Monthly Archives: March 2010

OK, time for some demospin; we don’t want ppl figuring out that abortion is basically the same as infanticide.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2010-03/31/content_9664673.htm

OK, time for some demospin; we don’t want ppl figuring out that abortion is basically the same as infanticide.

I don’t think “choice” will work here. Or “reproductive freedom.” We need to figure out some way to keep everyday, normal Americans from figuring out that abortion is the same trash bag as the recognized human right issue of infanticide.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

More “Dems” quoting Marx: Baucus and “mal-distribution” of income

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/26/democratic-senator-health-care-law-address-mal-distribution-income/
“Too often, much of late, the last couple three years, the mal-distribution of income in American is gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy and the middle income class is left behind,” he said. “Wages have not kept up with increased income of the highest income in America. This legislation will have the effect of addressing that mal-distribution of income in America.”

What is “fair?” And who gets to judge? And why have the Party leaders exempted themselves ?

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The next step: “Immigration.”

It is not really “immigration.” We are heading for a world-wide government run by the workers of the world. The term “immigration” really only refers, anachronistically, to the old days when the workers were forcibly dominated by the owners of the means of production.

When the oil companies and other big businesses  — down with the capitalist pigs!!!! — all controlled the lives of each of us, oppressively. Down with Apple!!! Down with Starbucks!!!!  Down with Ben & Jerries!!!!  Down with Industrial Light & Magic!!!

Now, we need to work to erase all borders. They only served as a false cause to maintain “sovereignty” of the “nations,” so the “nations” could serve as frontmen and police force for the owners of the means of production.

Now, with no borders, we will all be happy. And have all we want. No more war, disease, pestilence, “bullying,” brown acid, or monogamy.

All that stands in the way are a few pesky laws. Like immigration laws. The experiment in open-borders, at the Rio Grande, shows the reality that John Lenin could only imagine. A zone free of crime, rape, exploitation, hunger, and free of any human rights violations. Let the Texas-Mexico border serve as “Walden III” for us. Biosphere III.

In order to replicate the Rio Grande Renaissance, we need a team of sociologists to study how, as Marx predicted, the borders would simply melt away, leaving peace and prosperity in their place. Nvivo La Revolucion!

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Carbon Market tanking, following bustling Christmas season

After some busy December shopping, with Christmas distracting us from the ClimateGate scandal and as “Warmers” bought their loved-ones carbon credits to place under the tree, the carbon market has really adjusted to the deflation of the AGW scam…

http://www.chicagoclimatex.com/index.jsf

Sell.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Pope, just step down. God will survive without you in the Vatican.

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/25/world/europe/25vatican.html?hp

Pope, just step down. God will survive without you in the Vatican. You have
done enough. The Christian church will survive without you, and even without
the Catholic church. Just step down. Get a little job somewhere, and study
your Bible alone, or with a group of other older guys. And stay prayed up.

You have done enough. Including for these boys, who were once voiceless and
defenseless.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

It was all about abortion, after all. A new day of abortion dialogue in U.S. civics.

It was all about abortion, after all. A new day of abortion dialogue in U.S. civics.

The health care reform legislation made its maneuver through the house yesterday/today, once a handful of legislators, concerned about abortion, found some reason$ to vote for the legislation. The legislation then received the necessary votes by that slim margin.

Success depended upon how abortion was / is addressed i nthe legislation.

All of that drama, weeks and weeks, and all of the sweetheartedals, depended upon one issue: abortion. There are no two ways to evaluate this.  The third way is to ignore it.

Ignoring will only work for so long. The net result, if this goes forward awithout other major machinations, is that we will see more abortions performed. We will detect this in the utilization statisitics. We will be able to see the circumstances under which any and all were performed,  including payment system / payment provider.

Insurance works for evants that are rare and costly. Otherwise, what you have is a “payment plan.” A “Christmas Club.” A “Vacation Fund.” Make regular contributions bit by bit, until that day comes when you want / need to spend the money. Cost matches contributions dollar for dollar.

With insurnace, you and a bunch of other people pay an amount to cover you in the unlikely but expensive outcome of the undesired event.

It is a gamble: lose a little with the possibility of winning big. Pay $10,000 premiums per year in case you get a $100,000-per-year illness.

Abortion is not very expensive…to the mother and supporters; it is ultimately expensive – loss of life – to the aborted.

Abortion is not rare. One of five pregancies ends in abortion – oh, one in three if you are Black. (what used to be “racism” is now “progress”).

How do you mathemactically set a premium? If a woman gets a policy that asks for $300 per year, she will simply decide: “why don’t I just watch what I do, and if I eventually need this several hundred dollar service, just do what I would do for a modestly expensive car repair, or an apartment first-moth-rent down payment?”

She won’t opt for this insurance.

Unless there is money being payed in by the rest of us to this abortion service insurance fund.

That is the technical definition of a “subsidy,” not a “risk pool.”

With time, this will be revealed. If the Senate is on-board, and other improbable events do not interfere. With time, this will be revealed.

Along with being our leading cause of death, abortion has lately moved much higher onto discussions in the national agenda.

We can no longer pretend it happens in a few unfortunate cases.

The numbers will be there in our state, federal budgets, and / or the budget of whatever entities will be hosting these plans.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

March 19: Health Care Reform Will Have Us All Paying Surcharge Into Abortion Coverage Fund

My analysis for March 19 2010, as Health Care Reform appraches a decision this weekend: It makes us all pay to make an abortion coverage fund. Thus: federally mandated abortion coverage.

Long story short (read on for more info):
I have analyzed the House’s reconciliation, and find nothing modifying the analysis I have already done regarding abortion coverage…
https://thelastdemocrat.wordpress.com/2010/03/09/march-9-my-analysis-of-reid-mgrs-amendment-to-senate-health-care-reform/
Now: for the lengthy analysis…

The health care reform proposal is complicated to review. Per the congressional budget office, and Washington Post, it seems that the bill consists of three parts, two of which are from the Senate, and one of which is from the House.

Harry Reid’s statement that the impending Sunday vote will be on the Senate bill, with the House revisions:
“up-or-down vote on its adjustments to the bill the Senate already passed would make our good bill even better.”
http://www.democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=323223&

The Senate part is called HR 3590, “Title X [of the Public Health Service Act]: Strengthening Quality, Affordable Health Care for All Americans” bill.

The Manager’s Amendment, which is part of this Senate bill, since it was added before the Senate vote, is simply called “amendment;” it doesn’t ot have its own name or bill number because it is simply more of the 3590 bill. Mgr’s Amendment was added Dec 19th, and Senate voted on Dec 24th.

The amendment is still here:
http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/managers-amendment.pdf

As that has stood, the manager’s amendment has called for anyone getting a heath insurance plan through the federally mandated and coordinated state-level “health insurance exchanges” WOULD be paying a specific, additional fee, along with their premium, to go into a fund of money for sustaining abortion coverage for those who choose to get abortion coverage. ALL would pay this fee, NOT just a woman who CHOSE to buy an abortion service coverage policy along with her separate health insurance policy. [this is in my earlier post.]

This has NOT been reported accurately ANYWHERE that I can tell.

Please post a clear note if you believe, technically or legally, that my analysis is not accurate regarding what is getting mandated legally. This means: quote me chapter and verse of legislation, NOT someone opinion. I must have chapter and verse regarding my mis-interpretation of one of these three pieces of legislation in order to modify my opinion.

To me the Manager’s amendment is clear:

In the section of the manager’s amendment concerning abortion coverage, section 1303 (at 1303(b)(2)(B)(i)), it declares: plans will “collect from each enrollee in the plan (without regard to the enrollee’s age, sex, or family status) a separate payment for each of the following:”

“REGARDLESS OF SEX.” Quote, End-Quote. People: what more do you need to read to figure out that this is NOT a separate “rider” that will be paid for ONLY by women opting IN, with ALL money kept totally separate from federal funds, as has been portrayed?

So: if the March 18 House reconciliation CHANGES section 1303 (“special rules”) of the manager’s amendment of HR3590, then the picture of abortion coverage changes; and if the reconciliation DOES NOT change section 1303 of the manager’s amendment of HR3590, then this federally mandated universal tax to fund an abortion-coverage pool is still in play.

The new, as-yet-unseen, parts to digest are the parts in the House’s “Reconciliation” bill, “H.R. 4872,” called “THE HEALTH CARE & EDUCATION AFFORDABILITY RECONCILIATION ACT of 2010.”
It is here, along with summary/commentary…
http://www.opencongress.org/articles/view/1738-Health-Care-Reconciliation-Bill-Summary

This has JUST been made available, within the last 24 hours. So, we all have THREE DAYS to digest this before deciding whether to vote for or against a federally mandated tax on all buyers of health insurance to build an abortion-policy fund, regardless of your personal family plans and configuration, and regardless of your sex.

I have searched to see if the House reconciliation bill modifies the Seante bill at all regarding this abortion coverage law…
OK: the opencongress summary / review has NOTHING about the Section 1303 abortion fund mandate.

So, we can look at the entire Reconciliation bill; it is here…
http://www.opencongress.org/house_reconciliation

I looked through the table of contents. I have not seen anything that would directly lead me to info regarding any adjustment of the status quo abortion coverage of the mgr’s amendment of 3940.

I searched the text for “abortion.” Nothing comes up.

I searched for “exchange.” A fair amount comes up, since this new state-level “exchange” mechanism is a big component in health care reform.

Nothing.

Title 1 covers the coverage issue. I thoroughly browsed “subtitle A,” “coverage. Nothing about abortion funding at all.

Subtitle E: nothing looks relevant, except, possibly, “sec 1406, health insruance providers.” So I look: Nothing relevant to abortion funding or coverage.

“Title II, subtitle B–Health”–
“Sec. 2301: insurance reforms: Nothing relevant to abortion funding or coverage.

Therefore, my analysis is that the status quo for abortion coverage in the Senate-approved health insurance reform bill is unchanged by the House Reconciliation Act HR 4872, of March 18, 2010.

Therefore, my previous assessment stands: health reform will include a federal mandate that buyers of health insurance plans, if they buy through a health insurance exchange, will contribute a separate fee or tax into a separate fund to support abortion coverage health care coverage policies. This includes men, who are explicitly noted to NOT be exempt from this, thus making it very clear that this is NOT simply a separate channel of money for females interested in this insurance to contibute to its funding and buy if they want. “Democrats” may present it that way, but I believe they are either mistaken or misleading or flat-out lying. Personally, I believe that Reid, Sebelius, Pelosi, Obama are lying. Intentionally. but that is just my opinion.

I am not sure how the Democratic party leaders are having special closed-door meeting with various congresspersons to “review” the language of the bill.

For those Pro-Life dems wavering, or that are question-marks, NONE have commented on this Section 1303. None. None say: “section 1303 called for this, but I know see that it is dead.” None.

Nowhere else do I see that the Manager’s Amendment Section 1303 is no longer in play. Nowhere.

YOU ARE FREE TO FOLLOW THE LINKS AND GO LOOK THIS STUFF UP YOURSELF. THIS IS NOT SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE.

Thank you, Opencongress.org, for supplying actual text to counterbalance the high-level lying from congress.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized