The Supreme Court just ruled against a major Obama agenda in a decision that is sure to leave the president devastated.
The highest court in the land just ruled against Obama’s attempt to force Christian organizations to pay for abortion-causing drugs for their employees. This is the fifth time the Supreme Court has ruled against President Obama.
Christians everywhere rejoiced at the decision and were thankful that their religious freedoms were being protected.
“How many times must the government lose in court before it gets the message?” asked Lori Windham, Senior Counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. “For years now the government has been claiming that places like Catholic Charities and the Little Sisters of the Poor are not ‘religious employers’ worthy of an exemption.”
“That argument has always been absurd. Every time a religious plaintiff has gone to the Supreme Court for protection from the government’s discriminatory mandate the Court has protected them,” she added. “That’s what happened to the Little Sisters of the Poor, Wheaton College, Notre Dame, and Hobby Lobby.”
“The government really needs to give up on its illegal and unnecessary mandate,” Windham concluded. “The federal bureaucracy has lots of options for distributing contraceptives–they don’t need to coerce nuns and priests to do it for them.”
The Supreme Court has told Obama no time and time again, yet he just can’t seem to get the message. Hopefully, this time he finally will.
“It is appalling that President Obama would cut off federal healthcare dollars to Florida in an effort to force our state further into Obamacare,” a furious Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) said Thursday as he announced that he plans to sue the Obama administration.
“It’s outrageous,” Scott told Fox News Thursday night.”The federal government started a program in our state in 2006. It’s called the Low Income Pool. It’s (health care) for low income families,” Scott explained. “Now, what they are saying is they are not going to keep that program going unless the state expands Obamacare (Medicaid). So this, first off, is horrible.”
“It sounds like extortion,” Fox News’s Kimberly Guilfoyle told Scott.
“Absolutely,” the governor agreed. “First off, you think about the families in our state that are relying on this. Second, (Supreme Court Chief) Justice Roberts said…that it’s not lawful for the federal government, for the Obama administration, to use coercion tactics, basically held a gun to our head, if we don’t expand Obamacare. They say they can’t do that.”
The Supreme Court in 2012 upheld Obamacare’s individual mandate, but it also said the federal government could not compel the states to expand Medicaid coverage for low-income people. As of this writing, 28 states and the District of Columbia have ageed to expand Medicaid. The federal government has agreed to pay 100 percent of the expansion costs through 2016, but after that, the states must pick up a larger share of the costs, and that’s what worries Scott and other governors.
In July 2012, shortly after the Supreme Court ruling, Gov. Scott announced that Florida would “opt out of spending approximately $1.9 billion more taxpayer dollars required to implement a massive entitlement expansion of the Medicaid program.”
“Floridians are interested in jobs and economic growth, a quality education for their children, and keeping the cost of living low,” Governor Scott said at the time. “Neither of these major provisions in Obamacare will achieve those goals, and since Florida is legally allowed to opt out, that’s the right decision for our citizens.”
He also noted that “Florida already has health care safety net programs for those with the greatest need.”
Scott told Fox News on Thursday that he and his attorney general are working on a lawsuit right now.
He questioned whether President Obama really cares about the low-income families in Florida for whom the federal government created the LIP program in the first place.
“And doesn’t everybody now understand that this is an administration that’s going to use coercion tactics, and when it’s appropriate, they’ll cut back funding if you don’t do another program they want?”
“One, they don’t care about the low income families because they are willing to walk away from a program. And then, two, they are using bully – this is a Sopranos. They are using bullying tactics to attack our state. It’s wrong. It’s outrageous just that they’re doing this.”
A White House spokesman, asked for his reaction to the anticipated Florida lawsuit, said he hadn’t seen “specific details.”
“But what is true is that expanding Medicaid in the State of Florida would ensure that 800,000 Floridians would get access to quality health-care coverage,” Josh Earnest said on Thursday.
Earnest noted that under Obamacare, the federal government picks up the full cost of expanding Medicaid through 2016.
“So there’s not a good reason why anybody in Florida would be in a situation of trying to block a policy that would benefit 800,000 Floridians. In fact, they would have a positive impact on the finances in the State of Florida.
“And it’s difficult to explain why somebody would think that their political situation and their political interest is somehow more important than the livelihood and health of 800,000 people that they were elected to lead.”
In a message on his website Thursday, Scott said the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) sent him a letter this week, saying that “the furture of LIP’ and “Medicaid expansion are linked.”
“We will fight to protect the healthcare of Floridians, and their right to be free from federal overreach,” Scott said. “Our citizens already pay federal taxes that go into the federal LIP program. Now, President Obama has decided that the state must take on a larger Medicaid program, forcing our taxpayers to pay even more to government, before they get their own federal tax dollars back. This is outrageous, and specifically what the Supreme Court warned against.”
This action sums up Obama’s views of America perfectly, and lays out his agenda, his sick joy in hurting it: “America is a bad place that has done bad things, and I am going to humiliate and shame it as much as possible. I am also going to curse it for doing what it needed to survive in order to weaken it from ever doing things that protects itself but hurts its enemies ever again.”
Excerpted from Gateway Pundit: After Rudy Giuliani made his comments this week that Barack Obama does not love America the White House tweeted this out:
Obama: “I’m using my powers as President to announce America’s 3 newest National Monuments.” #ObamaLovesAmerica
3:11 PM – 19 Feb 2015
“Obama loves America” because he announced three new National Monuments.
The only problem is that one of Obama’s national monuments is the Japanese internment camp in Hawaii.
Honouliuli Internment Camp was long forgotten until it was dug up in 2007.
The Honouliuli National Monument is on Oahu. The camp was the largest and longest-operating internment camp, opened in 1943 and closed in 1946, in Hawaii. In August 1943, there were 160 Japanese Americans and 69 Japanese interned there. Keep reading
Excerpted from Monsanto.com: Monsanto recently donated land to the National Park Service from the Honouliuli Internment Camp Site for a National Park Service National Monument. The designation of the monument was announced by President Obama on Feb. 19.
“We are very excited about reaching this significant milestone in the community’s efforts to preserve the Honouliuli Internment Camp into perpetuity as part of the U.S. National Park System,” said Alan Takemoto, Community Affairs Manager of Monsanto Hawaii. “Transferring ownership of this land to the Federal Government is the result of years of hard work by numerous individuals and organizations who have been diligently and patiently working, step by step, to make this community vision a reality. We at Monsanto Hawaii are very proud to be a part of this tremendous collaboration.”
In 2007, Monsanto acquired farmland in Kunia which includes the site of the former Honouliuli Internment Camp. At that time, the company pledged to work with the community to preserve the Camp site for its historic value. Since then, Monsanto has been collaborating closely with local organizations, including the Japanese Cultural Center of Hawai‘i and University of Hawai‘i West O‘ahu, to work with the National Park Service in the hopes of establishing Honouliuli Internment Camp as a National Historic Site. Keep reading
Shots rang out and tension remained high in the streets of Kiev Friday, as Ukrainian protest leaders signed a deal with Ukraine’s president to defuse a political crisis that has left scores dead and hundreds injured.
After hours of European-led negotiations, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych signed an agreement with opposition leaders Friday that calls for early elections, a new constitution and a new unity government. The deal promises presidential elections will be held no later than December, instead of March 2015 as scheduled.
Many protesters say December is too late – they want Yanukovych out immediately.
Ukrainian authorities also will now name a new government – including opposition figures – within 10 days. The deal says the government will not impose a state of emergency and both sides will refrain from violence.
It’s a “good compromise for Ukraine. Gives peace a chance. Opens the way for reform and to Europe. Poland and EU support it,” European Union mediator, Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski, said in a Twitter post Friday.
The Ukrainian parliament approved amnesty for protesters involved in the violent months-long standoff, following the agreement Friday. The parliament also voted to restore the 2004 constitution that limits presidential powers, clawing back some of the powers that Yanukovych had pushed through after being elected in 2010. Although Yanukovych retains an apparent majority in parliament, his powers are now significantly reduced.
Yanukovych gave in to pressure from European diplomats, offering concessions – including elections – and promising to invite the opposition into the government, in an attempt to end the violence.
Opposition leader Oleh Yaroslavovych Tyahnybok says one condition of the agreement was that the present interior minister and prosecutor-general be excluded from any interim government, Reuters reported, citing Interfax.
Russian officials immediately criticized the deal and protesters angry over police violence showed no sign of abandoning their sprawling camp in central Kiev. While opposition leaders agreed that protesters should hand over any weapons and withdraw from occupied buildings and protest camps around the country, it’s far from clear whether the thousands of demonstrators camped out in Kiev Friday will go home.
One by one, protesters took to a stage on Independence Square to say they’re not happy and didn’t get what they wanted.
A statement on the website of the Health Ministry said 77 people had been killed between Tuesday morning, when the violence began, and Friday morning. The statement said 577 people had been wounded and 369 hospitalized. Opposition sources claimed at least 70 on their side were killed Thursday. There was no way to immediately verify the figures.
European foreign ministers had stayed up all night in Kiev trying to negotiate an end to the standoff, sparked when the president aborted a pact with the European Union in November in favor of close ties with Russia instead.
The U.S., Russia and European Union are deeply concerned about the future of Ukraine, a nation of 46 million that has divided loyalties between Russia and the West.
Leonid Slutsky, the chairman of the committee in charge of relations with other ex-Soviet nations in the lower house of Russian parliament, told reporters Friday that the agreement serves the interests of the West.
“We realize where and by whom this agreement has been written. It’s entirely in the interests of the United States and other powers, who want to split Ukraine from Russia,” Slutsky said.
Slutsky also shrugged off claims that Russia could send its troops to Ukraine, saying Moscow will communicate with any government Ukraine has. “No matter how bad and hard to deal with the new government is for us, we will deal with it,” he said. “We must learn from mistakes we have made.”
Lawmaker Inna Bogoslovskaya, allied with the opposition, told The AP that December is too late for elections. “After 77 corpses yesterday… that changes the stakes,” she said. “The Maidan (protest movement) demands immediate resignation of the president instead of early elections.”
Protesters will not abandon occupied buildings until after the constitution is changed, she added.
“It’s completely not enough,” said protester Anton Gusev, standing at one of the barricades near city hall. Referring to the election date, he said, “December or March – what difference does it make?”
At the city hall barricade, protesters were busily organizing stacks of tires. The street was crowded with people heading toward the central square.
Several regions in the west of the country are in open revolt against the central government, while many in eastern Ukraine back the president and favor strong ties with Russia, their former Soviet ruler.
In a sign of the high tensions, armed law enforcement officers tried to enter parliament Friday morning during a debate over measures to end the crisis. Shouting lawmakers pushed them out.
The report of a deal followed the worst violence yet in the confrontation between the government and protesters. Demonstrators advanced on police lines in the heart of the Ukrainian capital on Thursday, prompting government snipers to shoot back and kill scores of people in the country’s deadliest day since the breakup of the Soviet Union a quarter-century ago.
Protesters across the country are upset over corruption in Ukraine, the lack of democratic rights and the country’s ailing economy, which just barely avoided bankruptcy with the first disbursement of a $15 billion bailout promised by Russia.
The violence is making Ukraine’s economic troubles worse. Ratings agency Standard & Poor’s downgraded Ukraine’s debt rating Friday, saying the country will likely default if there are no significant improvements in the political crisis, which it does not expect.
Obama administration officials are illegally delaying enforcement of a central provision in the president’s namesake legislation in a desperate attempt to manipulate the 2014 midterm elections and swell the ranks of those who look to government for healthcare.
The White House is beginning to sense that when Americans realize the price of “free” healthcare, they’re likely to take swift vengeance on those responsible.
Section 1513 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA, better known as Obamacare) requires all large employers to provide health insurance for their employees. “Large employers” are those with at least 50 full-time employees, and “full-time” is defined as averaging 30 or more hours per week.
Section 1513’s “Employer Mandate” is one of five parts of the ACA that are absolutely essential for this government-run system to work, with the most well-known of those five being the infamous “Individual Mandate” upheld by the Supreme Court as a tax by a controversial 5-4 decision in 2012.
And the Employer Mandate is mandatory. The law Congress wrote explicitly commands that this provision takes effect in January 2014. The ACA does not permit the government to grant a reprieve or an extension.
Yet in a blatantly illegal move, the Obama administration is presuming to rewrite the ACA by choosing not to enforce provisions that are causing visible problems. The IRS – which is tasked with enforcing the Employer Mandate – will simply not enforce it until 2015. Every large employer in the country is under the mandate. If they don’t comply, then they are breaking federal law.
But the IRS not enforcing Section 1513 is like a policeman who patrols a stretch of road who says for the next year, he won’t issue any speeding tickets. He has no authority to suspend the law, but if he chooses to violate his duty by failing to enforce the law, then to all the motorists on the road it’s as if the law does not exist.
However, the White House is doing nothing to stop Section 1501’s Individual Mandate. Almost every American is still being commanded to buy insurance or face a penalty (now called a “tax” by the Supreme Court). If you work at a large company, you might be on your own and need to buy insurance somewhere else.
This will force millions of Americans instead to purchase insurance on government-run healthcare exchanges. Not able to get insurance at work, and not able to buy full-price policies on the individual market because of the enormous increase in prices resulting from the ACA’s laundry list of new entitlements and mandates, these individuals will buy it on a state-based exchange where the prices are heavily subsidized by taxpayers.
It’s worth noting that the ACA only subsidizes insurance policies on an exchange run by a state. Yet 34 states have refused to join this government-run debacle, so in those states the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will set them up.
This is why the IRS issued a regulation last year saying that these tax credits for state-run exchanges also extend to HHS-run exchanges. Several lawsuits are now underway challenging the IRS Rule, and they should quickly lead to federal courts striking down the regulation.
In the meantime, though, this will drive millions of Americans onto government-run healthcare, conditioning them to think of it as an entitlement. By promising them all the benefits now but delaying the massive costs until after the 2014 midterm election, Obama and his team hope to buy themselves a couple years to make this system work.
Bad policy makes for bad politics, however; sooner or later everyone has to pay the piper. Maybe Obama will delay the most onerous parts of Obamacare until after the 2014 elections in an attempt to keep the Senate and retake the House, but it might take a miracle to keep this shell game going until after the 2016 election, when voters decide on a new president and what direction we take as a nation.
Whether Obamacare remains the law of the land will be at the center of that national discussion for 2016. Suspending the Employer Mandate just added to that debate.
There are a few things that we all know and accept about human beings, and one of them is that we all need food and water to survive.
But one local
nutbag moron woman wants to challenge that fundamental concept of life.
Her name is Naveena Shine, and some of her ideas can best be described as being “out there.” The 65-year-old England native who now lives in the Seattle area is aiming big with her goals.
“This will literally save the Earth,” she said of her most recent experiment.
Shine claims she doesn’t need food to survive, and she’s out to prove it to the world.
“Well, the intention of what I’m doing is I want to provide evidence that it is possible, should it be possible, that human beings can live and thrive and do really well without having to eat solid food,” she said.
To prove her point, she quit eating. She’s now living on water and tea with a dab of milk. She claims she hasn’t had a thing to eat since May 3.
Because she knew people would doubt her claims, Shine set up cameras in every corner of her home that record 24 hours a day. When she goes outside, she takes a mobile camera.
It’s all so she can prove to the world that humans don’t need food.
“There’s got to be a point that’s a shift-over point, you either go into starvation and death or you go into finding the place within and without that creates living on light,” Shine said.
She often talks about light – both the kind that comes from the sun and the inner power source she can’t fully define.
She said she sometimes has sudden drops in blood pressure where she gets dizzy and needs to sit down.
Dr. Rich Lindquist from Swedish Hospital doesn’t doubt that Shine can survive for a while on tea and water – maybe as long as three months – but he said it’s a bad idea.
“People can live for extended periods of time, but people need food in order to live,” he said.
Lindquist said the body will cannibalize itself for a while by burning up stored fat and muscle, but that can’t go on forever.
“Long term, over time, if you don’t eat, you die,” he said.
Shine said she originally hoped people would be fascinated by her experiment and sponsor her efforts, but that hasn’t happened.
She insists she’ll stop if she feels like she’s in any danger. She said she’s lost some weight since starting the experiment, but she isn’t gaunt. She also said she’s not hungry.
A woman found on a Pleasant Grove roadside Tuesday with a Walmart bag over her head has been criminally charged after authorities found she made up the ordeal.
Pleasant Grove police today charged 19-year-old Kayla B. Earl with False Reporting to Law Enforcement. The crime is a misdemeanor.
Investigators said Earl, of Hueytown, was trying to lure back her estranged boyfriend with sympathy when she told lawmen she was attacked in a Pleasant Grove cemetery. A Jefferson County sheriff’s deputy on patrol spotted the woman about 5 a.m. in the dirt just off the road near Five Acre Road. She appeared unconscious.
Rescue workers took her to UAB Hospital where she was checked out and released. She told detectives she was visiting a friend’s gravesite at the cemetery when a man came up from behind her and put a bag over her head. Her vehicle was found parked in the cemetery.
The woman said she struggled with the man, and was able to break free. She then ran to the roadway, where she said she passed out.
Detectives from both Pleasant Grove and Hueytown spent much of the day trying to track down the real story, including cell phone records and review of surveillance video from nearby. During a second interview with detectives, Earl broke down and admitted the hoax.
“She even said she put the bag on her head to make it look like someone tried to suffocate her,” said Pleasant Grove Detective Jason Davis. “She is going through some personal problems. Between that and wanting attention, it turns out none of this happened.”
Earl surrendered to police this afternoon. Her bond is set at $500.