Moral Support: Solution to Obamacare Replacement

Moral Support: 

Solution to Obamacare Replacement

Michele Bachmann: 1 simple secret to fix Obamacare

‘All the federal government needs to do after repealing is to …’

When asked what she would propose, Michele Bachmann, the former congresswoman replied, “An Obamacare fix? Easy.”

Then she provided these five steps.

  1. “Pass the full Obamacare repeal bill. That gets us to 2008 when health care was far cheaper than it is today under the burdensome, heavily bureaucratic Obamacare mandates.
  2. “Each state needs to decide what it wants to spend on health care and what it wants to offer its citizens, if anything. The federal government has repeatedly proved itself a failure on this issue for decades. They need to get out of creating monopolies in health care and punishing free market competition.
  3. “All the federal government needs to do after repealing Obamacare is to pass a bill that allows any health insurance product to be sold across state lines with no minimum federal mandates. Period.
  4. “Medicare eligible Senior citizens and poor people on Medicaid should have the option of choosing a voucher to spend toward the purchase of any type of healthcare plan they want, then put the surplus, if any in a Health savings account.
  5. “I’d also encourage the states to pass liability shields for charity clinics. If doctors, nurses and facilities want to offer free healthcare, then the clinic and practitioners should be free from the threat of lawsuits.”

Her bottom line?

Let the market fix the problems caused by Obamacare.

Once the impediments were removed, “People would be shocked at the low-cost options that would arise in the marketplace.”
So, WND asked, how she would deal with the potential PR dilemma of a parade of people on the news who had lost their health-care coverage after a full repeal of Obamacare?
She focused on the opportunities provided by change as far exceeding the perils.

“Think of all the minute clinics located in grocery stores today, the concierge health services people buy for $80/month (in Colorado), the nurses and doctors offering ‘in home’ appointments via Skype?”

Bachmann noted, “These innovations are available today in spite of massive government intervention in the healthcare business.”

“Innovation in health care is a given, its the price of government bureaucratic intervention that we can’t afford,” she concluded.


Immigration Issues Solution: De-fund Sanctuary Cities for Illegal Alien Crime

Immigration Issues Solution:

De-fund Sanctuary Cities for Illegal Alien Crime

Sanctuary city solution? Hit cities’ pocketbooks ‘hard’

‘Suddenly, these policies will go away’

Paul Bremmer

trump-illegal-immigration-crime-validated1Donald Trump built his presidential campaign around tough talk of securing the border and deporting illegal immigrants already in the United States. But mayors and police chiefs from around the country are promising to defy the new president by continuing to provide “sanctuary,” an exemption from federal law for lawbreakers.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Barack Obama’s former chief of staff, affirmed his city will continue to prohibit government workers and police from asking locals about their immigration status.

“Chicago will always be a sanctuary city,” he boasted.

Seattle Mayor Ed Murray sounded a similar note, saying, “Seattle has always been a welcoming city. The last thing I want is for us to start turning on our neighbors.”

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio told Muslim residents concerned about deportation, “We have your back.”

Daniel Horowitz, author of “Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges From Transforming America,” sees a horribly backwards double standard regarding immigration laws.

He pointed out Arizona passed a law in 2010 to help augment and enforce federal immigration law, but the courts struck down several provisions of the law. Meanwhile, Los Angeles, San Francisco and many other cities are undermining federal immigration law with their sanctuary policies, without ramifications.

“They’re getting away with it,” Horowitz groused. “They’re getting away with stealing the sovereignty of the people. So we have it exactly backwards.”

But Trump promises to not let them get away with it any longer. The president-elect has previously stated he will cut off federal funding to sanctuary cities after he takes office.

Cheryl Chumley, an award-winning freelance journalist, enthusiastically supports Trump’s proposal.

“Cut the purse strings off until these sanctuary cities recognize the dangers of their foolish policies and quit advertising to the world of illegals: Come on in,” she told WND.

Families honor those murdered by illegal criminals

Families honor those murdered by illegal criminals

Chumley, author of “The Devil in DC: Winning Back the Country From the Beast in Washington,” encouraged Americans to remember Kate Steinle, the San Francisco woman who was gunned down in broad daylight while walking on a pier with her father.

Her killer was an illegal immigrant who had previously been deported several times for felonies. But San Francisco’s sanctuary policies allowed him to roam free, and while roaming free, he killed.
Chumley, for her part, suggested if an illegal alien taking shelter in a sanctuary city commits an additional crime, Trump should use the full force of his Justice Department to prosecute the leaders responsible for the continuing sanctuary status – including going after punitive damages that could be awarded to the victims and families of victims.
Horowitz sees an easy way Trump could turn back the tide of illegal immigration.

ImmigrationCriminals“The good news is that a lot of what Obama did was through executive action,” he noted. “The statutes remain the same; in fact, Congress never changed the immigration statutes during his entire eight-year tenure. So this is garbage in, garbage out: whatever he was able to implement through executive order, Trump could reverse.”

Horowitz suggested Trump could restore the Secure Communities program, which Obama gutted, or roll back DACA and DAPA. He also shared one tip on federal immigration law.

“It’s very important for people to realize that the immigration statutes were written for the most part one directionally,” Horowitz advised. “They gave broad latitude to the executive to ratchet down immigration as needed for the security of the nation, but did not give discretion for a president to broadly expand immigration.

“Certainly if Obama was able to get away with all his expansive immigration executive orders, Trump could definitely follow the statutes by ratcheting down some of this immigration.”

National Security: Trump on Immigration, a cautionary tale, and safety first solution

National Security:

Trump on Immigration, a cautionary tale, and safety first solution

warningHuma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s closest advisor,  has deep ties to terrorism.  Advancing Shariah globally was theobama-muslim-brotherhood-infiltrate Abedin family business. Huma was listed was listed as an assistant editor of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs (a propaganda magazine for Shariah Law). Huma’s mother, Saleha Mahmood Abedin, is a member of the Muslim Sisterhood, a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. Huma’s brother, Hassan Abedin, has worked with Muslim Brotherhood leaders and founders of a group reputed to fund terrorists. ~Leo Hohmann


Trump touts compassionate but safe solution for refugee crisis

 Learn the Lesson of the Snake

Phyllis Schlafly


rattlesnakeRecently in Erie, Pennsylvania, Donald Trump entertained his vast crowd of supporters by reciting the lyrics to a song called “The Snake.” The song was written about 50 years ago, but it tells a timeless truth derived from Aesop’s Fables, which are more than 2,500 years old.

                The song tells the story of a “tender-hearted woman” who rescues a “poor, half-frozen snake” from near death in the winter cold. “Take me in, oh tender woman, ” the snake cries out. “Take me in, for heaven’s sake.”

So the tender-hearted woman takes the snake into her own home, warms it by the fire and feeds it milk and honey: “if I hadn’t brought you in, b now you might have died.” But instead of saying thanks, the snake gave her a vicious bite.

“I saved you,” cried the woman. “And you’ve bitten me, but why? You know your bite is poisonous, and now I’m going to die.”

“Oh shut up, silly woman,” said the reptile with a grin. “You knew very well I was a snake before you took me in.”

  The moral of the song was clear to many in the crowd, but Donald Trump made sure that everyone got the message. “This is what is going on in our country, with our border,” he told the 9,000 people who filled the Erie Insurance Arena.



             When you’re listening to this, think of our border. Think of the people we are letting in by the thousands. And Hillary Clinton wants to allow 550 percent more coming in to our country. How stupid are we?!”

That’s right: Hillary wants to bring in 65,000 Syrian refugees, which is indeed a 550 percent increase over the 10,000 who entered this year, which in turn is a 500 percent increase over last year’s intake of about 1,600. Obama is now rushing to complete his pledge to bring in 10,000 Syrian refugees by Sept 30, despite FBI Director James Comey’s testimony last October that those people can’t be vetted because there are no reliable records on them.

As Trump said at the rally in Erie, “We want to help people, but we can’t take a chance. We know bad things are going to happen. We know, as we allow more and more people to come in from terror areas, bad things are going to happen.”

To illustrate the “bad things” that are bound to happen when “we allow more and more people to come in from terror areas,” Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., last month released the names of 20 people convicted of terrorism in the last three years after being admitted to our country as refugees from such countries as Iraq, Somalia, Uzbekistan and Bosnia. One of the 20 had received a special visa for Iraqi translators and subsequently became a U.S. citizen, yet he pledged an oath to the leader of ISIS.

Safe, Compassionate Solution

trump-illegal-immigration-crime-validated1              Trump’s compassionate solution for the refugee crisis is to “Build a beautiful safe zone in Syria” and get the so-called Gulf States to pay for it. The Gulf States are the oil-rich kingdoms of the Persian Gulf whose existence is protected by the U.S. Navy, but have contributed nothing for the welfare of their fellow Arab Muslims in need.

The story of ‘The Snake’ is what’s happening to our country

“The story of ‘The Snake’ is what’s happening to our country,” Trump continued. “We’re letting people in. many of these people hate us. Many of these people don’t have good thoughts. And you see what one sick wacko can do in Orlando. And then you see his father sitting behind Hillary cClinton with a big smile on his face.”

That’s right, the father of Omar Mateen, who murdered 49 people at the Pulse nightclub on June 12, was allowed to sit directly behind Hillary where he was visible on camera during her entire 25-minute speech. Seddique Mateen, who apparently came to the United States as a refugee in the 1980s, told reporters that Hillary Clinton “would be good for the United States, versus Donald Trump.”

Aiding and Abetting Terrorism

treasonaidabetenemy               Before we allow any more refugees from Syria, let’s take a closer look at what happened to a previous wave of refugees brought here from the East African failed state of Somalia. Starting in the 1990s, an estimated 100,000Muslims from Somalia have been resettled in Minnesota and Maine at U.S. taxpayers’ expense.

Instead of expressing their gratitude for the opportunity to live in a peaceful, prosperous nation, many Somalis have been trained by leftist community organizers to adopt an entitlement mentality, quick to complain about alleged discrimination.

                 If that’s not bad enough, a disproportionate number of their young men have supported terrorism or have even traveled overseas to join ISIS.




Moral Repair Plan: Pregnant Teen and Immigration Issues

Dinner Topics for Thursday

We recently started an “Abuse Report.” This lists summarized selections of the tyranny and abuses inflicted by our government. There are so many that we don’t have room to give each one its own post. To follow up with something hopefully more positive, we are introducing the Moral Repair Plan, to post whatever sensible solutions we can find to society’s many vexing problems. These are harder to find than the troubles, but we will try to post them as often as possible. ~ C.A. Davidson

Solution 1 —Rush Limbaugh: We can solve immigrant worker issue without amnesty

AmericanWorkersPIXRUSH: Let’s stay with our last caller. She’s gone, but let’s stay with what she was saying. Conservative. She’s 25 years old, her family is into farming in the Central Valley of California — which, folks, the Central Valley of California is so fertile, it feeds the world in a lot of categories. She said the reason Americans won’t do at work that they have on their farm is that they will not work for what they can afford to pay, wage-wise.


Well, now, that’s admittedly a problem. But my question is: Why is the solution never ending amnesty for everybody who wants to come here, which is gonna turn them into automatic Democrats? Whatever happened to seasonal permitted green card immigration to come in? Seasonal immigration, which we’ve supported in the past, is not immigration, but seasonal work permits for people to come in during the growing season, the picking season, whatever it’s called — and when the work is done, then they leave?

Why isn’t that a solution. To me, and many people, this is not really about amnesty. It’s not really about immigration. It’s not about a humanitarian cause. The people pushing this are just seeking new voters who will remain in a permanent need of government assistance. There is a desire the Democrat Party for a permanent underclass. Now, they say (and the Republicans who support this say) that what they’re trying to do is service the needs of businesses like these farmers.

Farmers who cannot afford to pay full-fledged citizens or full-fledged persons, they won’t work for that money, so we need this influx of people from around the world who come from such poverty that the money they will be paid is humongous to them. Okay. I understand the business needs of farms in this circumstance. But the solution does not have to be amnesty for 20 million people who are going to become Democrat voters.

You know 15 million of ’em are gonna back Democrats. How about another solution? Just as an idea. If the farms cannot pay enough to attract American workers, then how about tax credits to allow them to? Tax credits to let them raise their wage. What about exempting them from the corporate tax rate, for example? What about exempting them from all kinds of federal taxation so that they will not have money to spend on the government, they’ll have money to spend on employees?

My point is, there are all kinds of potential solutions to this that do not involve amnesty for 20 million, whatever the number is. Seasonal migration, which we used to do and which we’ve supported. We understand economics. My point, folks, is that the people behind the immigration reform movement might want you to think that they’re trying to help that woman who called and her farm, but that’s not what they’re into.

Just like we learn from Bob Gates in his book that Obama and Hillary opposed the Iraq war on purely political grounds. Well, that’s not news to you or me because we know who Obama and Hillary are, and everything they do is political. But the same people who put a political calculation on war — and here’s Gates telling us that Obama, he doesn’t even like hanging around with military people, and he’s not even really into this Afghanistan thing.

He’s just doing this because he was handed it, and he doesn’t want to be saddled with defeat, but he’s not really behind it. Yet he is sending people into harm’s way for something he’s not even really committed to. But if we didn’t have Gates’ book, all we would know is Obama’s speeches talking about how much he does want victory and how committed he is to it. But we know he’s not. Okay, well, the same kind of people and the same thinking are here on immigration.

It is nothing more than a giant voter-registration drive to them. But they make it sound like they are concerned about farmers and migrant workers and the other itinerant or attached humanitarian causes. But that’s a smoke screen, because there are solutions that are much less damaging to the culture, to the society, and to the overall economy, not to mention the sanctity of law. Our immigration law is worthless. People are allowed to break it, and very few are ever held accountable.

We don’t need immigration “reform.” All we need to do is enforce the laws that are already on the books, and why don’t we do that? The reason we don’t do that is these bodies are desired. They are seen by both parties as potential voters. So we have this woman in Central Valley of California. She’s conservative. You could hear the Republican inflection in her voice. She’s conservative. But she can’t pay very much for the work she has done.

There are certain people who will do it for what she could afford to pay, but they’re not Americans, and she needs the work done. Her family needs the work. Okay. How do you solve that problem? Well, the problem can be solved without granting amnesty to 20 million people. That’s my only point. (interruption) Well, they would have, except we stopped it. Snerdley just said, “The problem with that is, Rush, that the seasonal people are not gonna leave when the season’s over, because they’re gonna like living here so much more than where they came from. They’re not gonna leave.” (interruption)

Well, free schools, free medical, free health care. But we’re not telling them they can bring their families. Wait a second. Under my idea, and the way it was done in the past, they didn’t bring their families, and they weren’t ending up on welfare. And when the season ended they were sent home. It was up to the employer to produce it and police. It’s been done before. No, we’re not breaking up families. Wrong. How many American fathers go over to Saudi Arabia to work in the oil fields while mom and the kids stay here? We’re not breaking up families; we’re supporting families. We’re letting people come here who want to work. There’s work here that only they will do, supposedly. I’m just accepting that as part of the theory, part of the equation.

Look, my overall point, I’m probably not expressing it well because Snerdley keeps arguing with me. My only point is that there are much more effective, smaller solutions specifically tailored to a specific need than what is being proposed. Nobody wants farms to go out of business. Nobody wants farms to close down. Nobody wants anybody to go hungry. That’s not the case here. But what we all know, what we all understand is that the people that are behind massive, as McCain said, comprehensive, meaningful comprehensive immigration reform, it’s just a voter registration drive to them. Let ’em tell us that that’s what they’re doing, see how it flies.

RUSH: I’ve got so many problems with all of this. This business that there are jobs Americans won’t do, I’ve had problems with that ever since I first heard that from an economist friend who tried to explain it to me. He believed it, thought it was rational. I’ve had problems with it instinctively from the first time I heard it. “Well, there are certain jobs Americans won’t do. Americans’ job expectations have gone way past picking lettuce.”

Okay, fine. We’ve got 90 million Americans not working, almost 91 million Americans not working. That is more people than live in Germany. As you well know, if the unemployment rate actually counted people who no longer were looking for work — who’ve given up — the real unemployment rate would be 11-point-something percent. With 90 million Americans not working, how can there be jobs Americans won’t do? And yet it’s probably true. And the reason is how much we’re paying people not to work. That’s why there are jobs Americans won’t do, is because of how much we’re paying them not to work. Pure and simple, folks.

Okay, so we’ve got an overcrowding problem in our prisons in California. How about letting them out, pick lettuce, pick peaches, and pay them whatever the going rate would be that you pay an illegal? My only point is there are all kinds of solutions here that do not involve massive comprehensive amnesty or immigration reform.

Reduce the corporate tax rate that these farms are paying. Reduce what they have to give to the government so they can pay a higher wage.

So the jobs will become those Americans will do. “But, Rush, Americans are not gonna go to the fields and sweat.” Okay, I got a solution for that. If it’s back-breaking work — and we’re told it’s really tough, I mean, it is hard, back-breaking work, then that’s what you do for college and pro football players. You send them there instead of summer training camp. You get ’em in shape. There’s no concussions.

There’s no blown knees, no strained ankles, just a bunch of people sweating in the hot sun, getting ready for football season. Now, I know it’s a stretch. I’m just giving you examples here. There are all kinds of solutions to this. But look at how much we’re paying people not to work? That’s why there are jobs Americans won’t do. And then factor in, we don’t have the money we are paying people not to work.

Solution 2: Reducing the number of Pregnant teens

Teen pregnancy drops as Planned Parenthood vanishes

New study reveals abstinence more popular without abortion industry influence

From 1994 through 2010, Planned Parenthood facilities in these counties went from 19 to zero. In the same period, the teen pregnancy rate dropped almost in half, from 43.76 per 1,000 to 24.1 per 1,000. … Those aren’t our numbers; those are government numbers.”

Bob Unruh

infants-340x161Communities looking to reduce their teen pregnancy rates perhaps should consider one move before all the others: closing down any Planned Parenthood business.

That’s because a new study of one region of the country shows that as Planned Parenthood operations shut down and moved out, the teen pregnancy rate plunged by almost half.
The study comes from the pro-life American Life League, but it uses government figures to reach its conclusions. It analyzed one section of the nation – the Texas Panhandle region – where over the course of several years 19 Planned Parenthood businesses closed or left.

The result? Teen pregnancies dropped from 43.6 per 1,000 girls to 24.1 among a stable population of about 13,000 teen girls aged 13-17.

“People don’t realize that Planned Parenthood must work hard to replace the 43 percent of its customers it loses each year,” said Rita Diller, national director of ALL’s STOPP International project. “It normally does this by promoting sexual promiscuity to teens. This study suggests that when Planned Parenthood leaves, teens are more likely to embrace chastity.”

She continued: “We know that the pro-abortion first-response will be ‘consider the source.’ But American Life League is not the source; the source is the official records of 16 counties within the Texas panhandle. From 1994 through 2010, Planned Parenthood facilities in these counties went from 19 to zero. In the same period, the teen pregnancy rate dropped almost in half, from 43.76 per 1,000 to 24.1 per 1,000. … Those aren’t our numbers; those are government numbers.”

The study is called Planned Parenthood Federation of America: A 5-Part Analysis of Business Practices, Community Outcomes and Taxpayer Funding.

On the topic of community outcomes, it reports that Planned Parenthood offers numerous suggestions to reduce the number of teen pregnancies, none of which involves abstinence. Instead, it suggests “sex education” that begins in kindergarten.

“While many things factor into the teen pregnancy rate, the fact that the TPR continually declined as Planned Parenthood facilities closed – and reached its lowest point in recorded history two years after disaffiliation of the last two remaining facilities – was a significant confirmation that Planned Parenthood’s presence and its ‘evidence based’ sex education programs are not a necessary component to reducing teen pregnancy,” the report said.

The report noted that the closures happened because of “education and activism against Planned Parenthood.”

Other findings of the study include that PPFA now gets $542 million annually from taxpayers but that it still was reducing “health services” while taxpayer funding rose 78 percent over the last six years.

It also found that while it brands itself has a health-care provider, the services it provides actually are plunging.

“There is no evidence that PPFA acted to provide enhancement of healthcare services but PPFA set a new record for abortions performed and total abortion market share,” the report said.

It also is generous with its executives, paying director Cecile Richards more than $583,000 and each of 74 other executives an average of about $166,000, the report said.

“Planned Parenthood at its zenith in 1978 had 191 regional affiliates. In 2012, this number was whittled down to 74, according to Planned Parenthood’s own releases,” the report said.

Regarding delivery of health-care services, ALL reported, Planned Parenthood cancer screens dropped 29 percent and the number of female contraceptive clients was down 18 percent.

All categories of services, in fact, were down, ”except one – abortions,” according to Jim Sedlak, ALL vice president.

And its business model would collapse except for the taxpayer funding it gets, the report said.

“Claims that PPFA ‘preventive healthcare services’ are critical to reducing teen pregnancy are not supported. To the contrary, results suggest that further study of Planned Parenthood’s impact on communities is warranted, considering the fact that its comprehensive sex education model, recruiting of teens to recruit other teens, and promotion of contraceptives as sexual freedom are in decline,” said Brown.

The study showed that PP has received more than $6.8 billion in taxpayer money since 1964, with huge increases coming in recent years under the direction of President Obama. And since 1970, it has terminated the lives of 6.3 million unborn children, equal to the populations of Chicago and Los Angeles.