Doug Book

States May Be FORCED To Implement ObamaCare

April 3, 2013 By Doug Book 4 Comments

So far, 26 states have opted against building ObamaCare exchanges, making it clear to Kathleen Sebelius that her Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will have to do all of the work and pay the tab for the creation of any Affordable Care Act “sales center” within their borders. And as the Act provides no funds for the Department to build or staff an exchange, implementation of ObamaCare rules and regulations would seem impossible within those states.

Moreover, in addition to throwing the financial burden of the Affordable Care Act back in the lap of an unprepared HHS, a number of state legislatures have passed laws making the Act’s implementation and enforcement illegal.

But Barack has different ideas.

The Obama administration has announced its intent to disregard state laws and state constitutional amendments prohibiting the enforcement of ObamaCare. Federal agents from the Department of Health and Human Services will assume absolute control over states’ health insurance industry and regulation in states that refuse to comply with the federal healthcare mandates.

What could be more convenient than to “disregard” those things that threaten your plans!

This latest example of the limitless hubris of the Obama Regime began when Oklahoma Insurance Commissioner John Doak received a letter from Gary Cohen, Director of the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight (CCIIO) informing him that “…the federal government will impose ObamaCare regulations on insurance companies in Oklahoma.”

Cohen’s letter came in response to a law passed by the Oklahoma legislature nullifying the implementation of ObamaCare in the state. HHS decided to take a hand by informing all health insurance providers in the state that “…enforcement of the law’s requirements will be handled by [HHS].” Shortly thereafter, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) demanded all state providers “…submit all group and individual health insurance policy forms, certificates, riders, endorsements, and amendments, as well as any other requested material pertinent to the market reforms of the Affordable Care Act to CMS for review.”

In short, the federal bureaucracy intends to utterly ignore the will of the people of Oklahoma by summarily overturning any “unfriendly” statutes written by their elected representatives!

What will this mean for health insurance customers in the state? Apparently, those who purchase insurance through the federally managed ObamaCare exchange will wind up with different policies, be forced to follow different procedures, and generally pay much higher premiums than residents who purchase coverage directly from an insurance company, whether individually or as part of a group through their employer. Two sets of rules will exist in the state.

But rest assured, as HHS will not tolerate competition, Katherine Sebelius & Co will soon disallow the purchase of any insurance plan unless it be through the ObamaCare exchange.

Of course, that is an ObamaCare exchange that has yet to be built and for which the Affordable Care Act itself made no financial provision!

In 2010, Barack assured the American public that anyone fortunate enough to be protected under ObamaCare will save an average of $2500 in premium expenses compared with his “old” policy.

No doubt this will be true if, like their Lord and Master, ObamaCare customers are permitted to disregard those things that disturb them–like premium billing statements.

Photo Credit: Fresh Conservative (Creative Commons)

Filed Under: Coachisright, Featured Stories, Floyd Reports Tagged With: Obamacare

Obama Demands Sheriffs Enforce Gun Bans

April 1, 2013 By Doug Book 14 Comments

“A law repugnant to the Constitution is void.” Though Chief Justice John Marshall’s decision in the landmark case Marbury vs Madison has led to two centuries of power-abusing mischief on the part of our federal government, he did have the premise correct—a law which is unconstitutional is not a law at all. What he did not add, but might have I suspect, is that such a “law” need not be followed and should not be enforced, especially not by those who have sworn an oath to uphold and defend that Constitution.

For months the American people have been threatened with legislation promoting gun confiscation, “assault weapons” bans and schemes which would lead quite inevitably to the national registration of firearms and their owners. New York and Colorado have already enacted such legislation, all in typical leftist, knee-jerk response to the Newtown killings.

Each new piece of gun control legislation proposed by the left, whether at the state or national level, has one thing in common—an utter disregard for the right of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. But while our would-be masters have been scheming to disarm the American people, sheriffs across the nation have proudly made it clear that “…they will not enforce federal or state gun laws they consider unconstitutional.” (2)

In fact, 28 of 29 Utah sheriffs wrote directly to Barack Obama announcing their position on federal gun control legislation:

”We, like you swore a solemn oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and we are prepared to trade our lives for the preservation of its traditional interpretation.” (3)

To which they added:

“Make no mistake, as the duly-elected sheriffs of our respective counties, we will enforce the rights guaranteed to our citizens by the Constitution. No federal official will be permitted to descend upon our constituents and take from them what the Bill of Rights-in particular Amendment II-has given them.” (3)

Of course, our Muslim Monarch has different ideas. “I think as a general proposition we think that people ought to follow the law,” (that is, whatever WE proclaim the law to be) commented White House Press Secretary Jay Carney when told that nearly 500 sheriffs nationwide have sworn to uphold the Constitution and NOT the gun control agenda of Barack Obama. Yet according to the Regime, local officials should simply do what the federal government tells them to do and not worry about how legal or constitutional it might be.

Obama has already informed states which have refused to implement ObamaCare that the federal government would be taking over all health insurance operations and decisions within their borders. Does anyone imagine the most corrupt and thuggish administration in the nation’s history would do any less upon the passage of federal gun control legislation? (4)

The Supreme Court has ruled that the federal government cannot force states to “enforce or enact federal law.” (5) Naturally the Obama Regime will ignore these inconvenient rulings as it demands local officials do what they are told while threatening any who resist.

Strange, isn’t it, that this administration sued Arizona for its desire to enforce federal immigration law, yet now demands that states enforce the provisions of the affordable Care Act and will no doubt do the same should decidedly unconstitutional, federal gun control legislation become the law of the land!

Filed Under: Coachisright, Featured Stories, Floyd Reports Tagged With: Arizona, Barack Obama, Gun Control, Obamacare, Supreme Court

Obama Using The IRS For Blackmail?

March 27, 2013 By Doug Book 1 Comment

In September of 2011, 60 million health records involving 10 million Americans were illegally confiscated by members of the IRS. The theft took place at an unidentified place of business in California.

Referring to itself as the John Doe Company in a lawsuit filed last week against the 15 IRS agents who took part, plaintiffs claim that “no search warrant authorized the seizure of these records; no subpoena authorized the seizure of these records; none of the 10,000,000 Americans were under any kind of known criminal or civil investigation and their medical records had no relevance whatsoever to the IRS search.”

One of the IRS agents who took part in the theft told John Doe Company officials that the government was searching for records involved in a “tax matter” pertaining to a former John Doe employee. Yet when informed that their search warrant did NOT allow for the confiscation–or even the search—of the 60 million health records taken, the IRS “…threatened to ‘rip’ the servers containing the medical data out of the building…” if the records were not turned over willingly!

The Doe Company complaint continues:

Moreover, even though Defendants knew that the records they were seizing were not included within the scope of the search warrant, the Defendants nonetheless searched and seized the records without making any attempt to segregate the files from those that could possibly be related to the search warrant. In fact, no effort was made at all to even try maintaining the illusion of legitimacy and legality.

Never mind the breathtaking arrogance of Obama’s foot soldiers or the contempt they display for the law and the American people. Those are old stories. In this case, the truly relevant question is WHY? What was the real purpose behind this IRS theft? The John Doe Company is presumed to be an insurance company or repository of insurance records. Of the 10 million individuals whose medical records were taken, it is believed that nearly 90% live outside of California, making the IRS theft one of truly national significance. The records stolen are said to include those of every state judge in California, all state court employees and “…prominent citizens in the world of entertainment, business and government, from all walks of life.” The medical information includes “… psychological counseling, gynecological counseling, sexual or drug treatment and a wide range of medical matters covering the most intimate and private of concerns.”

In short, if ever a politician needed information with which to coerce a powerful, recalcitrant friend or blackmail an outright enemy, these stolen records could provide a treasure trove of “mineable” dirt! Was this a Regime-ordered fishing expedition, a search for potentially damaging information concerning the more recognizable individuals within a very long list of otherwise less than noteworthy names? Or were millions of files stolen in order to provide a healthy margin of cover for the relatively few that Regime operatives REALLY wanted!

The IRS has operated with utter disregard for law and the Constitution for decades. Intimidation became the “new normal” for that contemptible band of bureaucratic thugs long before Obama began his Marxist blitzkrieg. Was their thuggish behavior in California a warning to the nation’s insurers from the Pennsylvania Avenue Cosa Nostra that resistance–legal or otherwise– to New World Order patricians will not be tolerated? Have we just witnessed the method by which ObamaCare’s principle collection agency intends to assemble and review claims information for the nation’s insured?

Remember, they’re from the government, and they’re here to help you.

Photo credit: terrellaftermath

Filed Under: Coachisright, Featured Stories, Floyd Reports Tagged With: California, Obamacare, Pennsylvania

Holder Defrauds Supreme Court

March 20, 2013 By Doug Book 5 Comments

In yet another testament to the corrupt if inventive workings of the liberal mind, Attorney General Eric Holder recently decided to defraud the United States Supreme Court in the hope of preventing sections of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) being ruled unconstitutional.

Section 5 of the VRA requires 9 Southern states and a number of jurisdictions in 7 others—all charged with a history of voting rights abuses–to obtain “preclearance” from the DOJ or the District Court of DC before making any changes to state election policies or procedures. Passed into law in 1965, Section 5 was enacted as an “emergency provision” designed to “promote full access to the voting process” and expire in 5 years.

But now, nearly 5 decades later, Section 5 has become the darling of Civil Rights groups, the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ, and liberal bureaucrats throughout the federal government as it has been inexorably extended and amended into a sacrosanct behemoth that virtually guarantees “election success for certain candidates chosen by certain racial groups.”

It was the Justice Department’s dishonest use of Section 5 that prevented the implementation of Voter ID laws in Texas and South Carolina prior to the 2012 election. In fact, Holder and the Civil Rights Division blocked both laws from taking effect even though the changes proposed by the 2 states were patterned after the Indiana Voter ID law ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court in 2009.

Of course the Department’s behavior should surprise no one, for Section 5 frankly BEGS to be misused by the Democrat Party. After all, it provides a means of accomplishing voter fraud, something that has worked to the benefit of the Party for 6 decades and more. A case in point: Mitt Romney won every state in which Voter ID laws were in effect.

But then something happened. In 2009, the Supreme Court came very close to striking down Section 5 as Justices Kennedy and Scalia lambasted that portion of the VRA, which both believed to be outdated, harmful, and quite probably unconstitutional. And though the Court wrote a VERY narrow ruling allowing Section 5 to escape unscathed in the Northwest case before it, the die had been cast, and the DOJ knew it had to take action in order to maintain its stranglehold on 9 states.

States subject to Section 5 provisions may seek an exemption from DOJ oversight in the form of a “bailout.” This involves satisfying a prescribed list of rigorous requirements in the text of the VRA itself. Once satisfied, Section 5 provisions no longer apply, and the state may initiate the change to its election law.

For years, the DOJ had deliberately made the bailout process virtually impossible to negotiate, even threatening states that dared make the attempt. But as the Supreme Court had gone to great lengths to grant a bailout in the 2009 Northwest case, the Holder Justice Department decided that bailouts might be the key to salvaging Section 5.

As former DOJ attorney J. Christian Adams explains it:

Because the Roberts court bent the language of the statute to permit a bailout in 2009, DOJ now thinks a flurry of bailouts, some of them obtained improperly, will convince the Supreme Court that Section 5 is not much of a burden and should survive. Cranking out as many bailouts as possible is the deliberate DOJ strategy to convince Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy that Section 5 should survive because it really isn’t a heavy burden.

In short, Eric Holder decided to SCAM the Supreme Court, as the DOJ has gone from making bailouts impossible to obtain to literally soliciting states and jurisdictions, telling them now is the time to get the bailout of their dreams! And as Adams says, it is Holder’s hope that, upon finding the bailout procedure working so well and bailouts so easy to obtain, the Court will decide that Section 5 requirements may remain in force.

The Supreme Court has disappointed the American people on any number of occasions, the most recent being the ludicrous ruling by John Roberts on ObamaCare. We can only pray the 5 Court “conservatives” will not betray the public once again by allowing Section 5 to remain in force.

Photo Credit: mira (on the wall) (Creative Commons)

Filed Under: Coachisright, Featured Stories, Floyd Reports Tagged With: Eric Holder, Justice Department, Mitt Romney, Obamacare, Supreme Court, Texas, voter fraud

Race Cards Fly As Whites Flee Corrupt, Black-controlled Atlanta

March 16, 2013 By Doug Book Leave a Comment

Blacks officials in the rapidly deteriorating city of Atlanta decided to sue rather than allow successful white “evacuees” to incorporate prosperous new cities in the Northern suburbs of Dekalb and Fulton counties.

For years, government scandals, rackets, political corruption, and charges of bribery have plagued a city that is becoming known as “The Detroit of the South,” all culminating in the threatened 2013 loss of accreditation for the Dekalb County School System. During that time, communities in the North Atlanta suburbs “…began the process of incorporating into cities,” with 6 having been carved out of the Atlanta hinterland by 2011 as hundreds of thousands of taxpayers were lost from the city’s tax base.

But the continued electoral fortunes—and perhaps, increasing personal wealth– of Atlanta’s politicos depend upon preserving the lynchpin of Democrat politics–robbing from the rich in order to acquire the votes of the poor. And that’s a system that doesn’t work very well when the rich are spending their tax dollars elsewhere.

So in March of 2011, the Georgia Legislative Black Caucus filed suit seeking the dissolution of the newly incorporated cities, claiming that “…the creation of the new cities diluted African-Americans’ voting power, access, and influence.” In short, plaintiffs pointed out that although blacks had been numerous enough to control election results in and around Atlanta, thanks to incorporation of “super-majority white” cities, blacks who live in them are no longer able to put fellow blacks in office in the overwhelming numbers to which they had become accustomed. As a result, a significant number of residents in the counties that make up Atlanta have escaped the liberal rule that is destroying the city economically, black politicians are losing power and control, and a city already struggling financially will have to make due with even less revenue in the future.

As the Georgia NAACP sees it, such hard-heartedness toward minorities is “…part of an alleged conspiracy to get rid of black office holders and deprive black voters of their rights.” “We’ve fought too hard and bled too long to allow our officials to be removed by a dictator,” said NAACP President Edward Dubose of the plight of 6 members of the Dekalb County School Board, removed from office by Governor Nathan Deal as a result of the threatened accreditation loss. Five of those Board members are black.

On February 8th, a federal court panel rejected the claims and demands of the Black Caucus, refusing to dissolve incorporation of the Northern county cities. A lawyer representing the plaintiffs said he would not appeal, but rather file an amended lawsuit.

Those who believe the recent incorporation of suburbs to be a function of racism rather than a longed-for escape from the corruption of Atlanta politics should know that the ousted school board members are demanding that taxpayers foot the bill for their defense “… because [they]… see their positions as a civil rights entitlement…” Lose a job as a result of incompetence (or worse), and demand that taxpayers get it back for you. How could that be upsetting to anyone, unless of course you’re a racist?

Needless to say, the creation of brand new school districts managed by brand new Boards is a priority in the newly incorporated cities!

Photo credit: k1ng (Creative Commons)

Filed Under: Coachisright, Floyd Reports Tagged With: NAACP

States May Be FORCED To Implement ObamaCare

Obama Demands Sheriffs Enforce Gun Bans

Obama Using The IRS For Blackmail?

Holder Defrauds Supreme Court

Race Cards Fly As Whites Flee Corrupt, Black-controlled Atlanta

Help the Cause!

Stay Updated with Impeach Obama

Recent Posts

Impeach Obama Archives

Blogroll

Contributors