro-abortion advocates in Congress, and the biggest fountain of
misinformation on Capitol Hill since Patricia Schroeder retired," he
laid out the scenario the bill presents whereby taxpayer dollars would
assuredly be used to pay for abortions.
LifeNews.com the main House measure, HR 3200, would drastically change
longstanding federal policy because of an amendment a House committee adopted
before lawmakers went home for their August recess.
bill creates a nationwide insurance plan run by the federal government, and
the Capps Amendment, crafted by leading pro-abortion
lawmakers and adopted in committee, explicitly authorizes this government
plan to cover all elective abortions," Johnson says.
means that any citizen who wants to take advantage of the public plan will be
compelled to purchase coverage for abortion on demand. The federal agency
will collect the premium money, receive bills from abortionists, and send the
abortionists payment checks from the federal Treasury account," he
Johnson concludes: "It is a sham to
pretend that this does not constitute funding of abortion. If this passes,
the federal government will be running a nationwide abortion-on-demand
House Official Won't Retract Obama Misstatement on
by Steven Ertelt LifeNews.com Editor
August 13, 2009
(LifeNews.com) -- President BarackObama's
top spokesman is defending his misstatement that saw him erroneously use a
Republican senator to justify a provision in the house health care bill that
has been criticized for giving financial incentive to doctors who could
promote euthanasia or rationing.
During Obama's health care forum in New
Hampshire on Tuesday, he used Georgia senator Johnny Isakson to
support the House bill and its provision.
attempt to allay the concerns, Obama said the
Republican lawmaker supports the specific provision. As LifeNews.com reported
on Wednesday, it turns out that Isakson strongly opposes both the bill and
its provision and condemned Obama for suggesting
Later on Wednesday, during his daily press
briefing, Obama press secretary Robert Gibbs
defended Obama's comments and claimed he and
Isakson are in agreement.
don't think that's what the President was implying," Gibbs said of Obama's attempts to say Isakson agreed with the
provision, known as Section 1233 in the bill.
attempted to defend Obama's comments by saying Obama merely meant that Isakson once served in the House,
not that he supported the House health care bill.
think the President mentioned that Mr. Isakson had been in the House -- that
may have been some of the confusion. He was a member of -- did, obviously,
represent Atlanta suburbs before becoming a U.S. senator from Georgia," he said.
think -- whether this is uncomfortable or not, I think he and the President
agree," Gibbs concluded.
Isakson spokeswoman Joan Kirchner told the
Atlanta Journal-Constitution newspaper after the press conference that Obama and Gibbs still have it wrong.
supports living wills and durable power of attorney. He supports individuals
making the choice for themselves — whether to get one, what should be in it,
and whom to seek advice from in drafting it," she said.
"He opposes the current House bill
because it is the government deciding who has the conversation, how often
they have the conversation, and what is to be discussed in that
conversation," she added.
office said initially: "Isakson vehemently opposes the House and Senate
health care bills, and he played no role in drafting language added to the
House bill by House Democrats calling for the government to incentivize doctors by offering them money to conduct
Later, Isakson went further.
what happens when the President and members of Congress don't read the bills.
The White House and others are merely attempting to deflect attention from
the intense negativity caused by their unpopular policies. I never consulted
with the White House in this process and had no role whatsoever in the House
Democrats’ bill,” Isakson said.
did not sponsor the controversial House language but is the bringer of an
amendment in the Senate that is quite different.
amendment would allow patients to receive the end-of-life counseling but does
not provide financial motivation to physicians who participate in Medicare to
urge them to do so.
Senate amendment simply puts health care choices back in the hands of the
individual and allows them to consider if they so choose a living will or
durable power of attorney," Isakson previously told the Washington Post.
House provision is merely another ill-advised attempt at more government
mandates, more government intrusion, and more government involvement in what
should be an individual choice," he says.
would financially reward physicians who have end-of-life discussions with
patients, even if they encourage patients to consider assisted suicide or to
revoking life saving medical treatment or food and water.
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:55:42 -0700
Subject: Stop Obama’s Energy Tax For Heath Care
Stop Obama’s Energy Tax For Heath Care
the ENERGY TAX INCREASE is slated for the General Federal Budget.
Just 20% of the Increased Energy Tax Revenue is directed at Obama’s green economy and jobs.
The Obama Health Care Tax scam will cost billions and a new
revenue source is needed according to Obama Treasury
Sec. Geithner who didn't rule out new taxes as a
means to do so.Timothy Geithner
said when asked if new taxes were likely "what the country needs
to do is understand we're going to have to do what it takes, we're going to
do what's necessary.”
The Obama administration tax increase plan strategy
includes an Energy Report it issued that contains no new research
intentionally scaring the public with the grimmest, most urgent language on
climate change ever to come out of any White House. False computer
simulations about rising sea levels, sweltering temperatures, deeper
droughts, and heavier downpours — blaming carbon for global warming's
alleged serious effects and lying to the country to collect the Obama “Energy Tax”. The House rushed a bill
through before going on vacation and the Senate expects to do the same.
But was the report complete? Did it have all the
relevant data? NO!!!
Get Ready Now with the Senate Million Fax Campaign –
The Obama-Pelosi-Reid Bill Strategy (Obama
PR-BS) is dumping unfinished bills without notice or time to read the
details on the House and Senate floor for votes. We must STOP Obama PR-BS and get ready for the Senate
Fight. To do this we want to have 1 Million Faxes ready to go and
everyone ready to call their Senators.
OBAMA’S reckless promise to get elected now appears to be
just another Obama lie when he said “I pledge. No
family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase.”
Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”
Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla has
ordered an investigation into the Environmental Protection Agency's alleged
suppression of a 98-page report, co-authored by EPA analyst Alan Carlin
that questioned the science behind global warming.
The report details how regulating gases like carbon dioxide WILL NOT
reduce global warming. Carlin's report states that the information the EPA
is using is out of date, and that even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels
have increased, global temperatures have declined.
Inhofe said "He (Carlin) came out with the truth. They don't want the
truth at the EPA," he's ordered an investigation. "We're going to
Dioxide DOES NOT Cause Global Warming
UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) Data The Truth For seven and a half
years, is that global temperatures have been falling
rapidly. The UN IPCC's predicted warming path
(pink region) bears no relation to the global cooling data that the IPCC
has observed in the 21st century to date. Source: SPPI global temperature
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Is Food For
Plants not "Air Pollutant"
CO2 is not an "air pollutant," but rather food for plants and
marine life. And its atmospheric levels are controlled by temperature
and other biological/chemical variables -- not the other way around (Just
as: Lung Cancer does not cause smoking). But most of all, a magical CO2
knob for controlling weather and climate simply does not exist.
The possible effect that forcing down CO2 levels may have on plants by
reducing the food supply are catastrophic.
BLAME CARBON DIOXIDE?
Are Using The Carbon Lie To Raise Taxes
CARBON DIOXIDE TO BLAME THE OBAMA'S TAX INCREASE OF HISTORIC PROPORTIONS
EVERYONE MUST PAY WHEN THEY FLIP ON A LIGHT SWITCH IS NOT NECESSARY
Turning on the Light = Cap and Trade = Democrat Tax Increase
Pelosi and the Democrats ignored American voters and listened to Obama and Gore as they lobbied for and passed the
biggest tax increase in history that is estimated to increase energy costs
per family by $1,600 to $3,200 each year.
Obama promised over and over that he would cut
taxes for the 95% of Americans making less than $250,000 per year during
the campaign last year, in the debates, in speeches and now he lobbied for
and got step one of his historic regressive tax increase
on 100% of America,
even those not paying income tax.
Obama Campaigned On False Pretenses And Must Be Stopped.
He pledged that his tax increases would only apply to the top 5% of
Americans making over $250,000. Yet Obama fully
supported passage of the House "Energy TAX" bill that taxes
everyone that just flips on a light switch.
ALREADY LOBBYING THE SENATE
President Obama called on senators to disregard
what he called the "misinformation" offered by critics of his
energy bill, which passed the House of Representatives late Friday night
despite GOP predictions that it will further damage the economy.
"We must not be prisoners of the past," he said in his radio and
Internet address. "Don't believe the misinformation out there that
suggests there is somehow a contradiction between investing in clean energy
and economic growth. It's just not true."
Democrats pushing the bill have admitted that the total tax costs per
family will increase. But the whole purpose of the bill is to raise the
price of using carbon-based energy to reduce its use, 17% by 2020 and 83%
by 2050. That is probably going to require even more than $3,000 per family
Obama's Carbon Disaster
Obama fanatically believes in a carbon disaster
and The Great Energy Lie - that
Energy Emissions Cause Global Warming. Obama
ignores sound science and the United Nations own data that the earth has
been in a 10 year cooling period said of the bill's passage "There is
no longer a debate about whether carbon pollution is placing our planet in
jeopardy. It's happening."
The bill will also result in millions of lost jobs and a weakened economy
due to high cost energy. Remaining manufacturing in America
will flee overseas. The coal industry will be phased out.
Rejects "Energy Tax" bill will not reduce global warming
Obama is on his own as countries around the world
such as France, Poland, Australia, the Czech Republic, and New Zealand are
turning against the cap-and-trade "Energy Tax" regressive
policies for their own countries, and China that Obama
is borrowing 50 cents of every dollar he spend from and India have rejected
the idea for their emerging economies all along.
Even global warming advocates admit that the bill passed by the House will
have no significant effect in reducing global warming, despite all of its
costs for the America
With these and other developments on the horizon Obama
is poised to break the central promise of his campaign, which took him
straight to the White House. Did Obama win last
year on false pretenses? Perhaps he might remember this cautionary tale:
When the first President Bush broke his campaign pledge not to raise taxes
in 1990, he was booted out in the next election.
WE ARE GETTING READY TO FAX to EACH AND EVERY Senator as soon as Reid calls
for a cloture vote. And will fax continuously to be heard. Be sure to send
this Alert to EVERYONE you know who wants to help FORCE our government to
STOP the EXCUSES and Save Taxpayers Not Spend More and Raise Taxes!
PR-BS and get ready for the Senate Fight.
Keep calling your Congressmen today,
toll free numbers include 1-877-851-6437 and 1-866-220-0044, or call
toll 1-202-225-3121 AND REGISTER YOUR OUTRAGE at expanding the Obama Green Energy Tax Bill!
CALL PRESIDENT OBAMA 202-456-1111
and 202-456-1414 expressing your outrage at incompetence in
wasting tax dollars to increase energy costs.
DO NOT BE SILENCED - MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD!
NOTE: We need TENS OF THOUSANDS of faxes and PHONE CALLS and EMAILS
delivered to ALL Congressmen right away!
Your voice can be heard - we need your urgent help at AmeriPAC.
Even smaller donations are going to help.
Any amount - $1000, $500, $250, or even $100 will help us fight the battle
in Congress to tell Congress about the "Green Energy Tax Bill".
It's time we stood up and said enough is enough! Please join us with your AmeriPAC donation TODAY. Thank you.
Alan Gottlieb AmeriPAC
President and Founder
Please make checks payable to AmeriPAC:
American Political Action Committee (AmeriPAC)
PO Box 1682
Dept Code 2850
Bellevue, WA 98009-1682
Paid for by AmeriPAC, a
federally-authorized and qualified multicandidate
political action committee. Contributions to AmeriPAC
will be used in connection with federal elections. Maximum contribution
per individual per calendar year is $5,000. Contributions from foreign
nationals and corporations are prohibited. Contributions are not
deductible for federal income tax purposes.
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:33:32 -0700
Subject: Alert: Lautenberg Bill To Ban One Million People From Gun Sales
A special message from
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms:
Lautenberg Bill To Ban One Million
People From Gun Sales
Gun Hater Lautenberg Proposes "Extraordinary
Powers" Be Given To the U.S. Attorney General To Limit Gun Sales.
Obama and the White House are looking the other
way as Lautenberg seeks to ban guns from 1,000,000 US
citizens on a secret FBI terrorist watch list. Obama
has deliberately and repeatedly lied to America's 90 million gun
owners across the country when he insisted that he would not try to take
away anyone's firearms. Now Obama's silence
endorses Lautenberg's latest attempt at banning guns.
Lautenberg has now introduced bill S. 1317 that would give the
attorney general the discretion to block gun sales to people on terror
watch lists. We must defeat this bill from giving extraordinary powers to
limit gun sales to the Attorney General.
The names of the people on the watch list are secret, and Lautenberg said
he was frustrated by the F.B.I.'s refusal to
disclose to investigators details and specific cases of gun purchases
beyond the aggregate data.
Gun hater Lautenberg requested the gun grab study from the Government
Accountability Office. He is using statistics, compiled in the report
that is scheduled for public release next week to invade US citizen's
privacy and put more restrictions on the Second Amendment.
Lautenberg said he wanted a better understanding of who is being allowed
to buy guns.
How you ask? Trial by innuendo and misinformation that has put 1,000,000
Americans and maybe even you on a terrorist watch list without your
knowledge by saying: people placed on this government's terrorist watch
list can be stopped from getting on a plane or getting a visa, and will
also be stopped from buying a gun.
Lautenberg wants gun purchases stopped for just being on the list.
Current law states federal officials must find some other
disqualification of a would-be gun buyer, like being a felon, an illegal
alien or a drug addict.
your name on the list and can you get it removed?
The government's consolidated watch list, used
to identify people suspected of links to terrorists, has grown to more
than one million names since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. It also has
drawn widespread criticism over the prevalence of mistaken identities and
unclear links to terrorism.
A CNN story raises questions about mistaken identities on the list -
James Robinson is a retired Air National Guard brigadier general and a
commercial pilot for a major airline who flies passenger planes around
James Robinson is a retired brigadier general and a commercial pilot. His
name is on the terrorist "watch list."
He has even been certified by the Transportation Security Administration
to carry a weapon into the cockpit as part of the government's defense
program should a terrorist try to commandeer a plane.
But there's one problem: James Robinson, the pilot, has difficulty even
getting to his plane because his name is on the government's terrorist
That means he can't use an airport kiosk to check in; he can't do it
online; he can't do it curbside. Instead, like thousands of Americans
whose names match a name or alias used by a suspected terrorist on the
list, he must go to the ticket counter and have an agent verify that he
is James Robinson, the pilot, and not James Robinson, the terrorist.
"Shocking's a good word; frustrating,"
Robinson -- the pilot -- said. "I'm carrying a weapon, flying a
multimillion-dollar jet with passengers, but I'm still screened as, you
know, on the terrorist watch list."
The 1938 German Weapons Act, the precursor of the current weapons law,
superseded the 1928 law. As under the 1928 law, citizens were required to
have a permit to carry a firearm and a separate permit to acquire a
firearm. Furthermore, the law restricted ownership of firearms to
"...persons whose trustworthiness is not in question and who can
show a need for a (gun) permit."
Must be Stopped
Recently Sens. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), Jack
Reed (D-RI) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) have joined Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent
Gun Violence and victims and family members of the Virginia Tech tragedy,
to introduce legislation to eliminate the private transfers of firearms
and close the nation's "gun show loophole."
This Senate bill is in the Judiciary Committee, chaired by anti-gun
liberal Democrat Leahy. Lautenberg's gun hate is well documented and he
says you are irrational if you support private gun sales.
"There is no rational reason to oppose closing the
loophole. The reason it's still not closed is simple: the continuing
power of the special interest gun lobby in Washington" Sen. Lautenberg
said ignoring the Constitution.
Lautenberg and the Gun Grabbers in the Senate are now tying to use the
GAO to justify putting Americans on a secret gun ban list.
Motives for his latest gun ban to are twofold:
·First, he is taking small steps to
enact gun control legislation this is just one step.
·Second, eradicate the gun culture
All that seems
to be on the minds of the Anti-Gun Senators and at the offices of gun
control extremists is figuring out how to invade your privacy to erode
and eventually destroy the right, and the means, of self-defense.
Now the Anti-Gun Coalitions are trying to use a self supporting GAO
study to destroy the right of all Americans to keep and bear arms to
protect themselves under the law. They are attacking and hiding
behind an Anti-Terrorist Agenda while getting political and financial
a Hungarian-born billionaire bank rolling efforts with
his check book and spending more that $100 million to destroy the
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (CA)
admitted that "guns would be banned and confiscated" if she
could have her way.
The United Nations
actively pushes globalism seeking to disarm all
We must Stop the Anti-Gun Coalition and get ready for the biggest gun
control fight of the year from coast to coast. We can not do that without
Stand up against this attack! Stand up for the right to not only
defend yourself, but to defend your family, your children, your friends,
and your classmates!
We at the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms have
launched this new nationwide campaign to rally gun owners and freedom
loving Americans behind an effort to protect our constitutional rights.
With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens
Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of the nation's
premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the
Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through
active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots
organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.
The Citizens Committee can be reached by phone at (425) 454-4911, on the
Internet at http://www.ccrkba.org/ or by email to InformationRequest@ccrkba.org
Subject: Maternal Death "Surge" Accompanies Lax Abortion Laws
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:42:48 -0700
Today we report on the growing evidence that liberal abortion laws,
far from lowering maternal mortality rates in the developing world,
often correspond to an increase in maternal deaths. Yet abortion
advocates continue to pester countries to discard laws protecting the
unborn based on false assumptions about women’s health needs. One
wonders whether their real concern is women in the developing world
or population control…
We also look yet again at one of the Culture of Death’s front line stormtroopers, the Center for Reproductive Rights,
and its ongoing campaign to have abortionists declared “human rights
defenders.” Far from defending human rights, abortionists and
their mouthpieces violate the most fundamental right of all – the
right to life.
Spread the word.
Piero A. Tozzi
Executive Vice President
UN Health Data Show Liberal Abortion Laws
Lead to Greater Maternal Death
(NEW YORK – C-FAM) The world's largest abortion provider,
International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), has recently
acknowledged an alarming "surge" in maternal deaths in South
Africa, challenging the pro-abortion mantra that liberal abortion laws
decrease maternal mortality. Maternal deaths increased by twenty per
cent in the period 2005-2007 in South Africa, a country that since 1996
has had one of the most permissive abortion laws on the African
continent. While deaths attributable to HIV/AIDS account for the
biggest portion of maternal deaths in South Africa, IPPF
acknowledges that a portion of deaths are "due to complications of
abortion" in a country where the procedure is legal and widely
available. Read more
Radical NGO Paints Abortionists
as Human Rights Defenders
– C-FAM) In a recently released report from the Center for
Reproductive Rights (CRR), the advocacy group is appealing to the
United Nations (UN) to formally recognize abortion-providers as
"human rights defenders." In "Defending Human
Rights," CRR presupposes that abortion is part of the accepted
human rights framework and targets legal restrictions on abortion,
funding restrictions on abortion and "failure to reduce
abortion-related stigma" as "human rights
violations." Read more