The Screwing of America By Democrats!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FOX NEWS – 3 ArticleS we thought you would be interested in – The medical loss ratio aspect or portion of this bill was brought to our attention by Sen Burr. Your commentaries or news room needs to really expose this and let the American people know what is actually going on. This has extreme ramifications on our society as a whole and is being done behind the backs of the general public. READ SEC. 9010 of Health Care Reform Bill and Sec 10923 in Managers Amendment.
Thank you

North Carolina concerned citizen!!!!


CBO: 90% Medical Loss Ratio Would Make Private Insurance A Government Program
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/12/14/cbo-90-mlr/

A compromise provision in the Senate health care bill that requires insurers to rebate beneficiaries if they fail to spend 90% of premium dollars on medical care could add new costs to the federal government, limiting health reform’s deficit reductions. Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) inserted the new medical loss ration (MLR) requirement (for insurers participating in the small or individual group markets) during the Gang of 10 public option negotiations, but a new directive from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) may force Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) to abandon the provision and could further undermine the now defunct compromise.
The CBO’s “harsh assessment” concluded that the 90% MLR requirement — which insurers would only have to maintain until 2014 — “would devastate the industry“:

A proposal to require health insurers to provide rebates to their enrollees to the extent that their medical loss ratios are less than 90 percent would effectively force insurers to achieve a high medical loss ratio. Combining this requirement with the other provisions of the PPACA would greatly restrict flexibility related to the sale and purchase of health insurance. In CBO’s view, this further expansion of the federal government’s role in the health insurance market would make such insurance an essentially governmental program, so that all payments related to health insurance policies should be recorded as cash flows in the federal budget.
The question of whether certain purchases of private health insurance “should be treated as part of the federal budget” is not insignificant. During President Clinton’s push to pass comprehensive health care reform, the CBO decided that “payments to and from the ‘health alliances’ should be included in the accounts of the federal government.” The decision artificially increased the bill’s score, dooming its chances in Congress.

Rockefeller argues that insurers that receive government subsidies should be required to spend those dollars on health care, not administrative overhead or profit. The 90% ratio replaced an existing provision that required insurers to maintain a medical loss ratio of 85%.

ARTICLE 5
Wendell Potter Says Franken Bill Will Go Far to Control Medical Costs
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/wendell-potter-says-franken-bill-will
By Susie Madrak Monday Dec 07, 2009 9:00am
Former CIGNA executive Wendell Potter says one of the most important things we can do to reform health care is to control the medical loss ratio - something Al Franken, Jay Rockefeller and other senators are attempting to do:

Today, insurers only pay about 81 cents of each premium dollar on actual medical care. The rest is consumed by rising profits, grotesque executive salaries, huge administrative expenses, the cost of weeding out people with pre-existing conditions and claims review designed to wear out patients with denials and disapproval's of the care they need the most.

This equation is known as the medical loss ratio (MLR), an aptly named figure that is widely seen by investors as the most important gauge of an insurance company's current and future profitability. In a private health insurance industry that collected $817 billion this year, a 14 percentage point difference in the MLR represents $112 billion a year! Over 10 years, that would be more than enough to pay for health reform.

Thanks to the efforts of several senators who pushed for a minimum MLR to be included in reform legislation, the current Senate bill requires insurers to provide an annual rebate to each enrollee if non-claims costs exceed 20% in the group market and 25% in the individual market.
Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) is now leading a group including Sens. Jay Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) to introduce an amendment that would go further by requiring that 90 percent of the money consumers spend on health insurance premiums go directly to health care costs.

The senators are proposing a reform that strikes at the heart of a health insurance system that puts profits first, and it would have a profound effect. When MLRs increase, that eats into profits, and Wall Street becomes very unhappy. A case in point is Aetna, the nation's third largest publicly-traded health insurance plan. Three years ago, the company reported that its quarterly MLR had inched up from 77.9 percent to 79.4 percent in 12 months. On the day this was disclosed, Aetna's share price plunged 20 percent as investors sold off their shares, reducing the company's market value by billions of dollars.

Wall Street investors expect insurers to pay as little as possible for medical claims. As a result, the nation's health insurance industry has evolved into a cartel of huge for-profit companies that together reap billions of dollars a year at the expense of their policyholders. The seven largest firms -- UnitedHealth Group, WellPoint, Aetna, Humana, CIGNA, Health Net, and Coventry Health Care -- enroll nearly one in three Americans in their health insurance plans. This year the industry will take about $25 billion in profits for getting between American patients and their doctors, according to the industry's trade group.

And they do this by finding every excuse in the book not to pay a claim, even if it means canceling individual policies when people get sick or ridding their rolls of unprofitable small business group policies if an employee or family member falls seriously ill. They issue confusing benefit statements to members so only highly motivated and persistent challengers of their denials stand a chance of reversing an unfair decision. And in the final analysis, when an insurance company has decided it no longer can make enough profit on a particular person or employer-sponsored group, it drives them away in a process known as "purging."

In this unconscionable profit-protection maneuver, an insurer will hike premiums so high that the policyholder has no choice but to pay outlandish rates for what may be a reduced benefit package, find another insurer, or simply go without coverage. The consequences of such decisions can be deadly -- but Wall Street always has the last word when profits are the main consideration.

When Wall Street isn't calling the shots, the outcome is decidedly better for health care consumers. Government-operated plans, such as Medicare, and some organizations that provide coordinated care, consistently maintain higher medical loss ratios. Kaiser had a 90.6 percent MLR in 2007. Between 1993 and 2007, Medicare's MLR hasn't dropped below 97 percent.
The health care reform bill now being debated in the Senate must include a provision, such as that proposed by Sen. Franken, that sets a minimum medical loss ratio to keep insurers from gouging consumers and leaving patients without the care they need. Instead of being a formula to reward investors, a properly regulated medical loss ratio in combination with other cost containment measures in the legislation would be a reliable tool for keeping insurance company profits and administrative waste in check.

Tags: al franken, CIGNA, health reform, Healthcare Reform, insurance company, Jay Rockefeller

Medical-Loss Ratio 3
Does A Higher Medical-Loss Ratio Reduce Insurer Profits?
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/11/16/medical-loss/

Over at Open Congress, Donny Shaw wonders why the House health bill doesn’t extend its requirement that insurers maintain an 85% medical-loss ratio once the Exchange becomes operative in 2013:

Once the bill is enacted, all health insurance plans would be required to spend at least 85 cents of every dollar paid in premiums each year to providing actual health care. If, in a given year, an insurer doesn’t spend that amount on health care, they would have to give their extra profit back to their customers in the form of rebates. [...]

But there’s a twist to all of this. The version of the bill that was passed by the House last weekend includes the provision, but also includes some curious, new “sunset” language. The sunset language states that the new minimum medical loss ratio requirements “shall not apply to health insurance coverage on and after the first date that health insurance coverage is offered through the Health Insurance Exchange.” In other words, in 2013, when most of the bill takes effect, the medical loss ratio language would be null and void. There would be no more profit control, just the market competition that is provided by whatever form of the public option is included in the bill.

“This really doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. What’s the point of including it in the legislation if it’s not going to apply once the bulk of the bill takes effect?,” Shaw asks.

Shaw’s concern is well taken, but a higher medical-loss ratio would not prevent private insurers from shifting a disproportionate amount of premium dollars into profits. It would do very little to improve care quality. If anything, plans could be encouraged to pay more for certain services (to meet the benchmark) and exclude certain benefits from coverage (benefits which would attract a sicker risk pool).

As James C. Robinson points out in this Health Affairs article, “High ratios can be achieved either through a large numerator (high medical expenditures) or through a small denominator (low insurance premiums).” In 2007, for instance, 6 of the 7 largest publicly-traded health insurers reported that their profits increased by 10%, while their medical loss ratios also went up. The same could happen after 2013. Once the Exchange is established, insurers will spend less on administrative expenses (reform will limit their ability to underwrite policies and the Exchange will streamline certain administrative tasks), and their medical-loss ratio will likely increase. This does not mean that they’re spending more money on patient care or shifting less towards profits.

Health reform should strongly encourage insurers to spend more premium dollars on financing quality health care, and less on administrative costs. The House legislation accomplishes that goal by prohibiting insurers from maximizing profits and denying coverage to Americans with pre-existing conditions. It establishes guaranteed issue and renewal rules, prohibits rescission, requires information transparency and plan disclosure, mandates plans to offer minimum benefits packages and eliminates cost sharing on preventive services. Still, more can be done. Policy makers may better achieve the goal of forcing insurers to spend premium dollars on health care by increasing the minimum actuarial value of health plans and only admitting insurers with high quality standards and low administrative overheads into the Exchange


Medical Loss Ratio 4
http://www.morningstar.com/1/3/80270-update-us-senate-democrats-seek-health-care-deal-tuesday.html

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- U.S. Senate Democrats worked to forge agreement Tuesday on health-care overhaul legislation as they finalized major new provisions to the bill that would expand the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

A number of Democrats cited Tuesday as a critical day for the bill, as they seek to send legislation to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office in time to receive a cost estimate and schedule a final vote before Christmas.

"It's a day where a lot of things have to come together, if we hope to finish this in a reasonable time," said Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D., Ill.).

Durbin cited the need to send the bill to the CBO and the lengthy amount of time it could take for the bill to overcome procedural hurdles in the Senate before a final vote, a process he said would take "a number of days."

The urgency comes as a group of 10 moderates and liberals assembled by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) works to finish a compromise on key provisions in the bill by the end of the day. They are trying to come up with an agreement that will enjoy the support of at least 60 senators, the number needed to break a potential Republican filibuster of the bill.
The group of 10, which met Tuesday morning, is considering changes to the bill that would scale down its version of a public health insurance plan, allow those 55 and older to buy into the Medicare program and expand eligibility for the low-income Medicaid program.
"If we can come to agreement with people in this room, it doesn't mean we're home, but we've made a big step forward," said Sen. Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.).

But it's unclear if some key senators will be willing to support the compromise. Sen. Olympia Snowe (R., Maine), who is considered a swing vote on the bill, told reporters that she had "deep concerns" about the proposed changes to Medicare and Medicaid.

But Snowe said a proposal to scrap the bill's public plan and instead create an

alternative plan administered by the Office of Personnel Management and run by a nonprofit entity "makes sense" and is "an attractive option."

While senators had discussed expanding Medicaid eligibility to cover those with incomes at up to 150% of the federal poverty level, Schumer suggested Tuesday that "there are different things you can do on the Medicaid end of things" besides expanding eligibility.

The group is also discussing stiffer regulations on the health insurance industry as part of the compromise. Sens. Jay Rockefeller (D., W.Va.) and Ben Nelson (D., Neb.) are working together on a series of proposals that would include possible new restrictions on how companies spend money they raise from premiums.

Rockefeller said the group had discussed adding a provision stating that insurance companies would have to spend at least 90% of money raised from premiums on medical care, rather than devoting those funds to administrative costs or profits. The proportion is known in the insurance industry as "medical loss ratio."

"There have to be other ways to encourage discipline and self-restraint... and medical loss ratio is a very strong example," Rockefeller said.

Rockefeller said the medical loss ratio could be averaged over a three-year period in order to account for possible aberrations in a company's costs.

The Senate is set to vote Tuesday on an amendment offered by Nelson to the health overhaul bill that would put in place strict restriction intended to block federal funding for abortion in health plans offered by an insurance " exchange" created by the bill.

The amendment is modeled after a provision in the House-passed version of the bill that would bar the public health insurance option, as well as any health plans accepting enrollees that receive tax credits from the bill, from covering abortions.

The amendment is expected to fail. But Reid signalled Tuesday that further negotiations would take place with Nelson after the vote.

"If, in fact, he doesn't succeed here, we'll try something else," Reid said.
Sen. Bob Casey (D., Pa.), an anti-abortion Democrat who has co-sponsored Nelson's amendment, echoed Reid's comments.

"After this vote, no matter what the vote is, this discussion is going to continue," Casey said.
-By Patrick Yoest, Dow Jones Newswires; 202-862-3554; patrick.yoest@ dowjones.com

Remember 2010, Vote the Bums Out

Health Care - The Screwing of America

After trying to read only a small section of the so called health care bill, I want to arm myself and get ready to fight for the freedom of having my family receive care when needed from the doctor I SELECT and go to the hospital I SELECT. Reading only a small portion I realized what I have been hearing is correct, THE IS A MAJOR POWER GRAB BY THE GOVERNMENT.

These clowns even mention control over the purchase of Guns, Ammunition, where they are stored, etc. in a HEALTH CARE BILL Remember, when the government takes our right to bear arms we will no longer be able to decide or freedoms. The bastards, yes I used a bad word but they deserve it and far more then I will say.

To say they are traitors to the Constitution is mild as Obama the Traitor has already shredded the laws by taking over Banks, Car companies, not following bankruptcy laws. The congress, well they are just a bunch of dirt bags and would anyone really miss them if they just went away. One good thing would be Washington couldn't screw up anything else.

Remember what this joke of a president said:

"My Friends: We live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it".

Well, all the idiots who couldn't see what he was and voted for this clown should be happy now. Just think, you have screwed over your children, grandchildren, parents and last but not least, yourselves.

Your children will live in a second rate country, your grandchildren will be living in poverty as they try to pay for the clowns debt he is loading on them. Oh, if you think rich people will stick around to get hosed, think again. They didn't get rich to see it taken to pay for people too lazy to get off their butts and earn a living. I don't want to hear I've had it easy, hell, I lived in my car at one time and worked daily jobs to live until I got my act together.

I remember working at a finance (70's) company and seeing people receive ADC, work full time, drive caddies and yet they lived in government housing. Yep, a bunch of free loaders then and we have the same thing now. Remember Detroit, thousands showed up for "OBAMA'S MONEY", hell they are to stupid to understand it isn't the chosen ones money, IT IS OUR MONEY AND WE WORK DAMN HARD FOR IT. Now we get to watch while it is flushed (wanted to use the P word) away just like some many past congress have done.

It is not only the Dem's who have screwed up our country but the Republicans get the heat also.

You idiots in congress need to FIX HEALTH CARE, not screw up this country any more then you have already. I could select 10 people who could come up with a better bill and NOT STICK IN ANYTHING IN IT EXCEPT HEALTH CARE.

Anyone who votes for this monster, be aware, WE THE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO "VOTE THE BUMS OUT", get ready, time is short for you.

I sincerely hope someone out there has the balls to comment as to what We the People can come up with to write a better bill with Tort reform, insurance across state lines or even GET THE SAME HEALTH CARE CONGRESS HAS". If it is so great, why did congress exempt themselves from this bill just as they do with ALL bills.

Any Congressman or Senators care to comment on the last item? You're all a bunch of traitors to freedom and it will cost you big.

Read and Remember 9/11, Muslims STILL want to Kill Us

I, Gene Hackemack, received this email from my good friend Tedd Petruna, a diver at the NBL facility [Neutral Buoyancy Lab], at NASA Houston, whom I used to work with. Tedd happened to be on this same Flt. 297, Atlanta to Houston.

In my opinion, the muslims are all getting very brave now, since they have one of their own in the white house......read Tedd's story below.
Semper Fi Gene Hackemack

PS...can you imagine, our own news media now are so politically correct that they are afraid to report that these were all muslims...unbelievable.

Thank God for people like Tedd Petruna.

Subject: Long story short....

One week ago, I went to Ohio on business and to see my father. On Tuesday, November the 17th, I returned home. If you read the papers the 18th you may have seen a blurb where a AirTran flight was cancelled from Atlanta to Houston due to a man who refused to get off of his cell phone before takeoff. It was on Fox.

This was NOT what happened.

I was in 1st class coming home. 11 Muslim men got on the plane in full attire. 2 sat in 1st class and the rest peppered themselves throughout the plane all the way to the back. As the plane taxied to the runway the stewardesses gave the safety spiel we are all so familiar with. At that time, one of the men got on his cell and called one of his companions in the back and proceeded to talk on the phone in Arabic very loudly and very aggressively.

This took the 1st stewardess out of the picture for she repeatedly told the man that cell phones were not permitted at the time. He ignored her as if she was not there. The 2nd man who answered the phone did the same and this took out the 2nd stewardess. In the back of the plane at this time, 2 younger Muslims, one in the back aisle, and one in front of him, window, began to show footage of a porno they had taped the night before, and were very loud about it. Now..they are only permitted to do this prior to Jihad. If a Muslim man goes into a strip club, he has to view the woman via mirror with his back to her. (don't ask me..I don't make the rules, but I've studied) The 3rd stewardess informed them that they were not to have electronic devices on at this time. To which one of the men said "shut up infidel dog!"

She went to take the camcorder and he began to scream in her face in Arabic. At that exact moment, all 11 of them got up and started to walk the cabin. This is where I had had enough! I got up and started to the back where I heard a voice behind me from another Texan twice my size say "I got your back." I grabbed the man who had been on the phone by the arm and said "you WILL go sit down or you Will be thrown from this plane!" As I "led" him around me to take his seat, the fellow Texan grabbed him by the back of his neck and his waist and headed out with him. I then grabbed the 2nd man and said, "You WILL do the same!" He protested but adrenaline was flowing now and he was going to go. As I escorted him forward the plane doors open and 3 TSA agents and 4 police officers entered.

Me and my new Texan friend were told to cease and desist for they had this under control. I was happy to oblige actually. There was some commotion in the back, but within moments, all 11 were escorted off the plane. They then unloaded their luggage.

We talked about the occurrence and were in disbelief that it had happen, when suddenly, the door open again and on walked all 11!! Stone faced, eyes front and robotic (the only way I can describe it). The stewardess from the back had been in tears and when she saw this, she was having NONE of it! Being that I was up front, I heard and saw the whole ordeal. She told the TSA agent there was NO WAY she was staying on the plane with these men. The agent told her they had searched them and were going to go through their luggage with a fine tooth comb and that they were allowed to proceed to Houston. The captain and co-captain came out and told the agent "we and our crew will not fly this plane!" After a word or two, the entire crew, luggage in tow, left the plane. 5 minutes later, the cabin door opened again and a whole new crew walked on.

Again...this is where I had had enough!!! I got up and asked "What the hell is going on!?!?" I was told to take my seat. They were sorry for the delay and I would be home shortly. I said "I'm getting off this plane". The stewardess sternly told me that she could not allow me to get off. (now I'm mad!) I said "I am a grown man who bought this ticket, whose time is mine with a family at home and I am going through that door, or I'm going through that door with you under my arm!! But I am going through that door!!" And I heard a voice behind me say "so am I".

Then everyone behind us started to get up and say the same. Within 2 minutes, I was walking off that plane where I was met with more agents who asked me to write a statement. I had 5 hours to kill at this point so why the hell not. Due to the amount of people who got off that flight, it was cancelled. I was supposed to be in Houston at 6pm. I got here at 12:30am. Look up the date. Flight #297 Atlanta to Houston. If this wasn't a dry run, I don't know what one is. The terrorists wanted to see how TSA would handle it, how the crew would handle it, and how the passengers would handle it.

I'm telling this to you because I want you to know..The threat is real. I saw it with my own eyes.. -Tedd Petruna

This was sent to us and I have tried to verify if this is true or not. From what I can find (snopes.com), it is not accurate. As with all items written to stir the pot of hate, we must watch closely that we try not to fall prey to these lies. It is hard enough to see our real enemies. If it did take place no one is talking and we should not pass it on.

The Staff

Update: After reading and seeing additional information, something did take place with 11+ Muslim men aboard the flight. Maybe this was a test of how people would react. There have been reports that Mr. Petruna was never on board yet he claims to have a boarding pass. After the last problem with Muslim men aboard a plane and being forced off due to their conduct, this may have happened on purpose. The last group won a lawsuit and now airlines may not want to challenge them.

All we know for sure now is, Muslim men created a disturbance by not following the attendants orders about cells phones and the first flight crew refused to fly them. If we hurt their feelings to bad, I don't remember Jews, Christians, Hindus or anyone except Muslims flying into the towers.

A WWII Hero Speaks

This venerable and much honored WW II vet is well known in Hawaii
for his seventy-plus years of service to patriotic organizations and causes
all over the country. A humble man without a political bone in his body,
he has never spoken out before about a government official, until now.
He dictated this letter to a friend, signed it and mailed it to the president.

Dear President Obama,

My name is Harold Estes, approaching 95 on December 13 of this year. People meeting me for the first time don't believe my age because I remain wrinkle free and pretty much mentally alert.

I enlisted in the U.S. Navy in 1934 and served proudly before, during and after WW II retiring as a Master Chief Bos'n Mate. Now I live in a "rest home" located on the western end of Pearl Harbor, allowing me to keep alive the memories of 23 years of service to my country.

One of the benefits of my age, perhaps the only one, is to speak my mind, blunt and direct even to the head man.

So here goes.

I am amazed, angry and determined not to see my country die before I do, but you seem hell bent not to grant me that wish.

I can't figure out what country you are the president of.
You fly around the world telling our friends and enemies despicable lies like:
" We're no longer a Christian nation"
" America is arrogant" - (Your wife even
announced to the world,"America is mean-
spirited. " Please tell her to try preaching
that nonsense to 23 generations of our
war dead buried all over the globe who
died for no other reason than to free a
whole lot of strangers from tyranny and
hopelessness.)
I'd say shame on the both of you, but I don't think you like America, nor do I see an ounce of gratefulness in anything you do, for the obvious gifts this country has given you. To be without shame or gratefulness is a dangerous thing for a man sitting in the White House.

After 9/11 you said," America hasn't lived up to her ideals."

Which ones did you mean? Was it the notion of personal liberty that 11,000 farmers and shopkeepers died for to win independence from the British? Or maybe the ideal that no man should be a slave to another man, that 500,000 men died for in the Civil War? I hope you didn't mean the ideal 470,000 fathers, brothers, husbands, and a lot of fellas I knew personally died for in WWII, because we felt real strongly about not letting any nation push us around, because we stand for freedom.

I don't think you mean the ideal that says equality is better than discrimination. You know the one that a whole lot of white people understood when they helped to get you elected.

Take a little advice from a very old geezer, young man.

Shape up and start acting like an American. If you don't, I'll do what I can to see you get shipped out of that fancy rental on Pennsylvania Avenue. You were elected to lead not to bow, apologize and kiss the hands of murderers and corrupt leaders who still treat their people like slaves.

And just who do you think you are telling the American people not to jump to conclusions and condemn that Muslim major who killed 13 of his fellow soldiers and wounded dozens more. You mean you don't want us to do what you did when that white cop used force to subdue that black college professor in Massachusetts, who was putting up a fight? You don't mind offending the police calling them stupid but you don't want us to offend Muslim fanatics by calling them what they are, terrorists.

One more thing. I realize you never served in the military and never had to defend your country with your life, but you're the Commander-in-Chief now, son. Do your job. When your battle-hardened field General asks you for 40,000 more troops to complete the mission, give them to him. But if you're not in this fight to win, then get out. The life of one American soldier is not worth the best political strategy you're thinking of.

You could be our greatest president because you face the greatest challenge ever presented to any president.
You're not going to restore American greatness by bringing back our bloated economy. That's not our greatest threat. Losing the heart and soul of who we are as Americans is our big fight now.
And I sure as hell don't want to think my president is the enemy in this final battle.

Sincerely,
Harold B. Estes

When a 95 year old hero of the "the Greatest Generation"
stands up and speaks out like this, I think we owe it
to him to send his words to as many Americans as
we can. Please pass it on.

Thanks to the unknown person who sent this.

Christmas Alert!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There will be no Nativity Scene in Washington this year! The Supreme Court has ruled that there cannot be a Nativity Scene in the United States Capital this Christmas season. This isn't for any religious reason. They simply have not been able to find Three Wise Men in the Nation's Capitol. A search for a Virgin continues. There was no problem, however, finding enough asses to fill the stable.

It is time for Amendment 28

Amendment 28

Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives, and Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States.

When the people fear their government there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
-- Thomas Jefferson

The Staff: It's about time

Three Wise Leaders

In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm and three or more is a congress.--

John Adams

I hope this one makes it around the world repeatedly!!!!

Give the people the same health care as their elected officials!!!


Fight organized crime: Re-elect no one... and ... Tell Everyone...



"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have."

"Thomas Jefferson"

The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."

Margaret Thatcher