Finally! An Awesome Bill Passes the House...and Utah's Matheson Opposes

Today the House voted to repeal Obamacare 245-189 -- a larger margin than the passage of the behemoth a year ago -- with three southern Democrats joining all the Republicans in passing (also reflecting more bipartisanship than the original bill vote).

Contrasting to the 2,000 page quagmire, H.R. 2 was a simple 3 page bill. It fulfilled campaign promises made by the GOP and points to the seriousness the House--led by a promising new Speaker, John Boehner--is taking in their Pledge to America made prior to the November elections. It's a welcome fresh change to the unconstitutional tyranny of the old Pelosi-led Congress.

Yet with the perfect opportunity for Utah's Rep. Jim Matheson to put teeth into his dying so-called "blue dog" moderate coalition and kill the bill he proudly claims he didn't vote for (for further analysis read my post "The Untold Story of Matheson's Vote for Obamacare"), Matheson voted today against repeal.

In this past fall's Bruce Lindsey's Sunday Edition KSL televised debate with challenger Morgan Philpot, Matheson claimed their were "good parts" about Obamacare that should be preserved such as the prohibitions against denial for preexisting conditions:

I think we ought to keep the good parts and get rid of the bad parts....if you had a pre-existing condition before this became law, insurance companies could deny you coverage, to have health insurance coverage....If you repeal the whole law you're saying, "You know what, if you have a pre-existing condition, too bad."

While on its face pre-existing conditions sounds very simple and utopic for the insurance companies to cover, the mandate on insurance companies is a horrible portion of Obamacare, not at all good like Matheson asserts. Indeed the mandate is a severe overreach of the Federal government and destroys the very concept of insurance.

Insurance is designed for a group of citizens to pool collective risk of negative future events. Life insurance pools risk against future death, car insurance against future accidents, and earthquake insurance against the event that an earthquake would destroy a home. Furthermore, the pools are specialized allowing different rate payments based on higher risks. A septuagenarian pays higher life insurance premiums than a mid-lifer because risk is greater, while a driver with a clean driving record reaps better premiums than the driver with three moving violations.

By the Federal government reaching in and mandating insurance companies cover pre-existing conditions, in a single swath they have destroyed both the specialized pools of low risk health insureds vs. high risk and the risk of insuring future negative events since anyone can obtain insurance at any time. Thus, health insurance is destroyed. Coupled with the Individual Mandate portion of the bill, the pre-existing conditions portions Obamacare causes us to now share collective healthcare costs in a Socialisitic system with disregard to lifestyle choices.

Why would Matheson and the liberal Democrats want to destroy Health Insurance through this pre-existing conditions clause? Health insurance premiums have continued to skyrocket post-Obamacare passage as companies seek to brace against the wave of uninsureds with pre-existing conditions who will be added to their rolls at the whim of the uninsured. Eventually the healthy will seek escape from so-called "health insurance" because it will be many times cheaper for them to self-insure rather than be pooled with people with actual, rather than risk of future, catastrophic medical costs.

By exacerbating health insurance woes by adding a requirement for pre-existing conditions, Matheson masks his Socialistic tendencies as help for the needy. Matheson clearly has to be voted out of office in 2o12. And a new Utah Policy poll this week shows just this: a hypothetical matchup of Gov. Herbert vs. Matheson has Herbert winning 50%-40% (h/t Political Cornflakes).

The Untold Story of Matheson's Vote for Obamacare

The most important race in Utah two months from now in November won't be Governor Herbert's triumph over Carroon. Instead, it will be the story of how a common man named Morgan Philpot took down a powerful political dynastic incumbent named Jim Matheson.

I'd like to introduce Jim Matheson to you. He is a politician who shrouds his votes carefully, masking his true liberal spend-and-tax philosophies. No better example of this comes to mind than Matheson's vote this spring for Obamacare.

Oh, you counter, Matheson did not vote for Obamacare (HR 3590)! Ahh, I rebut, but in the real vote for Obamacare he did vote to unconstitutionally ram it through! Please, allow me to elaborate and take us back to March of this year.

Back in the third week of March the Senate had already passed Obamacare and Speaker Nancy Pelosi was frantically twisting arms to get votes to get Obamacare passed in the House. Out of desperation, scheming, or both, Louise Slaughter (D-NY28 "gerrymandered earmuffs" and Chair of the House Rules Committee; Jill Rowland is in a good fight to unseat her) came up with an idea which would become to be ignominiously known as the "Slaughter Solution": deem Obamacare to have passed without actually voting on it. The Slaughter Solution provided Pelosi twofold objectives: first, a backup plan to pass Obamacare in case Democrats couldn't force enough of their members to vote for it on a direct vote and second, to provide Pelosi a true test vote on Obamacare to see what kind of margin they could get on Obamacare. Many Democrats were "fence sitters" knowing Obamacare was massively unpopular at home but desired to both partisanly please their leader as well as further the expansion of big government and power. Such was the case with supposed fence sitter Democrat Jim Matheson.

On Thursday, March 18th, the infamous "Slaughter Solution" (H RES 1190) passed the house 222-203 providing Pelosi a good indication about how fence sitters were sitting. Joining all the Republicans in opposing the "Slaughter Solution" were 28 so-called "Blue Dog" Democrats who are considered more moderate than the Nancy Pelosi and Louise Slaughters of the political world. Publicly that week even beyond Thursday, Matheson kept saying how he was undecided about Obamacare while protesters were held daily outside his office. Yet Matheson revealed his desire for government healthcare takeover by voting "aye" on the Obamacare "Slaughter Solution" which is nothing worse than passing unconstitutional Obamacare unconstitutionally (ie Congress has to actually vote on law, they can't deem it to have passed.)

Pelosi kept working the Democrats and prepping them for a Sunday--yes a rare Christian Sabbath Day vote--on Obamacare to be held when Christians across the nation would in their homes and churches praying for deliverance from Sin and Obamacare. The morning of Saturday the 20th broke and I joined a few hundred protestors on the steps of our state capitol for a Code Red Rally. Even after the rally ended Saturday mid-dayish, protestors went over to "undecided" Matheson's empty office to protest. It was after this--less than 24 hours before the vote--that Matheson announced he would be voting no on HR3590 and Pelosi got Bart Stupak to cave in on the anti-abortion measures freeing up some of the Democratic fence sitters like Matheson to vote against the leadership knowing that the vote for HR3590 "Obamacare" would be scrutinized historically far more than H RES 1190 "Slaughter Solution."

Utah needs a better Congressman than Matheson. I have better things to do with my Saturdays than to protest a supposed "fence-sitter" who has already voted for Obamacare in the worse form of the Slaughter Solution.

But let's just say I'm a nutjo who has no idea what I'm talking about. You say Matheson's vote against Obamacare HR3590 proves he is against it. I say the vote was a run for cover and can prove it with one final blow: if Matheson is SO against Obamacare that he didn't vote for it, then why doesn't Matheson sign the pledge to repeal it? Republican Morgan Philpot signed the pledge a long time ago.

The answer to that question reveals the true nature of liberal Democrat Matheson and why we must make every effort to ensure Morgan Philpot defeats him this November.

SCOTUS: 6 Catholics, 3 Jews?

Imagine for a minute there were two sitting justices on the SCOTUS who were Mormon by religious affiliation. The only Protestant on the Supreme Court was retiring and the POTUS nominated yet another Mormon to the bench. How would you feel? Would you feel like somehow though the various Protestant denominations (Baptists, Methodists, Lutherans, Evangelicals) comprise a majority of religious adherents in the US that you had no representation? Would you wonder why a US religion registering around 2% was getting a third justice while your religion had no representation? Would you protest or accuse the POTUS of being a religious bigot? (SCOTUS religious stats here)

Yet in the nomination of Elena Kagan to replace Justice Stevens, Obama has done just this with one twist: substitute Jewish for Mormon and, Bingo! Actually, if anything I'm being generous because there are more Mormons than Jews in the US and there have historically been 7 Jews on the SCOTUS while representing Mormons there have been fewer: lets see there has been--hmm, let me think a moment--oh yeah! There hasn't EVER been a Mormon on the SCOTUS!

I use the example of the Mormon faith because I am one and it is the religion I am most familiar with, yet Mormons are hardly unique in their lament. Consider Baptists: they comprise nearly 20% of the population so roughly they should have a couple of Justices on the SCOTUS. Baptists have none. Conversely, Catholics are currently way over-represented comprising 6 of 9 SCOTUS seats (Sotomayor, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, Roberts) while representing a mere 25% of the population.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not here to stir up religious fervor. I'm not here to mandate proportional religious equality on the SCOTUS. Indeed I have a deep respect for religions and am proud to have close family ties to members of Jewish, Mormon, Protestant, and Muslim faiths; and while there just aren't a bunch of Catholics in the family, I have numerous Catholic friends and people I admire.

What I am saying is that the POTUS should use more judgement in balancing out the deep diversity of religions and certainly the nomination of a third Jew to balance out six Catholics is about as skewed religiously as you can get. Those nine justices combined would represent only 26% of the US citizenry.

I vehemently oppose the nomination of Elena Kagan to the SCOTUS. Being the third Jew and having zero hours experience being a judge are just the writing on the wall of mene mene tekel upharsin: that Kagan fails to defend the Constitution as the citizenry adopted it. Show me where in these hearings has Kagan declared Obamacare unconstitutional because it mandates the purchase of a product (health insurance), something that has never been required of the citizenry before. And then show me where in Article 1, Section 8--the list of specific authorities granted the Federal Government--does it talk about health care? The nomination of unconstitutional Kagan must be stopped, by filibuster if necessary.

++++ Update 7/10

I wasn't the lone voice lamenting the cause of a another Jew being nominated. Consider this story from late June (h/t CNS news) in an interview with the Rabbinical Alliance of America:

Rabbi Yehuda Levin, spokesman for the alliance, told CNSNews.com on Thursday that "a great deal has been made about the fact that she would be the second Jewish woman on the court, and we want to signal to people across the country that we take no pride in this.”

Levin said most people are happy when "one of their own" is nominated to such a high position. But, he added, "We feel that Elena Kagan turns traditional Judaism on its head--from a concept of a nation of priests and holy people, she is turning it into, ‘Let’s homosexualize every segment of society. And by the way, partial-birth babies
have no right to be delivered.’"

“What exactly was Obama thinking, President Obama thinking, when he nominated Kagan? Because eventually, down the road, someone--or some group--is going to ‘take the hit’ for the crazy decisions that Kagan is bound to make. So we would have much preferred if President Obama had given this ‘distinction’ to another minority group, instead of singling out the Jews.”

"We’re waiting for the more courageous, decent senators--whether it’s a (Sen.) Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) or a (Sen.) Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) or a (Sen.) Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.)--we’re looking for them to stand up and filibuster this embarrassing endangerment of a nomination,” Levin said.

You know, when considering Harry Reid's political views as Mormons are supposed to be similarly anti-abortion, strong supporters of traditional marriage, and against Socialism, I can see exactly where the Rabbinical Alliance of America is coming from.

Repeal the Bill: A New Look at Mark Kirk

3/21, the day that Obamacare passed the House based on false promises from the President, inexorable backdoor deal-making, and voted on against the will of We the People, marks a political event that like 9/11 reshaped our thinking for America: indeed it marks the start of Medi-geddon. We have had time to reflect on what we can to do repeal the bill and return American at least to a partially-Capitalistic system we had before instead of passing through the doors of Socialism which this bill is doing to us on its multi-year journey. It seems for now that the #1 priority for 2010 elections is voting for candidates who will embrace repeal--and this really means voting Republican as every Republican currently in the House and Senate voted in unanimity a resounding "H*LL NO"!


So how would repeal work? Realistically, we'll need 60 votes in the Senate, a majority in the House, and a President in 2012 who won't veto repeal. Sixty votes in the Senate is the most difficult to achieve because it takes 6 years to cycle through a single opportunity to change a Senate vote for the bill to against the bill. Nacilbupera believes that the Senate could gain back the majority in 2010--but not if we fail to build coalitions with those who agree with us only some of the time: if repeal is a true priority, we will have to vote for Republican candidates who have won their primaries, yet are moderates. It appears that we need to win 2 of the 3 "big state" Senate seats in order to at least get the majority back in the Senate: California, Illinois, and New York (and preferrably all 3 to set us in better shape for 2012).

If you don't like your GOP candidate for Senate and House, you MUST get involved NOW and you MUST donate NOW to the candidate you like. Primaries are quickly approaching and in the case of Illinois, it has already happened. If you like DeVore better than Fiorina, now is election day. If you like Rubio over Christ, now is election day. If you like Hayworth or Deakin over McCain, now is election day. If you like Eagar, Bridgewater, or Lee over Bennett now is election day. And so the list goes on, state by state, congressional district by congressional district.

Illinois had its day and selected its GOP candidate Mark Kirk. Nacilbupera opposed Kirk. Indeed we indicated we would seek someone else to fill the seat. However, in light of Medi-geddon we are reversing our stance on Kirk for the following reasons:

1. Kirk voted NO! to Obamacare
2. Kirk has signed the pledge to repeal Obamacare
3. Kirk's Democratic opponent supports Obamacare and indeed is using the Socialistic bill as a means of touting a vote against Kirk.
4. The sense of urgency to repeal is so great that if we don't repeal now, we may not have our Republic in 6 years when a more conservative Republican could run against a non-incumbent and thus challenge the Democrat incumbent.
5. Kirk could end up being the difference between a Republican majority and minority in the Senate in 2010. (Election Projection currently has it at 50-48 in favor of the Dems.) This is necessary to put a check on Obama who will sign whatever Socialistic legislation Congress puts forth like amnesty, cap and tax, and endless upward debt ceiling adjustments.
6. No 3rd-party conservative opponent to Kirk has any traction. Indeed, they are looking for petition signatures at this point to merely make their name on the Illinois ballot. We fear any traction they do gain at this point will end up further solidifying the Democrat and thus put in jeopardy the Medi-geddon war.

In light of these points, we therefore officially reverse our stance of opposition last month on Mark Kirk and wish him success as we fight together the battle of Medi-geddon. This is not a refutation of the wrong sides Kirk has been on in the past, but the recognition that just as we allied ourselves with Russia in World War II to fight world takeover by fascism, we must align ourselves with Kirk in order to protect our country from Socialism. Nacilbupera will continue to monitor Kirk through the election and his victory to ensure that Kirk stays true to his word.

Medi-geddon

Yesterday was proof we are in the midst of Medi-geddon: we are fighting for the very essence of our country, freedoms, prosperity, and Constitution ambushed in the name of health care reform. The battle lost yesterday deepens our resolve to fight harder. We are the Battered Bastards of Bastogne: for us surrender is "nuts". Or below as seen in "A Bridge Too Far": we haven't the proper facilities to take you [Progressives] all prisoner. Sorry."

As Heritage President Fuelner said today: Obama's health care legislation can and will be repealed. The American people are never permanently thwarted.

The Progressives have been working quietly, year after year to pass their evil agenda. Their fight has spanned generations. Ours has been less consistent, but no more. We will fight to the end of our lives. We will raise up our children and their children to fight for our country and our Constitution to take our places when we die so that someday our posterity might enjoy the free country untainted by socialism we never had.

We are redoubling our efforts against those who voted yesterday AYE on HR3590. We will hold accountable all 219 Representatives and 60 Senators who voted for this list. Like the 9/12 terrorist attacks, we will NOT forget our 3/21 and our 12/24.

Health-scare Passes Congress

The House just passed 219-212 HR3590, the 2,700-page Obamacare scheme despite bipartisan opposition (178 GOP and 34 Dem). (HR4872, the reconciliation bill also passed 220-211, but that goes to the Senate with the infamous Bismark Bank Bailout.) Interesting, 219-212 was the same exact vote count that cap-n-tax passed the House last year.

Stupak's Cave-in
Bart Stupak caved in on his anti-abortion language in favor of a weak executive order; every pro-life organization is dumping him. As his gang was the deciding factor we estimate the anger against him will be severe enough to jeopardize his re-election. Stupak also recently garnished $1M in airport earmarks (h/t The Lonely Conservative) for his district. This video surfaced, however, showing his true intentions were never to put protection of life above government-mandated insurance:


Summary of other votes
Jim Matheson (UT-02) joined his two Utah GOP colleagues in voting NO! North Dakota Rep. Pomeroy of Bismark Bank Bailout fame ignored his constituents and voted for the bill. Some brave patriots voting against the bill included Stephen Lynch of (MA-09), John Tanner (TN-08), and Joseph Cao (LA-02), the last having voted previously for Obamacare. Here is the link to how everyone voted on HR3590.

Some tea party groups are planning candlelight vigils for the seniors and the unborn who will die because of Obamacare as Obama is expected to sign the bill in the next few days.

Aborting the Constitution Through Executive Order: More March Madness

Here we are on Christian Sabbath Day trying to defend the Constitution and to protect the babe in the womb.

As the Slaughter Solution appears to have been slaughtered, the latest tactic seems to be to get Rep. Bart Stupak & gang to sign on by having Obama sign an "executive order" defunding abortion after Congress would vote to fund it through passage of Obamacare. (The Hill, Life News). We decry this latest foul trickery.

Executive Orders have a tainted history of abuse in violating the Constitution separating the power of the Congress to legislate law and the executive branch to enforce the law. But this proposal goes further: Obama would pre-promise to reverse a law passed only perhaps minutes or hours stating the complete opposite. There is no historical example of this EVER being done before in the history of our Republic.

Secondly, an executive order is much weaker than a law passed by Congress. Any president can reverse any executive order at any time for any reason. All it would take is for Obama or another future Progressive President to wave their magic wand and all that Stupak, Hyde, and We the People have fought for in keeping federal funding of abortion prohibited would be washed away.

Stop this March Madness abortion of our Constitution!

+++ Update:
Although you can't contact Stupak outside of Michigan through his congressional email, you can use this email from his facebook: rep_stupak@new.rr.com

How to Contact Holdout Rep. Pomeroy (ND)

North Dakota's sole member of Congress, Rep. Earl Pomeroy is hiding.

He is one of the Democratic undecideds going into tomorrow's health-scare vote. Actually, if we were going to have to stand up and answer questions about why the Bank of North Dakota is singled out for favoritism in the student-loan government takeover in the reconciliation bill while at the same time holding out an undecided vote in a bill 64% of North Dakotans are opposed too, we'd probably play a silent version of the kid game "marco-polo" too! Apparently this isn't the first complaint of only listening to North Dakotan Democratic "yes-men":

Pomeroy isn't on twitter so you can't tweet him. Apparently he's on facebook but we really loathe facebook. If you try to email him with a zip code outside of North Dakota, you'll be blocked. And forget trying to comment on his Youtube videos because it is set up for comment approval or something.

Yet there is a way to contact him as we discovered: through Youtube email! Here's the message we sent to him. (We'll let you know if we get a response.)

Congressman: Congrats on your new appointment. [Nacil: we're trying to be
nice here--he just got a big promotion a week ago to be Social Security
subcommittee chair. Hmm. More payoffs for his vote???] Will you
now please defend your oath to uphold the Constitution by voting NO on Obamacare
and show the American people that a mandate to purchase insurance is an
"excessive fine" never before established in the history of our nation and
prohibited by the 8th Amendment?

Also, will you explain your stance and what involvement you played in the "Bismark Bank Job" to cut a special deal for the Bank of North Dakota while having sweeping changes to every other student loan lender in the country?

We'd be willing to gander that if everyone were to try and sneak in the same door, it'd shut down pretty quick...

Salt Lake City Code Red Rally

Nacilbupera had the great honor of joining with like-minded patriots on the steps of our great state capitol in Salt Lake City in a last-minute-announced CODE RED rally against the abominable health-scare bill.

We had 200-300 Patriots gathered from all walks of life. We met a patriot (http://twitter.com/evorgsum) who made this fantastic sign (we overheard others commenting on it as well):

We exchanged thoughts and Nacilbupera quickly realized how likeminded and informed she was.

Another great patriot we met was Kathy (above) of Latterdaybanners.com who created this beautiful masterpiece flag just a few months ago. As way of explanation to our non-Mormon readers this flag is of particular symbolism to Mormons: 2,000 yrs ago Captain Moroni was a great military leader who when faced with a hostile takeover of his country by some people wanting to overthrow their judicial system and establish a king, tore his coat and wrote the above saying on it. Captain Moroni then further made everyone swear allegiance to the cause of freedom and a free government else be put to death. Think of Captain Moroni as a General Patton without the profanity: both were die-hard preservers of freedom and devoutly religious.

Speakers at the rally included: Jared Law of the 9/12 project, Diedre Henderson of the Jason Chaffetz campaign, Rep. Craig Frank of District #57 (Pleasant Grove), and Utah US Senate GOP candidates Mike Lee and Cherilyn Eagar. (US Senate candidate Tim Bridgewater was also present, but did not speak.) The speakers freely discussed neighboring issues such as state sovereignty and the crowd expressed opposition Bennett's reelection when solicited.

Jared Law urged us to call Governor Herbert and have him sign HB67 (sponsored by Carl Wimmer and co-sponsors including our Rep. Keith Grover): to have federal health-scare mandates passed after March 1, 2010, not apply to Utah and HB251: to have employers use E-Verify. HB67 has a growing number of states with similar legislation (see current map) across the country and is one Nacilbupera urges Gov. Herbert to sign. Jared also urged us to "fast and pray"--as our founding fathers did many times--that the bill be defeated.

Mike Lee quoted from James Madison's Federalist Paper #62 which was extremely appropriate considering the crypticness of an unwieldy, 2700-page health-scare bill before Congress:

It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow.

Cherilyn Eagar spoke exclusively on health care, talking about the American Medical Association's (AMA) support for the bill and how the AMA only represents a mere 17% of physicians. She urged us to instead support the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) and to sign the petition at http://www.takebackmedicine.com/ When Nacilbupera next seeks a physician, we will be looking for one that doesn't belong to the AMA and preferably belongs to the AAPS. Eagar also spoke about her father, a physician, coming home after Medicare first passed and saying: "today is the first day of the end of quality medicine in America." How true those words have turned out to be!

The protest carried over to Matheson's office a couple of miles south where, if we are not mistaken, there has been a protest going on virtually every day this week. Although we weren't able follow the protest, it seems we may have helped make an impact: Matheson formally announced his plans this afternoon to vote NO on Obamacare!

Code Red Rally Saturday Morning!

As we said yesterday, this last stand against socialism and the health-scare bill comes inconveniently comes down to this weekend before the our caucus elections on Tuesday.

Tomorrow morning, March 2oth, at the Utah State Capitol from 10am-noon there is a Code Red Rally to protest this unconstitutional bill. This event capstones other rallies this week held at Matheson's office and parallels the massive national CODE RED rally being held in DC.

Kill the Evil Bill Slotted on Christian Sabbath Day (Update)

Sometimes the most urgent fights come at the most inconvenient times. So it was last year, the Democrats rallied around a Christmas-Eve vote to push through the worst bill--a heath-scare scheme with (some samples, there are plenty others):

• a Cornhusker Kickback for citizens of Nebraska, courtesy Democrat Ben Nelson (Obama lied about this being removed in the Baier interview yesterday: it only is out if a second healthcare "reconciliation" bill passes both houses which is unlikely.)
• a Louisiana Purchase for citizens of Louisiana courtesy Democrat Mary Landrieu (Obama said this was for states "affected by a natural catastrophe" like Louisiana and...Hawaii???)
• a Gator Aid for citizens of Florida courtesy Democrat Bill Nelson
• a union bribe to get out of a Cadillac healthcare plan tax increase
• tax increases on medical devices
• an individual mandate to throw non-insurance holders in jail a bill which throws tax increases years before benefits to eek out some sort of 10-year disguise of being fiscally responsible
• a violation from the President that the debates would be held on C-SPAN
• federal funding of elective abortions, overriding the long-standing Hyde amendment

No, weren't not kidding. This is evil and sets up the framework for a socialist America. Americans know this and stand solidly against this bill. Time after time we have shouted from behind our signs, on our blogs, on our phones, emails, and letters for the Congress to start over. The bill is so bad, the House Rules Chair Louise Slaughter is proposing "deeming" the bill to have passed rather than voting on it--a direct violation of Act 1 Sect 7 of the Constitution.

Even after the unlikely election of Scott Brown to the Senate in deep blue state Massachusetts as the 41st vote against healthcare and thus ensuring a GOP filibuster, after several Democrats have announced their retirement, after not a single poll shows the support of the American people on this issue, Obama announced in his State of the Union his continued push for this bill.

So the bill which the Senate passed by 60 votes (and which they don't have the votes for now with the election of Scott Brown) is now being rammed down the throats of every Democrat in Congress.

Take for example Utah's sole Federal Democratic Congressman, Jim Matheson. We're not huge Matheson fans but we did send Matheson a thank you for voting against the two worst bills of 2009: the 2,000-page House version of health-scare (HR3962) and Cap n Tax (HR2454) which have not been passed by the Senate. Yet the Obama administration has attempted to sway Matheson in favor of the Senate version of health-scare (HR3590)--which has its own interesting, corrupt history as a gutted military home ownership bill--by nominating his brother to the Federal bench.

We shouldn't have to be having this debate right now. Kennedy--who couldn't live long enough to forever filibuster the Massachusetts seat from Bay Staters, should not have had a vote as by Massachusetts law and the seat should have been empty during the vote (unless you mess with the law)--yet he got two votes: Kirk's and Byrd's!

The word is out that a vote could come Sunday--Christian Sabbath Day--and a rare day for a Congressional vote. But that's OK because Obama has attacked Christians before. The time is not convenient, but if there is ever a time to protest, to call, to email, to speak up, and to pray, the time is NOW!

+++ Update: We understand intuitively that the bill is fiscally irresponsible, yet tricks allow Obama to declare it will help reduce the deficit. One of the most easy to understand graphs in understanding this trick comes via The Weekly Standard:



One can easily see how the benefits of the bill don't fully kick into place until about 2016 and the price tag then is around $200B/yr. If these benefits were amortized over 10 years, we'd be looking at an economy-breaking $2T+ bill.

Professor Obama's Lecture at the State of the Union Shows He Still Doesn't Get It

Tonight in his lengthy, professorial lecture Obama reiterated support for the two biggest bills Nacilbupera and Americans opposed this year: Cap N Tax (IE "Climate Change Bill"/Waxman-Markey/"Cap N Trade") and the Democare healthcare scheme. If anyone was in any doubts of whether a Brown victory in MA was enough to pull Obama towards the middle, those doubts have been erased. The State of our Union is bad and Obama doesn't know how to fix it. Worse, he ignores the will of the people in opposing these schemes and taxes.

Obama also reiterated his lie to the American people about creating (or saving) 2 million jobs when the facts are he has lost 4 million in his first year as president.

In a show of bombastic maneuvering, he advocated that federal government workers be given preferential treatment in student loan forgiveness over private sector workers. (Sounds rather unconstitutional let alone anti-business, pro government bureaucracy).

He proposed a super-lite freeze of spending of selected budget items at what are now unsustainable, record levels. The funniest line of all showing how minuscule importance he takes on cutting the deficit was this:

"I know that some in my own party will argue that we cannot address the deficit or freeze government spending when so many are still hurting. I agree, which is why this freeze will not take effect until next year..."

Nacilbupera broke out in hysterical ROFL at the pathetic-ness of an Obama fiscally-responsible budget and complete lack of courage to stand up for the smallest of all budget cutting ideas.

In contrast, Nacilbupera feels the president should proposed a balanced budget. Cut the czars, eliminated the Dept of Education, cut entitlements, cut, cut, cut! Cut before our country goes bankrupt! But no, says Obama. That might hurt. It might cause pain and hardship. Obama will propose a budget $1T again out of whack this year again. Unsustainable. Imagine the pain, Mr. President, you will cause when hyperinflation destroys our country due to unmanageable debt.

You are a fiscal disaster and disgrace to our country, Obama. Shame on you! Perhaps more than any single item we are looking for in a 2012 Presidential Candidate is one who will propose from day one a budget that AT MINIMUM holds the line on the deficit until the economy turns around and we can use annual surpluses to reduce our national debt and pay back the Chinese.

++++More:

Video: Justice Alito lips "Simply Not True" at Obama's SCOTUS shot (Moonbattery)

The Grinch steals Christmas 2009

Our Christmas has been destroyed this year by Democratic Senators who decided in a 60-39 partisan vote at 4am Pacific time on Christmas Eve this morning to pass the Democare "healthcare" legislation. Truly, the Grinch stole our Christmas and our liberty this year.

We would rather come together as a nation unified around a celebratory season both as Christians remembering the miraculous birth of our Savior in fulfillment of Biblical (and additionally for Mormons new world) prophecy, this God-incarnate perfect Jesus who made everything possible for us; and as non-Christians celebrating the birthday a man who has arguably made the single most dramatic impact on the history of the world.

Instead, we are dismayed and irate at the level of corruption exhibited throughout this bill and process including this Christmas Eve vote, the first since the Civil War era. Indeed, this is prompting a new Civil War in our nation. Not one of cannons and rifles but of words, civil disobedience, and massive protest. We follow the motto of Patrick Henry: "Give us liberty or give us death." The individual mandate is contrary to the liberty we fought and died for. A new era of tea party-ism has begun.

Our fight has only begun. This bill will be hotly debated at the dawn of 2010 as the Senate and House seek to reconcile their two shameful Democare bills. A blue dog Democrat, Parker Griffith, has already switched parties; it wouldn't surprise us if there is another. We vow to fight this at every step, at every level. We will fight this in Utah as it evades our state's sovereignty. We will bring this unconstitutional bill to the Supreme Court if Obama signs it. We will seek the overthrow of every Senate Democrat and Independent who voted to take away our liberty. We will continue in protest and raise our voice and never, never, never give up.

To all our readers, friends, and even our political adversaries: to you and your family a Merry Christmas.

Why the Healthcare Scheme is Unconstitutional

Here are three reasons why we believe the healthcare scheme Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590) before the Senate at this late hour tonight--at the Democrats own choosing--to be unconstitutional:

(1) Tenth Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." No powers to regulate health insurance are found in the constitution. End of discussion here: states or the people have jurisdiction in the healthcare arena. The bill is unconstitutional.

(2) Eighth Amendment: Protection from "excessive fines" is guaranteed. Never before in the history of our nation have we fined for NOT purchasing something. This bill would require everyone to purchase health insurance coverage under threat of fine and/or jail. Any fine would be excessive. Joining this amendment is the Fourth Amendment which protects against unreasonable searches. To enforce their law of everyone having insurance must needs be a requirement of verification so that we would allow the Government to search our records for insurance coverage verification. If the burden of insurance coverage verification were placed in the responsibility of the people, then they would force anyone without health insurance to violate the Fifth Amendment which prohibits self-incrimination! What a mess!!! No wonder GOP Senators have declared this portion of the bill blatantly unconstitutional and have assured that it will be challenged in court. (Hertitage.org also offers a lengthy but excellent article explaining the unconstitutionality of mandating insurance purchase in detail.)

(3) Bill of Attainder: We assert the $1.2B "Cornhusker Kickback" is a bill of attainder which is prohibited in Art. 1 Sect. 9: (from Wikipedia: "A bill of attainder, is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without judicial trial and includes any legislative act which takes away the life, liberty or property of a particular named or easily ascertainable person or group of persons because the legislature thinks them guilty of conduct which deserves punishment.") Reid's manager's amendment to the bill was debated in a secret, partisan manner so as to punish those states not in on the bargaining with the Medicare healthcare costs of the state of Nebraska whose Senator Nelson was in on the secret scheme. The bill was released at the beginning of the biggest holiday shopping weekend of the year and is scheduled to be voted on not many minutes from now before the weekend closes.

Dems poised to force America into their healthcare scheme

Like the process which began in the Senate on the Saturday before Thanksgiving, now on the Saturday before Christmas, Harry Reid releases the behind-closed-doors-discussed 383 page healthcare manager's amendment. Even as we write, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell forced a reading of the amendment on the amendment (broadcasting live on C-SPAN2) which is expected to take most of the day simply to give some time before Democrats force a vote next week--most likely and most onerously on Christmas Eve--on this horrible and unconstitutional government overreach.

"I'm a Jeffersonian" decried Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska who was the last Democratic holdout before announcing minutes ago his support for the bill. Nacilbupera is bewildered how anyone could invoke the name of Jefferson in describing insignificant abortion opt-outs for the states while mandating all Americans be forced under threat of fines and jail to have health insurance. Freedom of choice is gone in this bill; your rights as an American to manage your own healthcare have been subserviated to a government that can't balance its budget nor even pay for the laws it passes or proposes.

Nelson, the former Nebraska Governor who once enjoyed the highest approval rating of any Senator in Congress is now on record as supporting a bill 67% of Nebraskans oppose. And this isn't just any bill; it is easily the most significant bill of 2009. Nacilbupera feels that Corn Huskers will now unite against Ben Nelson to remove him from office in 2012 when his term expires, if not before; in short, Nelson will follow Reid out of office. According to an anonymous Senate aide, Nelson was exhorted by the White House that if he didn't vote for this bill, Offutt Air Force Base would be put on the BRAC (base closing) list. Nelson was also seeking undisclosed large amounts monies for his state in order to effectively sell his vote out (like Mary Landrieu!)

Unbelievably, we find ourselves agreeing with MSNBC liberal Keith Olbermann who denounces this bill because it takes away his freedom to be self insured. Perhaps Nacilbupera will get to share a jail cell with Mr. O. (and a bunch of other patriotic dissenters) when we excise our right to choose our own "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" when it comes to healthcare. Under our God-given right we refuse to participate in a unconstitutional Federal edict to have health insurance. We never ever gave government the right to require us to be insured; it is simply illegal and we decry ALL SENATORS who will vote for this coal-in-the-stocking Christmas "present."

Today the Last Day of Capitalism?

Nacilbupera is unequivocally opposed to the tax-raising, 2000-page, $2.5 trillion, socialized healthcare bill before a vote in the Senate today. In our opinion, this is the single most significant vote of the Senate for 2009 (if not longer) and urge all Senators to vote NO! We will be taking note of every Senator voting today to discuss this socialized healthcare behemoth.

Utah conservative GOP-er Diedre Henderson has a new blog entitled The Daily Dose with some powerful and concise information on the socialized medicine bill debate. In her post "U.S. Senate to Commit Harry-Kerry" she describes the sly tactics used by the Democrats to force this unpopular bill through the Senate. In her post Shadegg's One Man Revolt she describes how Congressman John Shadegg (AZ-03) recognized the Stupak Amendment as a way for Pelosi to shepherd votes for Obamacare knowing full well the amendment would be stripped. Shadegg posted his own thoughts on his website.

The whole process is reminiscent of the significant corruption that exists in our country as exhibited in this famous John Murtha Youtube video:


Nacilbupera has pondered much whether with the government takeover of automakers, banks, railroads, and mortgage companies along with massive entitlement/welfare programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, America remains a capitalist country or if we have slouched into socialism. We believe passage on debate of the public option socialized healthcare bill before the Senate today will almost inevitably lead to the public option becoming law. Should healthcare which represents 1/6th of our economy become socialized through this public option, Nacilbupera will no longer be able to accurately describe our economy as capitalist; it is the last leaf.

We support those sacrificing their time in today MillionMedMarch and wish them well. Consider this post our cyber-walk with you!

To the dwindling number of Obama supporters, when you weigh in this massive government expansion, perhaps you can understand the rationale of why many of us fully consider Obama a radical socialist.

Evils of a Dole: A Mormon Perspective on Harry Reid's Socialism

Much has been said of late concerning liberal Democrat and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's(*) stance in the Mormon church vis-à-vis his political philosophy. For those not familiar with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the church maintains political neutrality. Every election cycle members of the church--via letters read in meetinghouses across the nation from the ranking "First Presidency" of the church--are advised be responsible and informed citizens in their communities, but not to use the Church in any means for direct political advocacy.

Nevertheless, the question has been raised this week by the Salt Lake Tribune of how the Church can allow a member with such blatant Socialist philosophies such as Harry Reid to be allowed full privileges in the Church. This is because the church has consistently allowed membership to be predicated on personal testimony and adherence to moral guidelines and excluded the promotion of Socialism from that list of requisites for worthy membership. Unless the Church reforms its membership guidelines, we recognize Harry Reid as a worthy member of the Church though we stand strongly against the vast majority of his efforts and political tenants.

This is not to say the Church has been silent on the evils of Socialism. Indeed Ezra Taft Benson, a past President and Prophet of the Church, was one of the most vocal leaders in his denunciation of Socialism. Last month, a favorite blogger of ours--True Politics USA--had these well-sourced articles on these past denunciations by LDS (or Mormon) leaders: Ezra Taft Benson describing socialism, Conference definitions of socialism, and Prophetic Quotations on Politics. True Politics even had a enlightening discussion with us on Why don't LDS prophets discuss socialism more today?

Although Church leaders do not denounce the word Socialism today, there is much talk on the "evils of a dole." For example in an April 2007 discourse in the Church's worldwide General Conference, Presiding Bishop H. David Burton who oversees the temporal affairs of the Church, quoted past Prophet Heber J. Grant (founder of the Church's respected welfare program) as saying: "Our primary purpose was to set up … a system under which the curse of idleness would be done away with, the evils of a dole abolished, and in-dependence, industry, thrift and self respect be once more established amongst our people." Indeed, a search on the Church's online "Gospel Library" for the term "dole" reveals 91 citations of the term, none of which are done so in a favorable light (...and none refer to "Bob Dole" either, ROFL). Included in these "dole" articles is one by James E. Faust, who as a member of the high ranking group "Quorum of the Twelve" sustained as prophets of the church and as a former leader of the Utah Democratic Party stated in an October 1982 General Conference address: "It [giving a full day’s work for a full day’s pay] will also help us avoid accepting government doles which rob us of our dignity and our self-respect."

To us it is evident that the Church is manifestly against government handouts or doles and Socialistic ideals. Surely Harry Reid's proposed healthcare bill in Congress is a dole and a Socialistic ideal to give a handout, grow government largess, and does not promote independence and self-reliance. The bill includes taxes taking money out of our hands, our neighbors hands, and our current and future posterity's hands to support it--$1T worth of money! We furthermore decry the lack of constitutional support for such a nationalized healthcare plan! Although the Church hasn't spoken out directly against the bill (and would likely not do so), it indubitably would be in keeping with the teachings of the church if it so chose to do so.


*A genealogical footnote: For the record we have no traceable genealogical link going back several generations to Harry Reid (or for that matter two other notable Mormons with that surname: Andy Reid and Roger Reid; indeed historically, our Reid progenitors were hardshell-Baptist and likely anti-Mormon having migrated into lands immediately vacated by the Mormons fleeing Missouri Governor Boggs'(D) infamous extermination order).

Jason Chaffetz Townhall

Maybe a thousand or so attendees overpacked an alternative venue with more space than the previous in tonight's Townhall Meeting with our freshman Representative Jason Chaffetz.

Nacilbupera was extremely impressed with Chaffetz in his demeanor, respect to his constituents  questioning, and especially in his ideas for America. This was our first opportunity to shake hands with Rep. Chaffetz and with the true patriot he is.

To set the stage appropriately, the reader should keep in mind that this is the likely the most conservative metropolitan area in the nation--Provo/Orem, Utah--full of people labeled by the left as "right wing activists" who want a smaller, less intrusive federal bureaucracy in order to pursue their rights to bear arms, preserve families, protect the unborn, and worship how they may. Here in this auditorium packed with fellow patriots (along with a few vocal dissenters) with most concerned about the government takeover of healthcare was found not a single individual touting swastikas or akin symbols (sorry Nancy Pelosi--maybe the swastikas you're seeing are in San Francisco).

Chaffetz talked out at length on the healthcare plan before the House which he avowed to vote against. Healthcare reform should address:

• Tort Reform (current bill does nothing about this)
• Transparency
• Portability of insurance across state lines
• Pre-existing conditions
• Competition (good to keep costs low)
• Opt-out provision for states

While there are a number of alternative bills being discussed Chaffetz did not specifically endorse any one of them as they do not address adequately the issues above.

Chaffetz also mentioned his support of an ACORN investigation and cited the 88-page report by Rep Darrell Issa (Nacilbupera thinks he would make a great CA governor), Chair of the Republican Committee on Oversight & Government Reform.

Chaffetz also highlighted HR3167, cosponsored with Stephen Lynch D-MA to have the postal service instead of ACORN conduct the census by declaring a postal holiday on census day (also saves government money).  This is a brilliant idea, and receives a full Nacilbupera endorsement.

Here is the bottom line with Chaffetz:  he is EXACTLY the kind of statesman we need running our government and Nacilbupera wholeheartedly applauds his efforts!