Showing posts with label Socialism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Socialism. Show all posts

Monday, June 17, 2013

Herman Cain says U.S. headed ‘towards socialism and towards communism’

End Of Days News

Herman Cain says U.S. headed ‘towards socialism and towards communism’

END TIME HEADLINES at END TIME HEADLINES 
Herman Cain, who ran unsuccessfully for the GOP presidential nomination in 2012, told a gathering of conservative activists in Washington, D.C., on Saturday that they shouldn’t wait until 2016 to “take our country… Read More →

Friday, April 19, 2013

Biden: 'The President Is Already Lining Up Some Additional Executive Actions' for Guns

End Of Days News

THIS IS WHAT HIS PLANS ARE BECAUSE HE DOES NOT CARE WHAT THE PEOPLE OF AMERICA WANT! He is a child that throws fits when he does not get his way!

Joe Biden says the president of the United States is preparing to take "executive actions" to deal with guns. 
Vice President Biden told White House allies in the gun control fight Thursday that President Obama will be announcing new executive actions on gun violence in the days after the Senate voted down a gun violence bill.
On a conference call with "stakeholders," Biden told gun control advocates that the fight is not over and that eventual action on gun control will come. Press were not invited to the conference call; a participant provided BuzzFeed with access.
"Look I know you're going to say that I'm just being an optimist and I'm trying to put a good face on this. But you know I've been around here a long time and we've already done, because of you, some really good things," Biden said. "Number one, the president is already lining up some additional executive actions he's going to be taking later this week."
After the Newtown shootings, Obama took a number of executive actions to expand research into gun violence and other areas favored by the gun control community. He took the actions without Congressional approval, leading to outrage by some conservatives.

Read More: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-president-already-lining-some-additional-executive-actions-guns_718027.html

Friday, March 8, 2013

California governor prepares implementation of Obama health care bill

End Of Days News

California governor prepares implementation of Obama health care bill
 
While falsely trumpeting the commitment of state funds to provide limited medical coverage for families living in poverty, California Governor Jerry Brown and the ruling establishment are building the case for cuts to Medi-Cal (California’s Medicaid welfare program) in the coming years.
 
The vehicle of this plan is President Obama’s Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as ObamaCare, which, beginning January 2014, requires most Americans to buy health insurance or pay a penalty. Democratic politicians have made every effort to sell the health care overhaul as a progressive achievement.

Under the ACA, California would have the option of extending medical benefits to families living at between 100 percent and 138 percent of the federal poverty line, abysmally set at about $22,000 per year for a family of four. The federal government would subsidize the additional cost for the first three years, then scale down its subsidy to 90 percent of such cost by 2020.

At its core, the ACA is aimed at a further privatization and gutting of the health care for ordinary Americans, concealed behind an adequate extension of benefits to poor and working class families.

Medi-Cal serves nearly 9 million people, almost one in four California residents, who depend on the program for access to any kind of health service. The expansion being currently discussed would bring in 1.2 million new enrollees by 2017. While Governor Brown, a Democrat, touts the expansion of Medi-Cal coverage for this layer, the state has the option of withdrawing such coverage at any time. Brown has already made clear that the long-term costs for implementing the coverage are unknown and may undermine California’s precarious budget. There is also the possibility that the federal government may shift costs to the state.

In the next few years, federal support for Medi-Cal will run out, while health care costs will continue to grow rapidly. Given that state funding for medical benefit programs will remain optional, it is reasonable to assume that the option of reducing payments will be exercised. Republican Governor Tom Corbett of Pennsylvania, for instance, has already “opted out” of the expanded Medicaid payments, a decision that will leave between 482,000 and 683,000 adults uninsured.

Thursday, March 7, 2013

For those protesting and getting arrested for it, its because you are breaking the law! The first ammendment was removed a while ago! Signed in secret by the welfare messiah OBAMA!

End Of Days News

One Hundred Twelfth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, the third day of January, two thousand and twelve An Act To correct and simplify the drafting of section 1752 (relating to restricted buildings or grounds) of title 18, United States Code.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the `Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011'.
SEC. 2. RESTRICTED BUILDING OR GROUNDS.
    Section 1752 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
-`Sec. 1752. Restricted building or grounds
    `(a) Whoever--
      `(1) knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so;
      `(2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions;
      `(3) knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds; or
      `(4) knowingly engages in any act of physical violence against any person or property in any restricted building or grounds;
    or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
    `(b) The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) is--
      `(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, if--
        `(A) the person, during and in relation to the offense, uses or carries a deadly or dangerous weapon or firearm; or
        `(B) the offense results in significant bodily injury as defined by section 2118(e)(3); and
      `(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in any other case.
    `(c) In this section--
      `(1) the term `restricted buildings or grounds' means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area--
        `(A) of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice President's official residence or its grounds;
        `(B) of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting; or
        `(C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance; and
      `(2) the term `other person protected by the Secret Service' means any person whom the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title or by Presidential memorandum, when such person has not declined such protection.'.
Speaker of the House of Representatives. Vice President of the United States and President of the Senate.

Wednesday, March 6, 2013

U.S. Army: Don't criticize Obama (Welcome to the New Amerika)

End Of Days News

obama_tight-lipped
 
A spokesman for the U.S. Army has sent an email to 6,000 employees with a strong subtext: Don’t criticize President Obama or any political party to members of the press.
 
The Weekly Standard published a copy of the email, distributed Friday by Stephen D. Abney, the chief public affairs official for the Army’s Joint Munitions Command, to all 6,000 employees he represents.
The email says:
From: Larson, Angela M CIV (US)
Sent: Friday, March
01, 2013 5:59 PM
To: USARMY RIA JMC List DL All JMC Pers
Subject: Sequestration – Media Tips
To JMC employees,
Because of media interest in sequestration and furlough, you may be approached or contacted by a reporter at some point and asked to comment.
If you don’t wish to speak with a reporter, politely decline.
If you agree to be interviewed, remember that you’re expressing your personal opinion, not that of anyone else – and certainly not the opinion of JMC or the Army.
Avoid giving an answer that might be perceived as criticism of the Commander in Chief or any political party.
If you’re asked to provide an official statement, refer the reporter to
JMC PAO, the official spokesperson for the command. Their number is [REDACTED].
v/r
Stephen D. Abney
Chief, Public Affairs
Joint Munitions Command
DSN [REDACTED]
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
The Weekly Standard reports that civilian employees also received the email.

Abney said the email was not meant for civilian contractors but can’t swear they did not receive it as well.

Abney told the Weekly Standard that he was just reminding employees that Obama is their boss.

The issue of free speech rights in the military is problematic. The Marine Corps gave Sgt. Gary Stein an “other than honorable” discharge for misconduct after he posted on Facebook: “Screw Obama. I will not follow all orders from him.”

Stein said he meant he wouldn’t follow unlawful orders from the president and that his comments were protected by the First Amendment.

He testified that his comment was part of a discussion about letting U.S. troops be put on trial for the Quran burnings in Afghanistan.

Stein explained he was saying he would not follow orders if they included detaining U.S. citizens, disarming them or otherwise violating the Constitution.

He filed a preliminary injunction in federal court in Southern California, but Judge Marilyn Huff denied the request.

In April 2012, WND spoke with Gary Kreep, who at the time was executive director of the United States Justice Foundation, which defended Stein.

Among the other problems, said Kreep, was the fact that one of the prosecution witnesses had “obscene political comments” on his own Facebook page, yet he had not been disciplined.

Kreep added that a Marine officer who reportedly was to be a neutral adviser at a disciplinary hearing also took on the role of the prosecution.

The hearing also rejected a statement from Brig. Gen. David Brahms, a Marine for over 50 years, with 49 of them as a lawyer.

Brahms said in a written statement: “I do not believe that … the behavior in question violates the cited UCMJ provision.”

The statement also noted that Department of Defense directive 1344.10, which Stein is accused of violating, is difficult to understand.

“My reading of it indicates it is confusing and quite unhelpful. It is also inherently contradictory,” Brahms said. “If I cannot understand 1344.10 as a 74-year-old retired brigadier general and staff judge advocate to the Commandant of the Marines, there is little hope that a sergeant would understand.”

Brahms also challenged the prosecution’s position that Stein represented the Marine Corps with his postings.

Thursday, January 3, 2013

They are getting their ducks in a row for when they are ready to declare MARTIAL LAW! Obama signs NDAA 2013 without objecting to indefinite detention of Americans

US President Barack Obama (AFP Photo/Brendan Smialowsky)
 
 
President Barack Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act of 2013 on Wednesday, giving his stamp of approval to a Pentagon spending bill that will keep Guantanamo Bay open and make indefinite detention for US citizens as likely as ever.
The president inked his name to the 2013 NDAA on Wednesday evening to little fanfare, and accompanied his signature with a statement condemning a fair number of provisions contained in a bill that he nevertheless endorsed.
The NDAA, an otherwise mundane annual bill that lays out the use of funds for the Department of Defense, has come under attack during the Obama administration for the introduction of a provision last year that allows the military to detain United States citizens indefinitely without charge or trial for mere suspicions of ties to terrorism. Under the 2012 NDAA’s Sec. 1021, Pres. Obama agreed to give the military the power to arrest and hold Americans without the writ of habeas corpus, although he promised with that year’s signing statement that his administration would not abuse that privilege.
In response to the controversial indefinite detention provision from last year, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California) introduced an amendment in December 2012 that would have forbid the government from using military force to indefinitely detain Americans without trial under the 2013 NDAA. Although that provision, dubbed the “Feinstein Amendment,” passed the Senate unanimously, a select panel of lawmakers led by Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Michigan) stripped it from the final version of the NDAA two week later before it could clear Congress. In exchange, Congress added a provision, Sec. 1029, that claims to ensure that “any person inside the United States” is allowed their constitutional rights, including habeas corpus, but supporters of the Feinstein Amendment say that the swapped wording does nothing to erase the indefinite detention provision from the previous year.
“Saying that new language somehow ensures the right to habeas corpus – the right to be presented before a judge – is both questionable and not enough. Citizens must not only be formally charged but also receive jury trials and the other protections our Constitution guarantees. Habeas corpus is simply the beginning of due process. It is by no means the whole,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) said after the Feinstein Amendment was removed.
“Our Bill of Rights is not something that can be cherry-picked at legislators’ convenience. When I entered the United States Senate, I took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. It is for this reason that I will strongly oppose passage of the McCain conference report that strips the guarantee to a trial by jury,” Sen. Paul added.
Although the Pres. Obama rejected the indefinite detention clause when signing the 2012 NDAA, a statement issued late Wednesday from the White House failed to touch on the military’s detainment abilities. On the other hand, Pres. Obama did voice his opposition to a number of provisions included in the latest bill, particularly ones that will essentially render his promise of closing the Guantanamo Bay military prison impossible.
Despite repeated pleas that Gitmo will be closed on his watch, Pres. Obama failed to do as much during his first term in the White House. Thanks to a provision in the 2013 NDAA, the Pentagon will be unable to use funds to transfer detainees out of that facility and to other sights, ensuring they will remain at the top-secret military prison for the time being.
“Even though I support the vast majority of the provisions contained in this Act, which is comprised of hundreds of sections spanning more than 680 pages of text, I do not agree with them all. Our Constitution does not afford the president the opportunity to approve or reject statutory sections one by one,” Pres. Obama writes.
Congress, claims the president, designed sections of the new defense bill “in order to foreclose my ability to shut down the Guantanamo Bay detention facility.”
“I continue to believe that operating the facility weakens our national security by wasting resources, damaging our relationships with key allies and strengthening our enemies,” he says.
Elsewhere, the president claims that certain provisions in the act threaten to interview with his “constitutional duty to supervise the executive branch” of the United States.
Before the 2013 NDAA was finalized, it was reported by the White House that Pres. Obama would veto the legislation over the provisions involving Guantanamo Bay. Similarly, the White House originally said the president would veto the 2012 NDAA over the indefinite detention provisions, although he signed it regardless “with reservations” on December 31 of that year.
Since authorizing the 2012 NDAA, the president has been challenged in federal court by a team of plaintiffs who say that the indefinite detention clause is unconstitutional. US District Judge Katherine Forrest agreed that Sec. 1021 of the 2012 NDAA violated the US Constitution and granted a permanent injunction on the Obama administration from using that provision, but the White House successfully fought to appeal that decision.
Commenting on the latest signing, American Civil Liberties Union Executive Director Anthony Romero says, "President Obama has utterly failed the first test of his second term, even before inauguration day.”
“His signature means indefinite detention without charge or trial, as well as the illegal military commissions, will be extended,” adds Romero. "He also has jeopardized his ability to close Guantanamo during his presidency. Scores of men who have already been held for nearly 11 years without being charged with a crime--including more than 80 who have been cleared for transfer--may very well be imprisoned unfairly for yet another year. The president should use whatever discretion he has in the law to order many of the detainees transferred home, and finally step up next year to close Guantanamo and bring a definite end to indefinite detention."


Obama to 'Quickly' Go for Immigration Reform and Gun Control

President Barack Obama will go for immigration reform and gun control this month, the White House tells the left-leaning Huffington Post. Obama's actions will reportedly be done "quickly."
Obama glowing"An Obama administration official said the president plans to push for immigration reform this January. The official, who spoke about legislative plans only on condition of anonymity, said that coming standoffs over deficit reduction are unlikely to drain momentum from other priorities. The White House plans to push forward quickly, not just on immigration reform but gun control laws as well," reports the Huffington Post.
"The timeframe is likely to be cheered by Democrats and immigration reform advocates alike, who have privately expressed fears that Obama's second term will be drowned out in seemingly unending showdowns between parties."
The outlet claims that it is "unclear what type of immigration policies the White House plans to push in January."
No details on what sort of gun control legislation the White House will seek were offered in the article.
As Politico reported last month, a "Gang of Eight," a conference of 8 senators from both parties, "has begun to meet to discuss immigration reform." But it is not at all clear what progress this group has made and what immigration laws it might propose.

 

Thursday, December 27, 2012

Obamacare Could Double Health Care Premiums: Aetna CEO

To provide all Americans with health insurance, premiums will have to rise to pay for it, Aetna CEO Mark Bertolini told CNBC's "Closing Bell" on Wednesday.

"If we're going to insure all Americans, which is a worthy and appropriate cause, then somebody has to pay for it," Bertolini said of the expected premium increases under Obamacare.

Bertolini said that insurance premiums could double in some places just on the basis of what types of policies people buy today.
He also said that when Obamacare is fully implemented, it won't start the way people had hoped and it won't be cheaper.
Over the longer run, the key to bringing down premiums will be controlling health care costs, he added. "It'll be fits and starts, but we'll get there," Bertolini said.
Higher premiums also will not necessarily mean higher margins for Aetna. "The people coming into the system will be sicker because they have not used services," Bertolini said. "So in the initial part of this program it will cost more to take care of people because they have been going without health care for so long."
The Aetna executive also weighed in on the debate over the country's fiscal situation.
Bertolini said a big deal would be the best deal for the country, but that it's looking increasingly unlikely that politicians do anything more than a short-term fix which won't be enough to restore confidence.
And confidence is key to increasing business investment and spurring economic growth. "A grand bargain won't create a slow economy," Bertolini said. "It will restore confidence and we'll all invest."
He added, "Americans don't want Plan B, they don't want a short term fix. They want the very best we can come up with. They want Plan A."