Sarah Palin Doubles Down On 'Death Panels' Refusing To Cower To The Lies Of Comrade Obama - Death As Cost Savings For Obamunists - PRAVDA USA Covers Up Abortion Funding In ‘Death Care Bill’

The former Alaska governor is defending her claim about the Democratic health-care proposal.

Read more:
Sarah Palin talks with residents in Alaska.

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 Barack Obama.

“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 hospice program.’"

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 “outrageous.”

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 “Orwellian.”

“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.”
Sarah Palin Defends "Death Panels" Statement on Health Care, Challenges Obama

by Steven Ertelt Editor
August 13, 2009


Washington, DC ( -- 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.
Last week, Palin 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.

"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," Palin says. "Such a system is downright evil."

The Obama administration, joined by liberal groups and Internet activists, attacked Palin for the comments and claimed the bill did not contain such concerns.
In a response issued today on the popular social networking web site, Palin offered no apologies for her frank assessment of the problems with the bill.
"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," she said.
"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 added.
The 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.
"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. 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 Post.

Posted: Thursday August 13, 2009 at 12:07 pm EST by Judie Brown

This article was published in the August 9-22, 2009 issue of the National Catholic Register and 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 unnoticed.

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 for Loma Linda University, 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 government-encouraged euthanasia.”

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 suicide.

“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 death.”

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 abortion.”

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 nurse practitioner.”

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 state-specific resources.”

Rationed Care
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 Robert Powell Center 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.

Judie Brown




Obama's environmental czar
started group targeting Beck

Attacks follow Fox News host's reporting
of White House adviser's radical activism


WorldNetDaily Exclusive
Obama inspiring young conservatives?
President has initiated 'largest power grab over private capital in U.S. history'


WorldNetDaily Exclusive

Congressman: 1 reason for health takeover opposition 
'Americans don't like being told what to do. Americans like choice'




WorldNetDaily Exclusive

Advocate says seniors 'up in arms' over health care 
'There's going to be some pain at the polls' in 2010

It's here

Exclusive: Phil Elmore shows to what extent
Orwell book has become reality via Obama


August 13, 2009




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!

Washington Times
EDITORIAL: Obamacare's tax hikes


Thursday, August 13, 2009

EDITORIAL: Obamacare's tax hikes


false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 v:shapes="_x0000_i1030">

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 percent.

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 Editor
August 13, 2009

Washington, DC ( -- 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, and CBS News in presenting a false picture.
A 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.
"Under 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 newspaper explains.
The final 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 bills.
"Representative Diana DeGette, Democrat of Colorado, said the bill would keep current restrictions on the use of federal money for abortion," the Times says.
But Douglas Johnson, the respected legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee, tells 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."
"Too 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.
Johnson 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.
"It 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 said.
Johnson laid out the scenario the bill presents whereby taxpayer dollars would assuredly be used to pay for abortions.
He told 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.
"The 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.
"This 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 explained.

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 insurance plan."
Related web sites:
National Right to Life -
White House Official Won't Retract Obama Misstatement on Senator, Euthanasia

by Steven Ertelt Editor
August 13, 2009

Washington, DC ( -- President Barack Obama'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.
In an attempt to allay the concerns, Obama said the Republican lawmaker supports the specific provision. As reported on Wednesday, it turns out that Isakson strongly opposes both the bill and its provision and condemned Obama for suggesting otherwise.

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.
"I 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.
Gibbs 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.
"I 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.
"I 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.
“Johnny 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.
Isakson's 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 end-of-life counseling."

Later, Isakson went further.

“This is 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.
Isakson did not sponsor the controversial House language but is the bringer of an amendment in the Senate that is quite different.
His 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.
“My 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.
"The 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.
The House version of the government-run health care system, HR 3200, contains sections that are causing concern for pro-life advocates.
The bill 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


80% of 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.”  

Select Below STOP THE OBAMA "Energy Tax" Bill NOW!
FAX All Senators Tell Them To STOP Obama's "Energy Tax"!


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 expose it."

Carbon Dioxide DOES NOT Cause Global Warming

The 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 index.

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.


The Answer:
Democrats Are Using The Carbon Lie To Raise Taxes


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.

STOP Obama PR-BS and get ready for the Senate Fight.
Select Below STOP THE OBAMA "Energy Tax" Bill NOW!
FAX All Senators Tell Them To STOP Obama's "Energy Tax"!

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 per year.

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.

China 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 people.

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!

STOP Obama PR-BS and get ready for the Senate Fight.

Select Below STOP THE OBAMA "Energy Tax" Bill NOW!
FAX All Senators Tell Them To STOP Obama's "Energy Tax"!

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.


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.

DONATE NOW. Stop Obama's "Energy Tax" Increase!

For more information, visit

Defend America,

Alan Gottlieb
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:

false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 alt=ccweblogo v:shapes="_x0000_i1034">

Alert: 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.

Fax NOW - Get Your Name Off The List
STOP Lautenberg's Attorney General Gun Grab
Select Here to Reject AG Gun Ban and Fax All 99 Senators

Lautenberg To Reveal Names on Secret List

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.

Is 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 the country.

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 "watch list."

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."

Fax NOW - Get Your Name Off The List
STOP Lautenberg's Attorney General Gun Grab
Select Here to Reject AG Gun Ban and Fax All 99 Senators

History Repeating Itself?

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."

Lautenberg 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.


Fax NOW - Get Your Name Off The List
STOP Lautenberg's Attorney General Gun Grab
Select Here to Reject AG Gun Ban and Fax All 99 Senators

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 altogether.

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 support from:

George Soros a Hungarian-born billionaire bank rolling efforts with his check book and spending more that $100 million to destroy the Constitution.

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 Americans.

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 your support.

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!

Fax NOW - Get Your Name Off The List
STOP Lautenberg's Attorney General Gun Grab
Select Here to Reject AG Gun Ban and Fax All 99 Senators

Like all other threats against our freedoms, we must rise and defeat this bill from giving extraordinary powers to limit gun sales to the Attorney General.

In order to stop Lautenberg and his fellow gun-grabbers-we need to let the Congress know with thousands of faxes telling them to leave guns alone.

Americans like you who understand what our Founding Fathers envisioned for our nation…and who are willing to fight to defend our Constitution and for what it stands.

So please, help the Citizens Committee and me defeat those who wish to gut and trash the United States Constitution.

Help me flood the U.S. Senate with a sea of FAXES big enough to drown each and every Senator willing to vote away the Second Amendment.

Please, send your Donation and FAX TODAY!

Select Here to Reject All Gun Bans and Fax All 99 Senators

Keep calling your Senators today, toll free numbers include 1-877-851-6437 and 1-866-220-0044, or call toll 1-202-225-3121 AND REGISTER YOU'RE OUTRAGE at ongoing efforts to take guns away!

CALL PRESIDENT Obama, 202-456-1111 and 202-456-1414 expressing your disdain and ABSOLUTE REJECTION of all GUN BANS.


NOTE: We need TENS OF THOUSANDS of faxes and PHONE CALLS and EMAILS delivered to ALL Senators right away!

For our projects to be successful, we must count on the voluntary financial support from individuals like you who care.

Your contribution of $20 or $25 is urgently needed today.

Your donation for just $10 will help so much. If you can afford to send $50 or $100 or more it would truly be a godsend.

Remember, protecting our freedom is not inexpensive.

But then, it's impossible to put a price tag on freedom.

The rights you save may be your own!

Together, we can preserve the Constitutional rights our Founding Fathers intended our people to have forever.

For more information about CCRKBA go

Please let me know your decision right away. Thank you.


Alan Gottlieb
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

If you prefer to donate by check, please mail to:
The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
12500 NE Tenth Place
Dept Code 2857
Bellevue, Washington 98005

P.S. Take the Emergency Gun Survey let us know where you stand. Did you know that since Barack Obama was elected President 3 people make a donation to an anti-gun group every minute?


Did you know that since Barack Obama was elected President 3 people make a donation to an anti-gun group every minute?

That's almost a million and a half contributions aimed at you - and your gun rights every year!

With Obama in the White House and anti-gunners in control of key committees in Congress, the gun grabbers are out for blood.

Select Here NOW I urgently need you to fill out the EMERGENCY GUN RIGHTS SURVEY registered in your name.

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 or by email to

Subject: Maternal Death "Surge" Accompanies Lax Abortion Laws
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:42:48 -0700





Dear Colleague,

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.

Yours sincerely,

Piero A. Tozzi
Executive Vice President



UN Health Data Show Liberal Abortion Laws Lead to Greater Maternal Death

By Aracely Ornelas

(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

by Samantha Singson

(NEW YORK – 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










false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 v:shapes="_x0000_i1048">

Editor in Chief – Austin Ruse
Managing Editor – Piero Tozzi
Assistant Managing Editor – Hannah Russo
Chief Correspondent – Samantha Singson
Contributors – Susan Yoshihara / Katharina Rothweiler