Funny cartoon explaining "If ObamaCare was like buying coffee.

Very simple way of understanding this crazy scam call Obama Care
You will like the video!

The stroy behind the Obamacare website

Michelle Obama's Princeton classmate is a top executive at the company that earned the no-bid contract to build the disastrous Obamacare website.

Toni Townes-Whitley, Princeton class of '85, is senior vice president at Canadian company CGI Federal, which earned the no-bid contract to build the so far costing $678 million Obamacare enrollment website at Healthcare.gov.

Townes-Whitley and his Princeton classmate Michelle Obama are both members of the Association of Black Princeton Alumni.

Toni Townes, Pricenton '85, is a onetime policy analyst with the General Accounting Office and previously served in the Peace Corps in Gabon , West Africa .

George Schindler, the president of the CGI Federal's Canadian parent CGI Group, became an Obama 2012 campaign donor after his company gained the Obamacare website contract.

________________________________________________

Soooooo...........

Let's see if we can connect the dots here ...

1.) No American companies considered for building Obamacare's website;

2.) CGI Federal was chosen by God knows which criteria and hired;

3.) CGI Federal was given a NO BID contract worth $93 million;

4.) A top executive at CGI Federal was a Princeton classmate of Michelle Obama;

5.) Previous company's experience was building a gun registry for the Canadian government;

6.) CGI Group was fired by Canadian Government for overruns that cost Canada $100 million;

4.) CGI has continued its practice of overruns as the Obamacare enrollment website has gone from $98 million to costing U.S. tax payers $678 million, and it's still going up.

Does this bother anybody else besides me? 

EXECUTIVE ORDERS AND YOUR FUTURE

For the SHOCK of your life, take 1 minute to comprehend what you read below. During our lifetimes, all Presidents have issued Executive Orders. For various reasons, some have issued more than others. These things will directly affect us all, in years to come. Question is: Do YOU care enough to send this, 'shocking info,' to people you love and others?

NUMBER OF EXECUTIVE ORDERS ISSUED by U.S. Presidents in the last 100 years:

Teddy Roosevelt - 3
All Others until FDR - 0
FDR - 11 in 16 years
Truman - 5 in 7 years
Ike - 2 in 8 years
Kennedy - 4 in 3 years
LBJ - 4 in 5 years
Nixon - 1 in 6 years
Ford - 3 in 2 years
Carter - 3 in 4 years
Reagan - 5 in 8 years
Bush - 3 in 4 years
Clinton - 15 in 8 years
George W. Bush - 62 in 8 years

Obama - 923 in 3 1/2 years! More than 1000+ and counting Executive Orders in 6 years...

Read some of them below – unbelievable!

Next step -dictatorship... (Looks like we are there already!)

If you don't get the implications, you're not paying attention. How come all the other presidents in the past 100 years have not felt it necessary to INCREASE GOVERNMENT’S POWER OVER THE PEOPLE with more than 1,000 Executive Orders? This is really very scary. And most Americans have absolutely no idea what is happening.

YES, THERE IS A REASON THAT THIS PRESIDENT IS DETERMINED TO TAKE CONTROL AWAY FROM THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE.
Even some Democrats in the House have turned on him, plus a very small number of Democrat Senators have questioned him. Rightfully so. -
WHAT IS OBAMA REALLY TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH????
Remember what he told Russia's Putin: "I'll be more flexible after I'm re-elected".

Now look at these:

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990 --allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995 --allows the government to seize and control the communication media.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997 --allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 --allows the government to take over all food resources and farms.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 -- allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001 --allows the government to take over all health, education and welfare functions.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002 --designates the registration of all persons. Postmaster General to operate a national registration.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 -- allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 --allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005 --allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 --assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen year period.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051 --specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 --grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 --allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. Financial institution in any undefined national emergency.Italso provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months.

Feel free to verify the "executive orders" at will.....and these are just the major ones. I'm sure you've all heard the tale of the "Frog in the Pot"... Watch Obama's actions, not his words! By his actions he will show you where America is headed.

Obama has issued executive orders that seek to "harmonize" U.S. Economic regulations with the rest of the world. These executive orders are yet another incremental step that is pushing us closer to a North American Union and a one world economic system.

Obama used the stage at the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s I have a dream speech to announce two new executive orders infringing on your second amendment rights.. The first bans the importation of antique military firearms for sale to sportsman and collectors.. He intentionally mislabels them military grade weapons to deceive the sheeply, but make no mistake . . . the order was written specifically to ban the importation of surplus M1 carbines, M1 Garands, 1903 Springfields and other antiques coveted by collectors and sport shooters. This order is the death knell for the civilian marksmanship program. Congress had previously passed the sportsman protection act in 1986 which among other things guaranteed that the importation of the historic relics for collectors and the CMP would not be impeded by unreasonable regulations..But Emperor Obama does not bend to the will of the people or the rule of law.. He will impose on his subjects what he wishes, when he wishes. Kind of like Papa Joe Stalin or the short Austrian with the funky mustache!

Unfortunately, most Americans have absolutely no idea what is happening.

The American people need to understand that Barack Obama is constantly looking for ways to integrate the United States more deeply with the rest of the world.
The globalization of the world economy has accelerated under Obama, and this latest executive order represents a fundamental change in U.S. economic policy. Now federal regulators will be required to "harmonize" their work with the international community.

If THIS IS DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE, THEN PROVE TO YOURSELF IT'S WRONG - Google it!

http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/executive-orders

A must read!

Professor Laura Hollis of Notre Dame ... A MUST READ!

Laura Hollis is a professor at the University of Notre Dame

November 20, 2013/10:42 AM

The unveiling of the dictatorial debacle that is Obamacare absolutely flabbergasts me. It is stunning on so many levels, but the most shocking aspect of it for me is watching millions of free Americans stand idly by while this man, his minions in Congress and his cheerleaders in the press systematically dismantle our Constitution, steal our money, and crush our freedoms.

The President, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid (with no small help from Justice John Roberts) take away our health care, and we allow it. They take away our insurance, and we allow it. They take away our doctors, and we allow it. They charge us thousands of dollars more a year, and we allow it. They make legal products illegal, and we allow it. They cripple our businesses, and we allow it. They announce by fiat that we must ignore our most deeply held beliefs – and we allow it.

Where is your spine, America?

Yes, I know people are complaining. I read the news on the internet. I read blogs. I have a Twitter feed. So what? People in the Soviet Union complained. People in Cuba complain. People in China complain (quietly). Complaining isn't the same thing as doing anything about it. In fact, much of the complaining that we hear sounds like resignation: Wow. This sucks. Oh well, this is the way things are. Too bad.

Perhaps you need reminding of a few important facts. Here goes:

1. The President is not a king. Barack Obama does not behave like a President, an elected official, someone who realizes that he works for us. He behaves like a king, a dictator – someone who believes that his own pronouncements have the force of law, and who thinks he can dispense with the law's enforcement when he deigns to do so. And those of us who object? How dare we? Racists!

And while he moves steadily "forward" with his plans to "fundamentally transform" the greatest country in human history, he distracts people with cheap, meaningless trivialities, like "free birth control pills"! (In fact, let's face it: this administration's odd obsession with sex in general - Birth control! Abortion! Sterilization! Gay guys who play basketball! -- is just plain weird. Since when did the leader of the free world care so much about how people have sex, who they have it with, and what meds they use when they have it? Does he have nothing more important to concern himself with?)

2. It isn't just a failed software program; it is a failed philosophy. People are marveling that Healthcare.gov was such a spectacular failure. Well, if one is only interested in it as a product launch, I've explained some of the reasons for that here. But the larger point is that it isn't a software failure, or even a product failure; it is a philosophy failure.

I have said this before: Obama is not a centrist; he is a central planner. And this – all of it: the disastrous computer program, the hundreds of millions of dollars wasted, the lies, the manipulation of public opinion, the theft of the public's money and property, and freedom (read insurance, and premiums, and doctors) -- IS what central planning looks like.

The central premise of central planning is that a handful of wunderkinds with your best interests at heart (yeah, right) know better than you what's good for you. The failure of such a premise and the misery it causes have been clear from the dawn of humanity. Kings and congressmen, dictators and Dear Leaders, potentates, princes and presidents can all fall prey to the same imperial impulses: "we know what is good the 'the people.'

And they are always wrong.

There is a reason that the only times communism has really been tried have been after wars, revolutions, or coups d'état. You have to have complete chaos for people to be willing to accept the garbage that centralized planning produces. Take the Soviet Union , for example. After two wars, famine, and the collapse of the Romanov dynasty, why wouldn't people wait in line for hours to buy size 10 shoes? Or settle for the gray matter that passed for meat in the grocery stores?

But communism's watered-down cousin, socialism, isn't much better. Ask the Venezuelans who cannot get toilet paper. Toilet paper. ¡Viva la Revolución!

Contrary to what so many who believe in a "living Constitution" say, the Founding Fathers absolutely understood this. That is why the Constitution was set up to limit government power. (Memo to the President: the drafters of the Constitution deliberately didn't say "what government had to do on your behalf.") They understood that that was the path to folly, fear, and famine.)

3. Obama is deceitful. Just as the collapse of the computer program should not surprise anyone, neither should we be shocked that the President lied about his healthcare plan. Have any of you been paying attention over the past few years? Obama has made no secret of his motivations or his methods. The philosophies which inspire him espouse deceit and other vicious tactics. (Don' t take my word for it: read Saul Alinsky.) Obama infamously told reporter Richard Wolffe, "You know, I actually believe my own bullshit." He has refused to be forthcoming about his past (where are his academic records?). His own pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, told author Ed Klein, that Obama said to him, "You know what your problem is? You have to tell the truth."

Did Obama lie when he said dozens of times, "If you like you plan, you can keep it. Period!"? Of course he did. That's what he does.

4. The media is responsible. And had the media been doing their jobs, we would have known a lot of this much, much h earlier.

The press is charged with the sacred responsibility of protecting the people from the excesses of government. Our press has been complicit, incompetent, or corrupt. Had they vetted this man in 2008, as they would have a Republican candidate, we would have known far more about him than we do, even now. Had they pressed for more details about Obamacare, Congress' feet would have been held to the fire. Had they done their jobs about Eric Holder, Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the IRS scandal, NSA spying - or any of the other myriad betrayals of the public trust that this administration has committed, Obama would likely have lost his 2012 reelection campaign. (A fact that even The Washington Post has tacitly acknowledged. Well done, fellas! Happy now?)

Instead, they turned a blind eye, even when they knew he was lying, abusing power, disregarding the limits of the Constitution. It was only when he began to spy on them, and when the lies were so blatant that the lowest of low-information voters could figure it out that they realized they had to report on it. (Even in the face of blatant, deliberate and repeated lies, The New York Times has the audacity to tell us that the President "misspoke.") They have betrayed us, abandoned us, and deceived us.

5. Ted Cruz was right. So was Sarah Palin. The computer program is a disaster. The insurance exchanges are a disaster. What's left? The healthcare system itself. and this, of necessity, will be a disaster, too.

Millions of people have lost their individual insurance plans. In 2015, millions more will lose their employer-provided coverage (a fact which the Obama administration also knew, and admitted elsewhere).

The exorbitant additional costs that Obamacare has foisted on unsuspecting Americans are all part of a plan of wealth confiscation and redistribution. That is bad enough. But it will not end there. When the numbers of people into the system and the corresponding demand for care vastly exceed the cost projections (and they will, make no mistake), then the rationing will start. Not only choice at that point, but quality and care itself will go down the tubes. And then will come the decisions made by the Independent Payment Advisory Board about what care will be covered (read "paid for") and what will not.

That's just a death panel, put politely. In fact, progressives are already greasing the wheels for acceptance of that miserable reality as well. They're spreading the lie that it will be about the ability of the dying to refuse unwanted or unhelpful care. Don't fall for that one, either. It will be about the deaths that inevitably result from decisions made by people other than the patients, their families, and their physicians. (Perhaps it's helpful to think of their assurances this way: "If you like your end-of-life care, you can keep your end-of-life-care.")

6. We are not SUBJECTS. (Or, Nice Try, the Tea Party isn’t Going Away). We have tolerated these incursions into our lives and livelihoods too long already. There is no end to the insatiable demand "progressives" have to remake us in their image. Today it is our insurance, our businesses, our doctors, our health care. Tomorrow some new crusade will be announced that enables them to take over other aspects of our formerly free lives.

I will say it again: WE ARE NOT SUBJECTS. Not only is the Tea Party right on the fiscal issues, but it appears that they are more relevant than ever. We fought a war once to prove we did not want to be the subjects of a king, and the Boston Tea Party was just a taste of the larger conflict to come. If some people missed that lesson in history class, we can give them a refresher.

The 2014 elections are a good place to start. Call your representative, your senator, your candidate and tell them: "We are not subjects. You work for us. And if the word "REPEAL" isn't front and center in your campaign, we won't vote for you. Period."

Laura Hollis is an attorney and teaches entrepreneurship and business law at the University of Notre Dame

And this comes from Notre Dame.  What a powerful and true letter!

How Obamacare will effect Oregons health care

Rep. Richardson's Newsletter

November 15, 2013

Cover Oregon and the Obamacare Crisis

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) is the much debated federal health insurance law signed by President Obama in 2010.  Obamacare has two major components—the expansion of Medicaid, which in Oregon is known as the Oregon Health Plan (OHP), and the requirement in all states to provide access for individual or small group health insurance plans via a health insurance policy exchange, which Oregon calls “Cover Oregon.”   There was wide concern about American citizens losing their right to retain their chosen health insurance policies and physicians when Obamacare was being debated.

To allay such fears, President Obama promised the American public,

      "...no matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health-care plan, you'll be able to keep your health-care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what." Click here

Just last year (2012) President Obama reiterated the promise when he stated,

      “If [you] already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance.” Click here

Oregon’s own Senator Jeff Merkley likewise assured Oregonians with this statement on his website:

      "If you like your current health insurance, you will be able to keep it. And you will be able to continue seeing your current doctor. Health care reform would simply give you the choice to change insurance providers if you so choose." Click here

Even Governor John Kitzhaber joined the chorus of promises to Oregonians who were concerned
about the consequences of the federal health care law and its implementation in Oregon.  Governor Kitzhaber said, 

      "We all felt from the beginning that it was important for the state to implement and operate its own exchange rather than default to the feds. It is going to be a central contributor to the success of our larger health care reform effort, by setting the standards for plans that they reduce cost, that they maintain quality and that everyone has access to the kind of coverage that they need and deserve in this state." Click here

It has now become clear: the truth about Obamacare is substantially different from the promises our politicians repeatedly made. 

Effective January 1, 2014, provisions of Obamacare require most private insurance policies to include a list of medical care benefits that have never been covered in many existing policies.  As a result of being out-of-compliance with the federal law’s mandated health coverage requirements, approximately 145,000 Oregonians are having their present insurance policies cancelled.  The vast majority of these Oregon policies will be cancelled effective December 31, 2013. Just today the Oregon Insurance Commissioner has reversed her position and joined with the President in granting Oregon health insurance companies the power to extend current policies for another year—to December 31, 2014.

Such a pronouncement is political theater, a partisan maneuver intended to transfer blame from the administration to health insurance companies if they do not retract their cancellation notices and reinstate existing policies. In reality, insurance companies have spent two years calculating policy provisions and  premiums to enact Obamacare effective January 1, 2014.  The cancellation notices have already been sent and the federal law sets the effective date for January 1, 2014.  A Presidential Executive Order or a directive from a state’s insurance commissioner cannot change the course of this out-of-control health care train.

Many of the policies being cancelled can be replaced by new and more expensive policies issued by the same health insurance company.  But others, such as the 11,000 Oregonians who previously have been covered in the Oregon Medical Insurance Pool (OMIP), are scheduled to lose their benefits on December 31, 2013.  OMIP is a special pool of chronically ill, special risk patients whose medical costs are shared by all the health insurance companies providing health policies in Oregon. 

Betrayed are those OMIP patients and other Oregonians who cannot afford to pay substantial Cover Oregon policy premium increases and who are ineligible to receive government subsidies or do not want to accept them.  The success of Obamacare and Cover Oregon depends on citizen acceptance of government subsidies to justify the governmental intrusion into the private health care decisions of all Oregonians.   

To avoid gaps in health care insurance coverage, resulting from the cancellation of current policies on December 31st, new Obamacare compliant health care insurance policies must be issued effective January 1st.  To do so, more than 100,000 Oregon applicants for the new policies must accomplish the following four steps by the cut-off date of December 15, 2013:  

1.     Complete a complex 20 page application;

2.     Determine eligibility for government subsidies of health insurance premiums;

3.     Select a policy from multiple options, at premiums that often will be substantially higher
than those paid for present health policies that are being replaced; and,

4.     Obtain the insurance coverage from a qualified health insurance company.

It was intended that effective October 1, 2013, all four of these steps were to be completed smoothly, quickly and seamlessly on the www.coveroregon.com website.  Unfortunately, the goal exceeded Cover Oregon’s ability to deliver. The facts clearly show Oregon’s insurance exchange was not ready to be implemented.  Cover Oregon’s regular Quality Assurance reports and monthly status reports repeatedly showed major inadequacies in the project.  Political pressure forced the Cover Oregon technicians to go on-line when they knew or should have known the system was not ready. 

The Cover Oregon train wreck was not unforeseen. I sounded an early alarm in a warning sent to the Governor and my legislative colleagues in September 2012.

Thus, Cover Oregon’s inadequacies were identified regularly and its catastrophic failure was fully anticipated.  With proper leadership, planning and execution Oregon’s expensive Obamacare disaster could have been avoided. 

Nevertheless, to chart a better course for the future, Oregon citizens deserve answers to the following questions:

Why was Cover Oregon allowed to go on-line when it was known it was not ready?

Why were the additional staff not added and trained before October 1, 2013, when it was known the system would not be able to process the applications on-line?

What has been spent so far on Cover Oregon?

How much will it cost to make Cover Oregon’s fully functional?

Where will the money come from to pay for system completion, corrections and manual processing of applications in the weeks and months to come?

How will coverage be provided for those who are uninsured as of December 31, 2013? 

Today, only 19,000 written applications have been received, and each of them must be manually processed.  In order to process all these applications—which must be completed by December 15th to provide insurance coverage effective on January 1, 2014—between 200 and 400 new employees are frantically being hired and trained.

Not a single Cover Oregon applicant has completed Oregon’s Obamacare health insurance enrollment process. Click here

There has been some confusion in news reports and statements made by various officials about thousands of Oregonians who used to be uninsured and are now being  signed up for the Oregon Health Plan/Medicaid. In addition to the private and small group health policies made available through Cover Oregon, Obamacare also allows Oregon to enroll more low-income people onto the Oregon Health Plan/Medicaid program. An estimated 250,000 Oregonians might qualify to now get such Medicaid health coverage.

While Cover Oregon struggles to correct the technical glitches and to hire and train hundreds of temporary employees who will process health care insurance applications manually for individuals and small business groups, the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) has already signed up 70,000 additional low income Oregonians onto the Oregon Health Plan/Medicaid program.  

Conclusion.  As one of the leaders on the legislature’s budget committee, for more than two years I have been monitoring the various Quality Assurance and progress reports for Cover Oregon. Repeatedly, questions have been raised about the QA’s warnings, and repeatedly assurances were given by the Cover Oregon staff.  Those providing legislative oversight repeatedly pointed out the risks of catastrophic failure, but to no avail.  In government, as in life, outcomes are what count, not well-intended promises. 

We should continue to hold the Governor and the Cover Oregon staff accountable as the Obamacare fiasco unfolds. Oregonians were told this was going to be an effective transition to the new health care law. The process at this point has been a disaster, and I predict the worse is yet to come.  

Sincerely,

Dennis Richardson
State Representative

P.S.  In all fairness, to help correct the flawed roll-out of Obamacare in Oregon, Cover Oregon will host a series of “Application Fairs” in communities across Oregon. If your health insurance coverage depends on enrolling through Cover Oregon, I highly recommend you gather the suggested materials and attend one of the Application Fairs.

Please, use a little common sense and not just misplaced emotions.

Cuts of horsemeat are displayed in a shop window at the horse butchery near Paris.REUTERS

WASHINGTON –  The slaughter of horses for human consumption could legally resume in the United States as early as this week following a decision by a New Mexico judge who dismissed a push by animal rights groups to stop the practice. (It should never have stopped)

U.S. District Judge Christina Armijo in New Mexico threw out a lawsuit Friday by The Humane Society of the United States (This is a name only, they do much more harm than good but that is another story) and other animal protection groups that alleged the Department of Agriculture failed to conduct environmental studies when it issued permits to Valley Meat Co. in Roswell, N.M., and an Iowa company to slaughter horses for human consumption.

It was a last-ditch effort that failed for animal rights groups. Instead, the court’s ruling ends – for now at least - a two-year battle by Valley Meat to open its slaughterhouse.

The practice of slaughtering horses for human consumption was legal and fairly common in the United States for many years.(yes, and fed to our military also!) 

In 2005, Congress voted to withhold funding for USDA inspections of horsemeat. It was a way to stop the slaughters because meat for human consumption at the time had to be inspected. (This was a vote based on emotion and not what was good for the horses, or for the horse industry as a whole. It was a vote to appease city folks that have no idea about the reality of owning and caring for animals.)

However, the USDA gave the OK for slaughterhouses to pay for their own inspections. Congress voted to end the practice in 2007.  (While all other inspections are subsidized)

The measure to stop the slaughters lapsed in 2011 and now U.S. companies are clamoring to get back into the game. (Because of the outcry from horse owners that want a fair and humane means to dispose of unwanted animals. This is a reality, not something that you wish on old trigger but a reality born from the day of birth.)

Across the country, businesses have been applying for permits with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. They want to ship horsemeat to countries where it is eaten by humans or used as animal feed. (This should never have been stopped. I have eaten horse meat in Italy and it is very tasty besides being very healthy! I would buy it here in America if it was offered)

Retail purchase of horsemeat for human consumption in the U.S. is not yet approved but the possibility could be coming. 

In a statement following Friday’s dismissal, The Humane Society pledged that it would “not only appeal the decision, but also work with the states to block the plants from opening in Iowa, Missouri and New Mexico and step up its efforts in Congress to stop the slaughter of American horses.” (I know this is their right, but their disinformation and out right lies are a form of environmental terrorism)

"With today's court ruling and the very real prospect of plants resuming barbaric killing of horses for their meat in the states, we expect the American public to recognize the urgency of the situation and to demand that Congress take action," Humane Society President Wayne Pacelle said in a statement. (His statement proves his ignorance. Horses right now are being shipped unnecessary miles across USA borders to be killed in plants in other country's.  Horses have been turned lose to die of starvation on our forest and BLM grounds. Indian reservations are flooded with these horses and they die a horrible death at the hands of the wild stallion) "Court fights and state legislative battles have been important, but this is an issue of national importance and scale, and Congress should have an up-or-down vote on the subject." (Yes, and they should uphold the right of animal owners)

The idea of killing horses for food has triggered strong reaction among people on both sides of the issue.

Several animal rights organizations have linked legalizing the practice to horrific abuses and animal cruelty that they claim could lead to unsafe meat. (Yep, they try to scare those who have no idea of the truth)  They call the slaughters themselves a “brutal and terrifying end for horses.” (Sorry but in 99% of all cases, this is the best and most humane way to end their life. Old horses need to be used for dog food and younger ones that are dangerous should be fattened and use for human consumption. That is the truth, no spin)

“Horses are shipped for more than 24 hours at a time without food, water or rest in crowded trucks,” the Humane Society says. “They are often seriously injured or killed in transit.” (Yes it happens and the longer they have to travel to a plant, the higher the risk! Each owner should have a plant that is within a short drive)

Once at the slaughterhouse, the horses are stunned, the Humane Society claims, adding that because they are skittish animals by nature, the horses often “endure repeated blows and sometimes remain conscious during dismemberment.” (In Mexico we have no idea and no control over their kill methods. This is why we need plants here in the USA where we can control and ensure that horse are put down in the quickest and surest method available.)

Supporters, though, say that claims of cruelty are overblown and that while there is some risk in transporting any animal to slaughter, it is not a common occurrence.  (True, its simple, to the hauler and plant it is business and losing animals means losing profit.) 

Supporters also say that horse slaughtering facilities in the U.S. will provide a humane alternative for aging, starving or abandoned horses by owners who can no longer afford to take care of them. (This is just a fact. Does not matter if it offends you or not, this is a FACT!)

A 2011 report from the federal Government Accountability Office that shows horse abuse and abandonment have been increasing since Congress effectively banned horse slaughter by cutting funding for federal inspection programs in 2007. They say the ban on domestic slaughter has led to tens of thousands of horses being shipped to inhumane slaughterhouses in Mexico. (Again, a fact that backs up my view. I do not wish to seem callous in anyway but meat plants in the USA are the very best way we have to take care of our older or unwanted horses. Keeping them alive in a government support pen until they get injured and die is not a humane living for an animal I love. Put them down quickly)

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, more than 166,000 horses were sent to Canada and Mexico last year for slaughter. (Fact, so what has the Humane Society done with its efforts? They have hurt our horses by causing them to travel farther and suffer because of no USA oversight) 

Supporters also take issue with the taboo of eating horsemeat and say the animal is consumed in countries all over the world and could be extremely profitable to American companies interested in the industry. They also argue that horses should be treated no differently than pigs, chickens and cows. (Sorry but this is true and a fact also. Ask any 4 H or FFA person, they grow, raise, care for and at times, love the animal that they raise for your dinner plate. Why would a horse be different from a pet rabbit or lamb?)

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), China is one of the largest consumers of horsemeat. In France, the meat is considered to be a delicacy, sold in the same vein as veal in the U.S. (What they don't tell you is that none are raised for that purpose, not like cattle, sheep, chicken or pigs. They, just as we should...use animals that no longer have a use for anything else.)

About eight miles outside of Roswell, N.M., Valley Meat, a shuttered cattle farm is almost ready to reopen its doors.

Plant owner Rick De Los Santos and his attorney, Blair Dunn, told USA Today they were surprised when they ruling came down, hours after a temporary restraining order that barred the companies from opening in August had expired.

"If I were a betting man, I probably would have lost a lot of money on this," Dunn said. "I thought the court was headed in a different direction on this since she had issued the TRO. ... I am very, very happy to be wrong."

De Los Santos estimated it would be seven to 10 days before he was up and running.

Over in Gallatin, Mo., Rains Natural Meats could open as early as today.

Lets hope that we will again, have plants that we can control here in the USA.

I will add one more point and that is my freedom to eat what I wish. The USDA made it illegal to eat horse meat. I can eat snails, worms, bunny's  baby lambs, snakes, alligators and unborn chickens but not a horse? Come on, there is no common sense in this. If you don't want to eat horse meat then just don't buy it.   

OBAMA DOJ CLAIMS INTERNATIONAL TREATIES TRUMP THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

OBAMA DOJ CLAIMS INTERNATIONAL TREATIES 

TRUMP THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

Posted 10.31.13 by Greg Campbell, TPNN Political Analyst

As Americans argue over Obamacare, illegal immigration and a variety of other important issues, the very real threat of Second Amendment infringements continues to creep as anti-gun rights advocates seek to approve the United Nations’ Arms Trade Treaty (ATT).

The United Nations General Assembly approved the ATT earlier this year, which has been designed to regulate the traffic and possession of weapons between countries. The treaty has been signed by Secretary of State John Kerry, however the international treaty must be approved by the Senate in order to be recognized.

While Kerry and others try to gain support for the treaty, Tea Party Senator Ted Cruz warns that the Obama Administration is already making the argument that an international treaty supersedes the rights outlined in the Constitution.

Justice Department attorneys are arguing before the Supreme Court a position that undermines American sovereignty. Obama’s Department of Justice is arguing that a law that abides by an international treaty adopted by the U.S. would allow the federal government to prosecute a case that would otherwise be handled by state or local authorities.

The case in question is Bond v. United States, where a woman allegedly used chemical agents for revenge against a woman with whom her husband had an affair. While the use of a weapon would normally fall under the state’s jurisdiction to prosecute, the federal government has gotten involved and seeks to undermine state sovereignty by claiming that the woman is in violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act, the international agreement that Syrian dictator Bashar Assad has been accused of violating.

While the woman’s actions may be heinous, the DOJ’s position, if affirmed, would place the federal government in a position to use international treaties to prosecute American citizens.

“The Constitution created a limited federal government with only specific enumerated powers,” Cruz told said in an interview. “The Supreme Court should not interpret the treaty power in a manner that undermines this bedrock protection of individual liberty.”

Bond’s lawyer similarly agrees, stating,

“The problem here is precisely that Congress, rather than implementing the treaty consistent with our constitutional system of federalism, enacted a statute that, if construed to apply to petitioner’s conduct, would violate basic structural guarantees and exceed Congress’s enumerated powers.”

The issue is much larger than who gets to prosecute the defendant. If this position is allowed to stand, then the federal government is in a position to invoke treaties that run contrary to our constitiuional protections.

If anti-gun rights supporters can garner the necessary votes in the Senate to pass the ATT, then the ATT can be used to restrict American Second Amendment liberties under the authority of the international treaty.

The treaty calls for regulation of firearms and while it’s supporters have claimed that the treaty does not violate our Constitutional rights, the very nature of the treaty’s enforcement suggests otherwise as a registry would be necessary to enforce the provisions of the treaty to crack down on gun trafficking. As the U.N. is largely concerned with where the firearms ultimately end up, it would be impossible to track firearm usage without noting who bought each firearm and when.

Further, the treaty would afford the international community greater powers to regulate arms imports and exports, conceivably allowing for the barring of import or export of certain classes of firearms to and from the U.S. that “endanger women and children.”

With such broad, overreaching outlines as to what the treaty does and does not do, it quite naturally has gun rights advocates worried. The international community is largely unfriendly to the uniquely American concept that firearm ownership is a right and that government is not only allowed to permit such a right, it is duty-bound to uphold and protect that right.

“The Obama administration is once again demonstrating its contempt for our fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action. “This treaty threatens individual firearm ownership with an invasive registration scheme. The NRA will continue working with the United States Senate to oppose ratification of the ATT.”

Hit Man Insider Admits That He Murered People, On Command, For Bill and Hillary Clinton

Posted on 18 October, 2013 by Dylan

via dcclothesline

Larry Nichols, former 10 year accomplice to the Clinton’s , can now add hit-man to his list of dirty deeds. Nichols dropped a bombshell on The Pete Santilli Show when he very calmly admitted that he had murdered people, on command, for Bill and Hillary Clinton. Mr. Nichols has been a voice crying out in the wilderness since he brought to light the sexual brutality of Bill Clinton during his reign as Governor in Arkansas. That information would eventually play a key role to Clinton’s impeachment in the 90′s. Larry says he makes no apologies.

They sent me overseas to kill people for them and told me it was for the good of the Country. So when they asked me to do it for them in the States it felt no different. The real truth is, I did it for the money and I didn’t give a shit about the women I beat and the men I murdered. The Clintons are bad people and I did bad things for them. I had to live with that all of these years and now I just don’t care anymore who knows it.

Larry maintains the Clintons were into so many illegal activities at the time, they had to have a team of mercenaries made up of friends and state-troopers to cover it all up and keep them protected from the public finding out. According to Larry Nichols, both Bill and Hillary were wild and out of control and both were relentless in their pursuit for money and power. From running drugs, to the rape and beating of women and young girls, both of the Clintons are guilty of the unspeakable crimes.

When Pete asked Larry about Gennifer Flowers making headlines last week claiming Bill had told her Hillary had eaten more pussy than he had Larry said that’s old news, and indeed it is … Larry had made that same statement on the Pete Santilli show early last spring. Larry is adamant that Hillary Clinton is a “Dyke” and always has been.

One thing I know for sure She did have enough sex with men to have a kid, but it wasn’t Bill Clinton’s Kid she had … Chelsea is actually the daughter of Web Hubble.

Nichols and many other insiders claim Clinton began having sex with Hubble to gain employment at The Rose Law Firm which she believed would eventually advance Bill Clinton’s chances of becoming Governor of Arkansas.

The above quotes came from a radio interview. I have obtained a video that is posted on the same page. It is 4 hours long and I have not had time to isolate the comments so I have no idea what segment of the show contains them. I am posting the video for those who might have time to listen to it.

The club posts, you decide