Two U.S. Senators on the Intelligence Committee...beware of the Patriot Act

Two Democratic U.S. Senators, Mark Udall of Colorado and Ron Wyden of Oregon have gone of record as warning the citizens of the U.S. that if they knew how and to what extent the Patriot Act is being used they would be alarmed at how the Act might and can and in some instances undermines our civil liberties under the premise that the government is using it just to protect us from terrorism. The documents that explain how the Obama administration implements the Patriot Act are classified. The two senators above are privy to this information and without telling the details (which they cannot do so legally) at least warned us to beware.

I believe that the government is obtaining "bulk information" from a very large cross sections of this country's citizens that has nothing to do with spying or terrorism and using it to have an electronic file on each and everyone of us...maybe "big brother" is already hear. Things that start off innocently ofter lead to "ends" not justified by the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. Beware of those who never loose an opportunity to use an "emergency" to further aggrandise power and centrally locate it in the Federal Government...big government leads to more control of the people and less control of the people who should be in control of their Government.

Law of the Conservation of Socio-Economic Security

As we all know, in physics we have the Law of the Conservation of Energy; that meaning that if we have a closed system, such as we believe that the Universe is, the total energy in that system stays the same. It may exist in various forms in different locals but the total amount cannot be added to or subtracted from.

I profess that in the area of socio-economic security another law analogous to the Law of Conservation of Energy exists; this law is the Law of Conservation of Socio-Economic Security. The first law mentioned can be proven mathematically and by experiment; the second one, at this time in history, I believe can only be proven true based on the study of human nature and mankinds' history.

Total, perfect, socio-economic security never did exist and it never will exist. When an individual or a government proclaims that we are totally safe they are not telling you the truth because of at least two reasons:

1. There are too many variables, known and unknown, to make this make this kind of definitive declaration.
2. Within the current existing market system, security can be granted (even in an imperfect manner) to some entities. Examples might be banks to big to fail, industries to big to fail, GM, and other sectors of the economic world which "planners" deem to big to fail...Fannie and Fredi Mac. At first thought this might seem to be a great idea but after a little thought we all must come to the conclusion that with each guarantee "not to fail" we as non-inclusive groups or as non-inclusive individuals loose bit-by-bit, increment by increment some of our security, liberty and freedom. The government does not possess enough "stuff" to guarantee a "non-failure policy" for each of us.

Wake up America and see what is really going on around you in small positive looking policies that in reality are taking your freedom and your country away from you. Eventually you will have no choice but to submit and obey. Don't let the "planners" destroy our country and your choice to plan for yourself.

A Sad State of Affairs

According to a poll conducted by Stanford University and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, about 75% of those polled want someone else to pay for their health insurance premiums. Could it be true that 75% of Americans are ignorant enough to truly believe in "a free lunch". The group they have chosen to pay the tab for them are the "rich". That would include anyone that makes more than $500,000 a year but there is also talk of lowering that income level to $250,000 a year. Remember something; what big government can give it can always take away. In years to come the "rich" may become the middle class as more and more funds are needed to fund all the "give away" programs and entitlements promised by your elected Congress. You will become the "rich" by Congressional definition and you will be paying for some one's "free lunch". This is a financially suicidal scenario and will only lead to complete collapse of our economic system and maybe our country itself. Stop the madness of "spend-spend-spend" in Washington. If it continues it will be cheaper to wallpaper your walls with dollar bills than with wallpaper.

House passes Healthcare Reform Bill

In the face of near-unanimous Republican opposition and a last-ditch effort to change the bill, the US House of Representatives late Saturday night voted 220 to 215 in favor of legislation to overhaul the nation's healthcare system. Thirty-nine of the body's 258 Democratic members — many from conservative districts in the South — joined their GOP House colleagues in opposing the measure, a $1.1 trillion compromise bill that has aroused deep passions on both sides of the aisle, as well as beyond the halls of Congress.

In a statement issued from Camp David shortly after the vote, President Barack Obama, who had visited House Democrats earlier in the day, said, "Tonight, in an historic vote, the House of Representatives passed a bill that would finally make real the promise of quality, affordable health care for the American people."

For her part, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said she was "proud" of House members who stood steadfast against overwhelming GOP opposition. "When we can't find common ground, we have to stand our ground," she said at a news briefing following passage of the legislation, which garnered just one Republican vote, that of Anh "Joseph" Cao (R-LA).

But House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-OH), whose GOP substitute plan went down to defeat shortly before the historic vote, vowed to continue the fight. "I came here to renew the American Dream, so my kids and their kids have the same opportunities I had. I came here to fight big-government monstrosities like this bill that dim the light of freedom and diminish opportunity for future generations. Our plan will lower premiums by up to 10%, making health care more affordable for families and small businesses. That's what the American people want, and that's what Republicans will continue to fight for."

Action now turns to the Senate, where leaders are working to merge bills from that body's Health Committee and Finance Committee. Like the House-passed bill, the Senate Health Committee's proposal includes a public-plan option, a new government insurance plan that would compete with private plans in the marketplace and be authorized to negotiate rates with physicians and hospitals. The Finance Committee proposal, in contrast, would create state-level private, nonprofit, consumer-run insurance cooperatives, which liberals in the Senate, including West Virginia Democrat Jay Rockefeller, say are fatally flawed.

But to overcome a 60-vote hurdle — the number of votes Democrats would need to cut off a GOP filibuster that some conservative Democrats have threatened to join — Senate Democrats who favor the public-plan option may have no choice but to compromise to get any sort of reform legislation through their chamber.

If that happens, and it's still a big if, the next battleground would be the conference committee, where negotiators of both chambers must forge a single piece of legislation acceptable to both sides — and, of course, to the President.

[CLOSE WINDOW]
Authors and Disclosures
Journalist
Wayne Guglielmo
Wayne Guglielmo is a freelance writer for Medscape.