WATCH: This Angry Governor Has Just Taken A Bold, Defiant Stand Over ObamaCare ‘Extortion’

Decrying the Obama administration for using strong-arm, “coercion tactics” in an effort to force his state to expand ObamaCare coverage, Florida Governor Rick Scott says he’s suing the president.

In an interview Thursday night with Fox News’ Kimberly Guilfoyle, the Republican governor of the Sunshine State lashed out at the administration for threatening to cut back funding on an assistance program for low-income families unless Florida officials comply with Washington’s demands. Guilfoyle, substituting for Greta Van Susteren in On the Record, said, “That sounds like extortion.” Gov. Scott replied, “Oh, absolutely.”

By clicking on the video above, you can watch the interview in which a defiant Gov. Rick Scott vowed to take the administration to court, saying, “We’re going to stand up for all 20 million people in our state.”

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Is The Liberal Media Forcing An Ignorant Populace To Debate What Is Illegal?

Facebook/Jeb Bush

“How is it America that these criminals in government know how to lie better than most in this country know how to tell the truth?”-Bradlee Dean (1 Kings 18:21)

I have to ask the American people a question: Do you really want Jeb Bush as president? Really? Have the American people not judged the corrupt tree for what it is and the fruit it has borne (Luke 6:44)? Is it that Americans cannot see the Bush family for who they are after years of corruption?

Now, the state-controlled media, namely the conservative outlets, are trying to convince us that Jeb Bush is the number one pick through polls that are clearly skewed, as well as fraudulent.

President Hilary Clinton? Really? Who is attempting to legitimize this criminal? Do I need to say anything about Hilary and her crime-strewn past? To latch on to the fact that she is a legitimate pick for the presidency of the United States is far beyond comprehension.

Isn’t everyone across the board (and I mean everyone) talking about how sick and tired they are of the establishment?  Yes, they are! Yet, this exhibits the media’s willingness to stay persistent regardless of what the American people are really calling for. In other words, shove it down their throats until they accept that we (the establishment) are the ruling class, like it or not! This is becoming more apparent every day in this country.

When did this all go wrong?

“Kings become tyrants through policy when subjects have become rebels from principles.” (Psalm 18:21, Exodus 20)

There is no doubt that the state-controlled media are pushing the talking points of the day, which get the American people to ask the wrong questions in order to create debate in an attempt to implement illegal legislation through their propaganda. And propaganda it is. Yet, it does not go forward without the ignorance of the people who have allowed it to go on.

For example, the American people are led to believe that the Supreme Court can redefine God’s definition of marriage (Genesis 2:24).

Americans are now waiting for a very radical and corrupt court to make a decision on the definition of marriage. Let me tell you plainly that government did not create marriage and, therefore, has no business redefining it. So, why are Americans awaiting a decision from the high court? They are to discover God’s Law and apply God’s Law. Who gave the Supreme Court permission to redefine anything? The ignorance of the American people has done this (Hosea 4:6).

“If the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of what the Constitution says, then we have ceased to be our own rulers (Under God), and the Supreme Court is our ruler.” -President Andrew Jackson

Americans have been, for years, talking about Obamacare. Yet, Obamacare is unconstitutional and, therefore, illegal, according to Article 1, Section 8 of The United States Constitution. Instead of the state-controlled media doing their job, by exposing its unconstitutionality and putting the question to this administration as to where they derived their authority to enact an unconstitutional agenda, they divide the people into opposing groups to debate what is illegal. Who gave corrupt government permission to violate constitutional law? Ignorance has (Hosea 4:6)!

These useful idiots lead Americans on with a cycle of rhetorical talk day after day with the same backward flow of information through a system that corruption means to destroy. It is like giving bad medicine to a healthy body. But rest assured – the body can only take so much before it will fail.

The good news is that it all stops when the American people have had enough!

The American People and the AK-47

Freedom to Break the Law?

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Top Doctor: Death Spirals Already Happening In Healthcare System

Twitter/Daniel Hannan

While the United States Supreme Court decides whether or not federal health care subsidies can be used for both federal and state exchanges, proponents of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), colloquially known as Obamacare, caution this could cause a “death spiral” in the health care system. One respected physician contends this is already happening, however.

Last month, the Supreme Court heard arguments in King v. Burwell, in which the plaintiff argued that a six-word phrase in the Obamacare law – ‘an Exchange established by the state’ – means tax credits can only be offered to those states that set up their own exchanges.

While those who advocate for the status quo believe overturning the law would result in a “death spiral,” Dr. Lee Hieb, former president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, contends a death spiral is already happening.

“There’s a death spiral in medicine already because it’s creating shortages of doctors and hospital closures, and that’s a business death spiral the medical community’s already starting to be in,” Lee told reporter Paul Bremmer in a piece published on WND Sunday.

A November 2013 article from The Atlantic describes what a “death spiral” in the traditional sense is:

Suppose some healthy people decide to wait till they need insurance to buy it. Then the overall insurance pool would have a higher percentage of sick people in it, and premiums might rise.

Those higher premiums might make more healthy people decide to drop their insurance until they need it—which would make the insurance pool sicker still. Premiums would rise again, and more healthy people would drop their coverage again, until eventually only sick people had insurance.

“[I]t’s a classic business death spiral where there’s too much work for too few people. No matter what you do, you can’t recruit new people because it’s too unpleasant a work situation, and so people keep leaving, and that’s a death spiral,” Lee added.

A decision on King v. Burwell is expected in June.

h/t: WND

Share this if you support the full repeal and ultimate replacement of Obamacare.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

ObamaCare’s Fate? Here’s What A Key Supreme Court Justice Just Said That Could Be A Huge Clue

Image Credit: Wiki Commons

As the U.S. Supreme Court considers a case whose outcome could prove to be a death blow to Obamacare — a case challenging whether enrollees through the federal signup site, healthcare.gov, are entitled to premium-reducing subsidies — one key justice has casually dropped what could be a huge clue to his thinking.

The Daily Caller reports that Justice Anthony Kennedy — who often casts the high court’s swing vote — said something intriguing in testimony before the House Appropriations Committee.

Justice Anthony Kennedy’s comments in a run-of-the-mill budget meeting Monday may have signaled how he intends to vote in this year’s biggest Obamacare lawsuit over the legality of federal premium subsidies.

Kennedy…made comments that could suggest he’s leaning in favor of the plaintiffs in King v. Burwell. The question in the pivotal case is whether the text of Obamacare restricts the law’s popular premium subsidies to state-run exchanges….

Kennedy’s remarks to the committee related to the Obama administration’s argument that all ObamaCare subsidies must be maintained because to declare the federal marketplace customers ineligible would be disastrous for the law’s future.

The Daily Caller article notes that the administration “seems to be trying to convince the Court that ruling otherwise would be catastrophic for the health-care law, and therefore for the Court’s image.”

In other words, Obama, his legal team, and his liberal allies want the high court to go beyond considering what the law actually says and to give weight to what impact striking down the controversial provision would have on the millions of people who would be affected.

Responding to a question during Monday’s hearing, Justice Kennedy seemed to say that’s a faulty and largely irrelevant argument, that the Supreme Court should not be concerned with the impact of a decision or with the ability of Congress to “fix” a flawed law.

“We have to assume that we have three fully functioning branches of the government that are committed to proceed in good faith and with good will toward one another to resolve the problems of this republic,” Kennedy argued.

In fact, the head of the agency responsible for implementing Obama’s healthcare takeover scheme, HHS Secretary Sylvia Burwell, has said there is no backup plan for fixing the law should the Supreme Court rule against it in the subsidies case.

The justices are expected to issue their ruling in the latest challenge to ObamaCare in June. That’s when we will learn if what Anthony Kennedy said to lawmakers in the hearing on the Supreme Court’s budget was, in fact, a clue to how he will vote.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

IHOP Restaurant Owner Sells His 16 Locations Because Of Obamacare

youtube

Faced with significant increases in labor costs due to the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”), a midwest restaurant owner decided to sell his 16 International House of Pancake locations.

Western Journalism reported earlier this month on the negative impact increasing the minimum wage to $15 per hour is having on the Seattle restaurant industry. However, restaurant owners around the nation are beginning to experience the impact of yet another government mandate that is greatly increasing their costs of doing business.

For Scott Womack, an Indiana franchise restaurant owner with over 25 years in the industry, the ACA mandate–coupled with the likely prospect of a minimum wage increase–meant it no longer made financial sense for him to stay in the casual dining business. The Daily Signal reports that he sold his 16 IHOP locations around the Hoosier state before the January 1, 2015 Obamacare employer mandate took effect.

Womack testified before Congress in 2011, after the passage of the ACA, about the impact it would have on his business. At the time, he had 12 IHOP restaurants with about 1000 employees. He had also signed a development agreement, prior to the law’s passage, to add 14 new locations in Ohio.

He testified at the time his plans were now in jeopardy due to the new costs of doing business associated with Obamacare. He explained that profit margins for him range between five and seven percent. He added:

The law [the ACA] is one-size-fits-all for employers, and restaurants don’t fit. Though some restaurant companies offer coverage now, the cost is prohibitive for many employees, and many of their plans will not qualify in 2014. The only viable alternative is to pay the $2,000 per employee penalty, which is not tax deductible. A quick study of public restaurant companies shows that many did not earn enough in 2010 to pay the penalties and likely will not survive in the future. For my company, these penalties amount to 60% of our earnings, and again, our company is very profitable by industry standards…

Let me state this bluntly: this law will cost my company more money than we make.

Womack told The Daily Signal: “You have to fund your development through your profits…and if you have no profits, you’re not building restaurants.”

He sold his restaurants last year, not going forward with plans to build several new locations, which meant hundreds of lost jobs for those who would have worked in his restaurants and those who would have built and serviced them.

Owners of multiple franchise locations, like Womack, can often particularly feel the law’s impact. Despite each restaurant really being a stand-alone enterprise in terms of profitability, they are grouped together in terms of the number of full-time employees with regards to Obamacare. The ACA’s employer mandate kicks in at the 50 or more full-time employee threshold.

International Franchise Association’s spokesman Matthew Haller explained its impact: “Rather than helping existing and aspiring franchise owners expand by adding jobs, locations and more hours for their employees who need them most, the law’s arbitrary definition of ‘large employer’ and ‘full-time work week’ have contributed to the steady increase in part-time employment in America and have been a drag on new franchise business formation.”

Womack decided to stay in the restaurant business by purchasing Popeyes restaurant franchises in the Kansas City area. He employees 180 now, rather than over 1000. Quick service dining, rather than casual dining like IHOP, makes more sense in the new business climate created by Obamacare. He wants to continue to grow his quick service locations, adding, “It’s a tightrope walk that you do, balancing between the risks in the industry vs. the reward of growing your business.”

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom