Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Happy New Year 2014 From True Health Is True Wealth

Happy New Year 2014_thumb[1]

Take a moment to enjoy the beautiful photographic train ride and the accompanying words: HERE. <– 

At the end of the year it has become a journalistic tradition to recap the year’s top stories, to recall the highlights and low points of the months and to remember those who have left us.  It is also a time to look forward with hope… This year that reach for hope and improvement seems more difficult than at anytime in my memory.

“It’s Auld Lang Syne time again. Robert Burns is credited with "collecting" the lyrics for the old Scots’ drinking and dancing ballad that’s become a traditional part of New Year festivities. The most memorable verses: "Should old acquaintance be forgot and never brought to mind?" and the chorus, "For auld Lang Syne, my dear, for auld Lang Syne, we’ll take a cup of kindness yet, for auld Lang Syne," are oft’ described as reminders of "the good old times" amidst new beginnings. That’s a tough task this year. Saying goodbye to 2013 won’t be hard. But looking forward with hope for a better year in 2014 is a bit of a challenge!”

Happy New Year!

Saturday, December 28, 2013

Are Young Americans Signing Up For Obamacare?

Video: Are Young Americans Signing Up For Obamacare?

Scottie Nell Hughes (News Director of Tea Party News Network) joins FBN's Charles Payne and Josh Nass (Voices of Conservative Youth Chairman) to discuss the reasons behind lack of enthusiasm by young Americans to sign up for Obamacare.

Friday, December 27, 2013

A Failing Grade for Obamacare

By: Zack Slingsby  -  The Forge

GK Chesterton once said, when asked to describe what it was about the world that made him believe in a divine creator, that he regrettably found himself dumbstruck, ill-prepared, at a loss for words. When he surveyed his surroundings, he explained, it was not that one thing pointed toward a celestial hand; it was that everything did.

Politicians and pundits of verifiable eloquence have similarly found themselves humbled before the mountain of evidence towering in tribute to President Obama’s calamitous Affordable Care Act. The heap has grown at such a rate that it is getting difficult to stand back far enough to see it all at once. How can anyone squeeze the multitude of weekly revelations into a digestible sound bite?

It is not merely the premise of redistribution at issue, not merely the suffering the law has inflicted on the populace directly (via policy cancellation and the structured marginalizing of small business interests), not merely the constitutional flippancy with which the Executive has unilaterally amended and implemented the bad law at will, but rather the coalescence of all these factors, and their myriad implications, that confounds opponents when asked, Well, what is so wrong with Obamacare?

The case for repeal is made plain by the simple fact that the law sold to us as a magical fix-all has thus far rendered every step of the healthcare insurance process completely broken.

The immense failure of the Obamacare rollout has evidently emboldened the media to use a painless litmus test for its success. If the administration’s tech savvies can catch up to the flaws of the website, if they can sign people up and stifle the groans of cancellation, and really make a go of the exchanges, then all is well and all is bright. This is the wrong test.

From the moment of the bill’s inception, the President has claimed his signature overhaul will improve the essence of healthcare for the people of America. Not simply make it as good. The numbers he has to compete with have been plainly recorded. In 2009, the Washington Post conducted a survey revealing that approximately 81% of US citizens were satisfied with their health insurance coverage and 88% were satisfied with the quality of the healthcare they received.

If the President wants to remake the economy under the guise of providing coverage to 15 million uninsured Americans—a goal that could have been reached through the tested-means of capitalism—his program will have to produce satisfaction returns that not only meet but exceed the statistical enthusiasm of 2009 (and do so, as he promised, without contributing to the reckless tax-and-spend trend of new progressivism). As it stands today, on the precipice of full-scale implementation and with the administration’s arbitrary revision tactics quickly become a new fact of governing, the President must contend with seven in ten Americans who, at minimum, would like to see the law’s one-year delay.

He will have to ignore them all to stay the course. And that he will. So when the White House wishes you a Merry Christmas via press conference, pundit promise or passing pop-up ad, remember to thank them for Obamacare: the gift that keeps on giving, whether you want to return it or not.

Time to Stock Up on Incandescent Bulbs Before They Go Out Permanently

If your New Year’s resolution is to change your light bulbs, don’t worry — the federal government’s here to help.

Beginning January 1, 2014, the federal government will ban the use of 60-watt and 40-watt incandescent light bulbs. The light bulb has become a symbol in the fight for consumer freedom and against unnecessary governmental interference into the lives of the American people.

In 2007, Congress passed and President George W. Bush signed into law an energy bill that placed stringent efficiency requirements on ordinary incandescent bulbs in an attempt to have them completely eliminated by 2014. The law phased out 100-watt and 75-watt incandescent bulbs last year.

Proponents of government-imposed efficiency standards and regulations will say, “So what? There are still plenty of lighting options on the shelves at Home Depot; we’re saving families money; and we’re reducing harmful climate change emissions.”

The “so what” is that the federal government is taking decisions out of the hands of families and businesses, destroying jobs, and restricting consumer choice in the market. We all have a wide variety of preferences regarding light bulbs. It is not the role of the federal government to override those preferences with what it believes is in our best interest.

Families understand how energy costs impact their lives and make decisions accordingly. Energy efficiency has improved dramatically over the past six decades — long before any national energy efficiency mandates.

If families and firms are not buying the most energy-efficient appliance or technology, it is not that they are acting irrationally; they simply have budget constraints or other preferences such as comfort, convenience, and product quality. A family may know that buying an energy-efficient product will save them money in the long term, but they have to prioritize their short-term expenses. Those families operating from paycheck to paycheck may want to opt for a cheaper light bulb and more food instead of a more expensive light bulb and less food.

Some may read this and think: Chill out—it’s just a light bulb. But it’s not just a light bulb. Take a look at the Department of Energy’s Federal Energy Management Program. Basically anything that uses electricity or water in your home or business is subject to an efficiency regulation.

When the market drives energy efficiency, it saves consumers money. The more the federal government takes away decisions that are better left to businesses and families, the worse off we’re going to be.

Why do you think they call him "kill"-o-watt

All our lives, we had fluorescent in school, at work and in many public places. No one said boo. All of a sudden, people are throwing up, have headaches....etc etc because of the mercury contaminated curly craps. So, we are saving money and we’re reducing harmful climate change emissions?  But the new bulbs are making us sick and contain mercury?  So what is wrong with that picture?

There are some alternatives:

A Manufacturer Found a Loophole Around That Incandescent Light Bulb Ban

Home Depot’s Cree 60W Equivalent Soft White (2700K) A19 Dimmable LED Light Bulb

Obamacare and Review of 2013 Should Remind Us We Are Not 'Subjects'; We Are People

By Laura Hollis, CP Op-Ed Contributor to the Christian Post writes:

The unveiling of the dictatorial debacle that is Obamacare absolutely flabbergasts me. It is stunning on so many levels, but the most shocking aspect of it for me is watching millions of free Americans stand idly by while this man, his minions in Congress and his cheerleaders in the press systematically dismantle our Constitution, steal our money, and crush our freedoms.

The President, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid (with no small help from Justice John Roberts) take away our health care, and we allow it. They take away our insurance, and we allow it. They take away our doctors, and we allow it.They charge us thousands of dollars more a year, and we allow it. They make legal products illegal, and we allow it. They cripple our businesses, and we allow it.They announce by fiat that we must ignore our most deeply held beliefs – and we allow it.

Where is your spine, America?

Yes, I know people are complaining. I read the news on the internet. I read blogs. I have a Twitter feed. So what? People in the Soviet Union complained. People in Cuba complain. People in China complain (quietly). Complaining isn't the same thing as doing anything about it. In fact, much of the complaining that we hear sounds like resignation: Wow. This sucks. Oh well, this is the way things are. Too bad.

Perhaps you need reminding of a few important facts. Here goes:

1. The President is not a king. Barack Obama does not behave like a President, an elected official, someone who realizes that he works for us. He behaves like a king, a dictator – someone who believes that his own pronouncements have the force of law, and who thinks he can dispense with the law's enforcement when he deigns to do so. And those of us who object? How dare we? Racists!

And while he moves steadily "forward" with his plans to "fundamentally transform" the greatest country in human history, he distracts people with cheap, meaningless trivialities, like "free birth control pills"! (In fact, let's face it: this administration's odd obsession with sex in general - Birth control! Abortion! Sterilization! Gay guys who play basketball! -- is just plain weird. Since when did the leader of the free world care so much about how people have sex, who they have it with, and what meds they use when they have it? Does he have nothing more important to concern himself with?)

2. It isn't just a failed software program; it is a failed philosophy. People are marveling that Healthcare.gov was such a spectacular failure. Well, if one is only interested in it as a product launch, I've explained some of the reasons for that here. But the larger point is that it isn't a software failure, or even a product failure; it is a philosophy failure.

I have said this before: Obama is not a centrist; he is a central planner. And this – all of it: the disastrous computer program, the hundreds of millions of dollars wasted, the lies, the manipulation of public opinion, the theft of the public's money and property, and freedom (read insurance, and premiums, and doctors) -- IS what central planning looks like.

The central premise of central planning is that a handful of wunderkinds with your best interests at heart (yeah, right) know better than you what's good for you. The failure of such a premise and the misery it causes have been clear from the dawn of humanity. Kings and congressmen, dictators and Dear Leaders, potentates, princes and presidents can all fall prey to the same imperial impulses: "we know what is good the 'the people.'

And they are always wrong.

There is a reason that the only times communism has really been tried have been after wars, revolutions, or coups d'état. You have to have complete chaos for people to be willing to accept the garbage that centralized planning produces. Take the Soviet Union, for example. After two wars, famine, and the collapse of the Romanov dynasty, why wouldn't people wait in line for hours to buy size 10 shoes? Or settle for the gray matter that passed for meat in the grocery stores?

But communism's watered-down cousin, socialism, isn't much better. Ask the Venezuelans who cannot get toilet paper. Toilet paper. ¡Viva la Revolución!

Contrary to what so many who believe in a "living Constitution" say, the Founding Fathers absolutely understood this. That is why the Constitution was set up to limit government power. (Memo to the President: the drafters of the Constitution deliberately didn't say "what government had to do on your behalf.") They understood that that was the path to folly, fear, and famine.)

3. Obama is deceitful. Just as the collapse of the computer program should not surprise anyone, neither should we be shocked that the President lied about his healthcare plan. Have any of you been paying attention over the past few years? Obama has made no secret of his motivations or his methods. The philosophies which inspire him espouse deceit and other vicious tactics. (Don't take my word for it: read Saul Alinsky.) Obama infamously told reporter Richard Wolffe, "You know, I actually believe my own bullshit." He has refused to be forthcoming about his past (where are his academic records?). His own pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, told author Ed Klein, that Obama said to him, "You know what your problem is? You have to tell the truth."

Did Obama lie when he said dozens of times, "If you like you plan, you can keep it"? Of course he did. That's what he does.

4. The media is responsible. And had the media been doing their jobs, we would have known a lot of this much, much earlier.

The press is charged with the sacred responsibility of protecting the people from the excesses of government. Our press has been complicit, incompetent, or corrupt. Had they vetted this man in 2008, as they would have a Republican candidate, we would have known far more about him than we do, even now. Had they pressed for more details about Obamacare, Congress' feet would have been held to the fire. Had they done their jobs about Eric Holder, Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the IRS scandal, NSA spying - or any of the other myriad betrayals of the public trust that this administration has committed, Obama would likely have lost his 2012 reelection campaign. (A fact that even The Washington Post has tacitly acknowledged. Well done, fellas! Happy now?)

Instead, they turned a blind eye, even when they knew he was lying, abusing power, disregarding the limits of the Constitution. It was only when he began to spy on them, and when the lies were so blatant that the lowest of low-information voters could figure it out that they realized they had to report on it. (Even in the face of blatant, deliberate and repeated lies, The New York Times has the audacity to tell us that the President "misspoke.") They have betrayed us, abandoned us, and deceived us.

5. Ted Cruz was right. So was Sarah Palin. The computer program is a disaster. The insurance exchanges are a disaster. What's left? The healthcare system itself. And this, of necessity, will be a disaster, too.

Millions of people have lost their individual insurance plans. In 2015, millions more will lose their employer-provided coverage (a fact which the Obama administration also knew, and admitted elsewhere).

The exorbitant additional costs that Obamacare has foisted on unsuspecting Americans are all part of a plan of wealth confiscation and redistribution. That is bad enough. But it will not end there.

When the numbers of people into the system and the corresponding demand for care vastly exceed the cost projections (and they will, make no mistake), then the rationing will start. Not only choice at that point, but quality and care itself will go down the tubes. And then will come the decisions made by the Independent Payment Advisory Board about what care will be covered (read "paid for") and what will not.

That's just a death panel, put politely. In fact, progressives are already greasing the wheels for acceptance of that miserable reality as well. They're spreading the lie that it will be about the ability of the dying to refuse unwanted or unhelpful care. Don't fall for that one, either. It will be about the deaths that inevitably result from decisions made by people other than the patients, their families, and their physicians. (Perhaps it's helpful to think of their assurances this way: "If you like your end-of-life care, you can keep your end-of-life-care.")

6. We are not SUBJECTS. (or, Nice Try, the Tea Party Isn't Going Away). We have tolerated these incursions into our lives and livelihoods too long already. There is no end to the insatiable demand "progressives" have to remake us in their image. Today it is our insurance, our businesses, our doctors, our health care. Tomorrow some new crusade will be announced that enables them to take over other aspects of our formerly free lives.

I will say it again: WE ARE NOT SUBJECTS. Not only is the Tea Party right on the fiscal issues, but it appears that they are more relevant than ever. We fought a war once to prove we did not want to be the subjects of a king, and the Boston Tea Party was just a taste of the larger conflict to come. If some people missed that lesson in history class, we can give them a refresher.

The 2014 elections are a good place to start. Call your representative, your senator, your candidate and tell them: "We are not subjects. You work for us. And if the word "REPEAL" isn't front and center in your campaign, we won't vote for you. Period."

Marion Algier at Ask Marion Added:

Along with the ever worsening travesty and lies of ObamaCare, Americans are awakening to the nightmare of the Federal government’s ever-growing stranglehold that is destroying wealth-creation and promoting skyrocketing debt. The Fed’s central bank—no longer tied to a gold standard—channels low interest rates and trillions of dollars to Goldman Sachs et al., while the rest of America is jobless, under-employed, owing staggering college loans with more people than ever without healthcare is given a bag of broken glass.

Peggy Noonan recently summarized much of what is wrong this holiday season…. beginning with:  What's the political word of the year? For months journalists couldn't settle on how to describe the rollout of ObamaCare. "Failed," disastrous," "unsuccessful." In the past few weeks they've settled on "botched." References to the botched rollout have appeared in this paper, The Hill, NBC, Fox, NPR, the New Republic, the Washington Post and other media outlets. A botch, according to the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, Sixth Edition, is a "bungled piece of work"—to botch is... Or, as JT McFarland recently mentioned on Redeye, is it really just going as they planned… creating total chaos and destroying what was the best healthcare system in the world so they can then install a single-payer socialized medicine system to pretty much cement their (Progressive) control of every every aspect of our lives?!?  I vote it is the latter.

The Christmas Classic, ‘Twas the Night Before Christmas’ was completely reworked for our current national predicament by our friend Rock Peters Western Journalism. It is guaranteed to make you laugh and cry.

Video:  Twas the Night Before Christmas - 2013 Version

Lies of the Year… ‘If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance’ and ‘If your doctor, you can keep your doctor’ 

Whistle BLOWER- President Obama’s HALF sister comes FORTH!

Obamacare Should Remind Us We Are Not 'Subjects,' We Are People

Wednesday, December 25, 2013

Healed After 19 Years: A Christmas Eve Miracle

CBN.com/700Club: Easter weekend 1993, Ema McKinley lost her balance and fell from a storage loft at work. Her foot was lodged between boxes and her body hung upside down until a coworker found her and called 911. “My head hit something very hard and I did not come to until the next day.” remembers Ema.

As Ema healed from the wounds she received in the fall, she developed widespread reflex sympathetic dystrophy, known as RSD, a chronic and progressive nerve disorder that left her entire body in severe pain.  “I partnered up with God because this accident was bigger than I could handle and I knew that I needed to know Jesus more in my life now than ever before,” says Ema.

Eventually Ema was bound to a wheelchair. Cathy Ruggeberg has been her caregiver for the last 18years. “She could not walk at all she was in her wheel chair 24/7 with the exception of toileting and she’s been like that for many, many years.”

“Eventually that pain got so bad in that foot and in the left hand that the foot started to grow crooked.” says Ema.

Ema’s left hand closed into a fist she was unable to open. Her neck and spine twisted to the left leaving her body in an awkward and painful position.  Her son Jason, saw how hard life had become for his mother. “It was difficult to see her just doing daily things. You could see the pain in her face,” says Jason. “It’s hard to see somebody go through that, much less a family member.”

Through the years Ema maintained a positive attitude despite her painful situation. Cathy Ruggeberg remembers, “No matter how rough her life was physically she’s always had a bright smile on her face and always been so warm and encouraging and the other thing I’ve never seen waver is her faith.”

“I kept pressing forward each and every day, knowing that Jesus was going to give me that strength; that He was going to be there for me and He never let me down. He was there for me,” says Ema.

Blood clots formed in her legs, which posed life threatening issues. Doctors wanted to amputate both of  her legs, but Ema refused. “I never gave up. I kept praying and thanking God for my healing because I had that much faith in my Jesus to know that someday He was going to give me that healing.”

The night before Christmas Eve 2011, Ema fell out of her wheelchair. For eight hours she lay on the floor in excruciating pain, crying out to Jesus for help. Ema says that Jesus came into her room and reached out to touch her. 

“What I saw was the most awesome white robe,” says Ema. “I knew Who that was. Our human eyes can hardly look at it, it’s so bright white. I couldn’t see it, but I could feel that left foot going from this position to this position. Jesus was straightening out that crooked foot. I knew my neck was being straightened. My spine was being straightened. That left hand that had been a clinched fist for over 18 years – Jesus started to take those fingers and open them up. I could take that hand and I could flex it and use my fingers. Jesus was now kneeling on one knee right beside me and He extended His hand out to me, asking for mine.”

“And then we stood up together and even though the bones were sounding and cracking like crazy He still had a hold of my hands. Then I knew I had to start walking and use those feet and legs. And I did.”

Just a few hours later, Ema’s two sons and her grandchildren came over to celebrate Christmas Eve, unaware of the miracle their mother just experienced.
Jason remembers that day clearly. “I could see down the hallway a little bit, and here she comes walking and it’s like, ‘No way.’” “I hadn’t seen my mom out of a wheelchair since my wedding in 1993. At that moment everything I knew was different because she’s supposed to be in the chair but she’s walking.  It was a surreal moment seeing her walk. It’s like, it’s a miracle. There’s nothing else it could be.”

“We kind of got through hugging my two sons. I went over and grabbed those two grandsons, and I gave them a big hug for the first time in all those years,” says Ema.

That night Ema and her family were in awe of God’s love and power as they celebrated her Christmas miracle. Ema says the being able to stand and walk on her own has changed her life forever. Although she still has RSD symptoms, she and her family believe that God is in control.

Today with her son Jason, Ema joyfully shares her story of how Jesus heard her prayers and forever changed her life on Christmas Eve.

“This is such a story of hope. This miracle is not just for my mom; not just for our family, but it’s for everybody,” says Jason. “Whatever difficulties people may be facing, there’s always hope.”

“Jesus has never let me down,” says Ema. “He has always been there for me. In His Word it says He will never leave us or forsake us and I knew that and I trust His word. I’m no longer the crooked lady with the broken body in the wheelchair. I’m known as the lady with the Christmas miracle!”

Saturday, December 21, 2013

Second-Hand Smoke Proven Harmless -- Again

EIB/RUSH: James Delingpole writing in I don't know what.  I did not print out.  But I've heard the name Delingpole, and I know he's got credibility.  The bottom line is that passive smoking, i.e., for those of you in Rio Linda, secondhand smoke, does not give you lung cancer. 

Now, this is something that I, El Rushbo, have known instinctively my whole life.  Ever since the anti-smoking zealots got geared up, they have tried to pass off this silly idea that secondhand smoke can cause cancer as well, and it's always been laughable. The tiniest bit of common sense will tell you it couldn't.  But there were enough people scared about it, that believed it, but there's a new report publicized by -- are you ready? -- the American Cancer Institute.  (gasping)  Which will come as no surprise to anyone with a shred of integrity, decency, or intelligence, who's looked into the origins of the environmental tobacco smoke crisis. 

"It was a decade ago that the British Medical Journal, published the results of a massive, long-term survey into the effects of second-hand tobacco smoke."  Do you remember we had that survey and it got buried?  We publicized it.  UN, any number, there was no danger whatsoever attached to secondhand smoke.  Might not like it, might make you uncomfortable.  It was not and did not and could not make you sick.  And it got buried. 

"Between 1959 and 1989 two American researchers named James Enstrom and Geoffrey Kabat surveyed no few than 118,094 Californians. Fierce anti-smoking campaigners themselves, they began the research because they wanted to prove once and for all what a pernicious, socially damaging habit smoking was. Their research was initiated by the American Cancer Society and supported by the anti-smoking Tobacco Related Disease Research Program.

"At least it was at first. But then something rather embarrassing happened. Much to their surprise, Kabat and Enstrom discovered that exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (i.e. passive smoking), no matter how intense or prolonged, creates no significantly increased risk of heart disease or lung cancer."

Now, again, it's important to remember that the two guys who started this research were fervent anti-smoking zealots, and they were out to prove that secondhand smoke killed.  It didn't take 'em long to find out that not only did it not kill anybody, it didn't matter.  It didn't make anybody sick.  It didn't matter.  And then similar conclusions were reached by the World Health Organization, which concluded in 1998 after a seven-year study that the correlation between secondhand smoking and lung cancer was not statistically significant. 

That got buried, but we have always kept it available.  We can bring it back to life any time we want at RushLimbaugh.com.  So now we've got three different studies proving that there is no cancer risk, no heart disease risk to secondhand smoke.  Now, you might be saying, "So what, Rush? If people still don't like it, what, are you grassroots to bring back smoking in public?"  No, no. I'm not that unrealistic. 

Again, the lesson here is that you were lied to by a bunch of leftist busybodies. You were lied to in order to be forced to live your life the way they wanted you to.  You were being denied freedom.  You were being lied to and manipulated into believing something that wasn't true so as to impact the way you and everybody else lives, and you were converted into a member of the army of the anti-smoking who would go out and harass anybody else who smoked.  You were lied to, to further the lies of a bunch of zealots. 

That's the important point here, and who are these people?  They're leftists.  I don't care whether you're Phil Robertson or whoever. They will try, they will do whatever, they will lie to you. But their attempt, their effort is to control the way you live and what you think.  Now there's medical news today. I kid you not.  "Apple-a-Day as Effective as Statins" for whatever statins do.  What are statins for, cholesterol? Yeah, an apple.  Medical research.

I got the news. It's a news story.  An apple a day is far more effective than whatever prescription medicine you're taking.  But apples don't come with prescriptions and doctors can't be paid to tell you to eat one.  Well, I guess they could.  But who's gonna do it?  And you can't eat apples 'cause Meryl Streep said they're putting Alar on 'em, which is killing our kids. It was a big story on 60 Minutes. 

This stuff, I don't know, it's a bugaboo with me, folks. Because the left is made up of busybodies, or worse. Do you realize how many people are going through life believing things that aren't true, and it's affecting their enjoyment of life? It's affecting the way they raise their kids. It's affecting the way they live themselves.  It's so unnecessary.  That's what bugs me about it. 

Gotta take a break.  Well, that's for another day. 

I was gonna talk about cigars and cigar smoking, but I'm not gonna make this personal.


Friday, December 20, 2013

Turning back time: ageing reversed in mice

No longer inevitable, for mice <i>(Image: Design Pics Inc/Rex)</i>

Aging…No longer inevitable, for mice (Image: Design Pics Inc/Rex)

New Scientist: Imagine if we could turn back time. A team that has identified a new way in which cells age has also reversed the process in old mice whose bodies appear younger in several ways. The discovery has implications for understanding age-related diseases including cancers, neurodegenerative disorders and diabetes.

One way all mammalian cells produce energy is via aerobic respiration, in which large molecules are broken down into smaller ones, releasing energy in the process. This mainly occurs in the mitochondria – the "powerhouses" of cells. Mitochondria carry their own genomes, but some of the cellular components needed for respiration are produced partly by the nucleus, so the two must coordinate their activities.

As we age, mitochondrial function declines, which can lead to conditions such as Alzheimer's disease and diabetes. To investigate why this decline occurs, Ana Gomes at Harvard Medical School and her colleagues compared the levels of messenger RNA (mRNA) – molecules that convey genetic information around a cell – for the cellular components needed for respiration in the skeletal muscle of 6 and 22-month-old mice.

They found that the level of the mRNA in the nucleus did not change much between the young and old mice, whereas those from the mitochondria appeared to decline with age.

Similar changes were seen in mice that lacked a protein called SIRT1 – high levels of which are associated with calorie restriction and an increased lifespan. These mice also had higher levels of a protein produced by the nucleus called hypoxia inducible factor (HIF-1α).

What was going on? It appears that communication between the nucleus and the mitochondria depends on a cascade of events involving HIF-1α and SIRT1. As long as SIRT1 levels remain high and the two genomes communicate well, ageing is kept at bay. But another molecule called NAD+ keeps SIRT1 on the job; crucially, the amount of NAD+ present in the cell declines with age, though no one knows why, leading to a breakdown in communication.

Turning back time

The team wondered if this aspect of ageing could be reversed by increasing the amount of SIRT1 in the cells. To find out if that was possible, they injected 22-month-old mice twice daily for a week with nicotinamide mono nucleotide (NMN) – a molecule known to increase levels of NAD.

At the end of the week, markers of muscular atrophy and inflammation had dropped and the mice had even developed a different muscle type more common in younger mice. Together, these features were characteristic of 6-month-old mice.

"We found that modulating this pathway can improve mitochondrial function and age-associated pathologies in old mice, and therefore it gives a new pathway to target that can reverse some aspects of ageing," says Gomes.

"This paper clearly demonstrates that NAD+ production is a sort of 'Achilles' heel', [a lack of which] significantly contributes to ageing, and also that this problem can be ameliorated by boosting NAD+ production with key intermediates, such as NMN," says Shin-Ichiro Imai, at Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, Missouri.

Journal reference: Cell, DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.11.037

Thursday, December 19, 2013

Rep. Suzan DelBene’s Husband, Kurt DelBene, Chosen to Fix HealthCare.gov

The Forge:  Good news! The Obama administration just hired on former Microsoft executive Kurt DelBene, who coincidentally is also married to Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-WA)12%, to fix HealthCare.gov.

He’s certainly qualified for the task. HHS Secreatry Kathleen said, “Kurt has proven expertise in heading large, complex technology teams and in product development.”

He will be an “unpaid senior adviser,” but with a wife who is a strong Obamacare supporter, it’s clear he has an incentive to help Obamacare to have some semblance of workability, an impression Americans are swiftly losing. In November, his wife put out a press release stating:

One of our top priorities must be ensuring that the Affordable Care Act works for Washingtonians, and I’m committed to doing what it takes to make sure that all of my constituents have access to affordable, comprehensive health coverage.

But Obamacare won’t accomplish that.

It will, however, cause immediate and long term damage to millions of Americans. People are losing the plans they liked and watching helplessly as their premiums and deductibles skyrocket. Nothing Mr. DelBene accomplishes as a government bureaucrat will improve Obamacare itself, though he may help to salvage the healthcare website.

For years, conservatives have accurately predicted the adverse effects of the government take over of healthcare by the left known as Obamacare. From the sweeping reality that it diminishes our freedom of choice by putting decision making in the hands of government bureaucrats, to the nitty-gritty of losing the plans we liked.

Kurt DelBene, accomplished and top-notch tech guy that he is, may be able to help Democrat members of Congress, like his wife, save face, but he won’t be able to help those Americans losing their freedom, choice, and affordable healthcare, because Obamacare will remain fundamentally flawed.

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

Stephen Moore: Hidden Obamacare Tax Will Cost Consumers Another $100-$500 a Year

Video: Stephen Moore: Hidden Obamacare Tax Will Cost Consumers Another $100-$500 a Year

Get ready for another hidden Obamacare tax...

Stephen Moore, economist and Wall Street Journal contributor, discussed the hidden Obamacare tax that will take effect in two weeks.

The hidden Obamacare tax will cost consumers $100-$500 a year and will take effect on January 1, 2014

Sunday, December 15, 2013

Yes, States Have the Constitutional Right to Nullify Obamacare

Capitalism Institute: Every effort to navigate the proper channels to repeal Obamacare have been thus far blocked by Democrats (and even some big government Republicans), despite practically everyone hating the oppressive legislation.

Naturally, states are considering other means by which to stop this economic disaster before it gets even worse.

South Carolina and Georgia have already jumped on board with a state-level model developed by the Tenth Amendment Center to effectively nullify Obamacare in their states. The template is even being applied outlaw the NSA from operating within Arizona.

Using this model to combat Obamacare, South Carolina and Georgia are prepared to “nullify” Obamacare by withholding the state’s personnel and resources the law depends on. It would be illegal for the state’s resources to contribute towards the law’s implementation. This is essentially how it works:

Nullification begins with a decision made in your state legislature to resist a federal law deemed to be unconstitutional. It usually involves a bill, passed by both houses and signed by your governor. In some cases, it might be approved by the voters of your state directly, in a referendum. It may change your state’s statutory law or it might even amend your state constitution. It is a refusal on the part of your state government to cooperate with, or enforce any federal law it deems to be unconstitutional.

Most of the “naysayers” will tell you that these nullification efforts are “illegal” because of the supremacy clause:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

However, those at the Tenth Amendment Center disagree:

The major argument used by those that oppose Nullification is the Constitution’s supremacy clause. But in fact, the arguments for the supremacy clause ARE the arguments for nullification.

They continue:

The major architects of the Constitution, and those that led the fight for its adoption, laid down what the supremacy clause meant during the ratifying conventions. By doing so, they defended state sovereignty, and set the stage for the negation of unconstitutional actions.

Judge Andrew Napolitano, a senior judicial and political analyst, recently confirmed that these efforts are, in fact, legal — and effective

[I]t will gut Obamacare because the federal government does not have the resources or the wherewithal […] to go into each of the individual states.

It was Alexander Hamilton who said, “but the laws of Congress are restricted to a certain sphere, and when they depart from this sphere, they are no longer supreme or binding.”

The TAC cites several other historic quotes from the New York, Pennsylvania, North Carolina ratifying conventions and the Federalist Papers demonstrating that the supremacy clause is — and was intended to be — a platform upon which we could hold an overbearing federal government “in check”:

[The Founders] established the means for the states to defend themselves and their citizens from a general government that exceeding its authority and that power is NULLIFICATION.

The nullification of overbearing, unconstitutional federal laws is essential to preserving our liberty. The Founders were certainly not ignorant of the consequences of letting a federal government run amok; thus, they crafted in our Constitution a fail-safe.

When Congress seems more interested in propelling us head-first into tyranny rather than protecting us from it, we have to take matters into our own hands.

The nullification efforts in South Carolina, Georgia, and Arizona are just the beginning.

You can help fight this country’s descent into despotism by sharing this article with your legislators, friends, family, and colleagues. Liberty is at risk with every passing generation. It is time to take action.

Friday, December 13, 2013

Pray For Jim Hoft Over At Gateway Pundit

JoshuaPundit: One of the long time fixtures of the blogosphere is Jim Hoft over at the renowned site Gateway Pundit. He also, as an aside, is a pretty nice and decent human being...and now, a victim of ObamaCare:

In August 2013 I became very sick with what I thought was a cold. After a few days I lost vision in my left eye and I checked into the hospital. I soon found out that what I thought was a summer cold was actually Strep bacteria poisoning my blood stream. The bacteria blinded my left eye, ate a hole through my heart, caused five strokes on both sides of my brain and forced the removal of my prosthetic left knee.

Dr. Lee was the surgeon assigned to perform open heart surgery. What was originally scheduled to last four hours ended up lasting twelve. My heart was severely damaged. Dr. Lee later told me the surgery was one of the most difficult of his career. He also said I only had a few days to live without the surgery.

Thanks to the excellent insurance I carried I was able to receive life-saving medical treatment at St. Louis University.

This week I found out I am going to lose my insurance. The company that carried me is leaving the Missouri market. I will have to find something else.

I am one of the millions who will be looking for new insurance. God willing, I will be able to keep my doctors at St. Louis University. I trust them. They saved my life. Please pray for me and the millions of working Americans who are going through this same ordeal.

Why is our government doing this to us?

Well Jim, it's because they feel they can..and because they don't feel they're our government, but that we're their cash cow.

Simply disgraceful.

Rest assured Jim that prayers for a refuah shlemiah, a complete a total recovery addressed to the Maker of us all are a given...and I'll see what I can do to add to the prayer circle, because there are lots of us who care about you and wish you the best.

UPDATE: Jim Hoft is holding a Wheel-In Obamacare protest this Saturday between 11 AM CT to Noon at Senator Claire McCaskill’s St. Louis office, located at 5850 Delmar Blvd, Ste. A, St. Louis, Missouri 63112. Jim will be leading the protest in his wheel chair, with the theme, Why is Our Government Punishing the American People-Give Us Back Our Healthcare!”.

More info here. 

Doctor Retires due to ObamaCare 

James Carville: Don’t Blame Republicans; Blame Obama 

Cancer and Obamacare Survivor, plus His Hero Audited – Interview

New Obamacare Bombshell - Rpt: No System Yet For Exchange Payment - The Kelly File 

Attention Main Stream Media. Regarding Obamacare… I Told You So!

All I Want for Christmas

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

Doctor Retires due to ObamaCare

Doctor Posts Newspaper Notice: Closing Due to Obamacare

Townhall- Cross-Posted at AskMarion: Obamacare realities just became a little more intense in the Bluegrass State. Requirements in the Affordable Care Act presented Kentucky Dr. Stephen Kiteck with obstacles he “just couldn’t overcome.”

This tweet helped uncover the story:

View image on Twitter

Twitter: Dara Bailey @darab_ic

They said it wouldn't happen.....wrong again.

7:21 PM - 8 Dec 2013

Dr. Kiteck verified the ad to Townhall Tuesday:

“It’s pretty basic really. The reason is that Obamacare requires electronic medical records and electronic prescribing and I simply don’t have the finances at this time to go into debt to provide that for my office, it would just be a complete new transfer of electronic equipment in my office for that.

So for me, at my age, I’m just not ready to go into financial debt. Of the 20,000 pages in there, probably up to 1,000 pages are about doctors' offices."

The Electronic Medical Records mandate requires an electronic overhaul by 2015 or penalization. Check out this visual of its implementation:




"I’ve got 6,000 records, some of them are two inches thick. It would just be basically impossible to scan all of these and put them on electronic medical records and very expensive, by the way,” said Dr. Kiteck, pointing to the many man hours of pay that an electronic overhaul would require.

“It’s a solo practice, I’m just a very small solo practice. I call myself a mom and pop practice,” Dr. Kiteck explained, “so I’ve had it for about twenty years here in Somerset, Kentucky.”

The ad ran for the sake of his customers, according to Dr. Kiteck, as a common courtesy to give patients a one-month notice,

“I just happened to start it out with that little notice there, because so many patients have questions why you’re doing it.”

Kiteck said his ad likely opened up a Pandora’s Box. But the truth is, the box had already been opened when Obamacare was signed into law, and the frightening effects are only beginning to fly out.

Breitbart: The notice closes with this message, "Dr. Kiteck wishes to thank all his patients that have visited his office over the past 20 years, and apologizes for this inconvenience."

Dr. Kiteck's office confirmed that he is indeed closing his practice and that he did publish the notice in the paper. Asked if he would agree to an interview, his receptionist indicated that he'd received many calls from the media but was not prepared to make any additional statement at this time.

There have been surveys which suggested a significant number of doctors might quit or retire early as a result of the new health law. A  2013 Deloitte Survey of U.S. Physicians found that 62 percent of doctors expected some of their colleagues to retire early.

Dr. Kiteck is a 64 year old board certified family physician with a good rating for patient satisfaction on healthgrades.com.

Update: Buzzfeed got through to Dr. Kiteck and he cites a specific reason for retiring, a requirement to use electronic medical records in his practice. That requirement was not part of Obamacare but was included in the stimulus act. Physicians must move to electronic records by 2015 and because of the way use is reported, that means mid-2014 is the deadline for a working system. Those who fail to meet the deadline are charged a fine of 1% (deducted from their reimbursements).

Video Report: Doctors quit on Obamacare

Tuesday, December 10, 2013

Fascist Bloomberg Pushes For Mandatory Flu Vaccines for Children

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton – the NoisyRoom – Cross-Posted at AskMarion

Looks like fascist Nanny Bloomberg intends to make good use of his final three weeks in office. For those of you hoping that Comrade de Blasio will reverse this or somehow be better, take your medication and get over it. Not. Gonna. Happen. Bloomberg wasn’t content with taking away salt, soft drinks or Styrofoam… He’s not content with $102 tolls to bring a delivery truck into New York or telling you that you can’t smoke… He’s not content with taxing and regulating the hell out of New Yorkers, or with claiming he knows better than the stupid riffraff that elected him… Oh no. Now he is mandating that our children get a yearly flu shot. If you love your family, get the hell out of New York. Under de Blasio this will seem like a walk in Gorky Park:

On Wednesday, with just three weeks to go until he leaves office, Mr. Bloomberg’s controversial Board of Health is set to vote on new rules that would force children as young as six months old to be immunized each year before December 31 if they attend licensed day care or pre-school programs.

“Young children have a high risk of developing severe complications from influenza. One-third of children under five in New York City do not receive an annual influenza vaccination, even though the vaccine safely and effectively protects them against influenza illness,” the Health Department said in a statement. “This mandate will help protect the health of young children, while reducing the spread of influenza in New York City.”


According to a Board of Health notice made public in September, influenza results in 20,000 hospitalizations and 30 to 150 deaths in children under 5 nation-wide each year.

Under the proposed rule, which had a public hearing in October, the vaccinations would be required “unless the vaccine may be detrimental to the child’s health, as certified by a physician licensed to practice medicine in this state, or the parent, parents, or guardian of a child hold genuine and sincere religious beliefs which are contrary to the practices herein required.”

One wonders why the jackbooted thuggery of enforcing flu shots in children? Surely there is nothing nefarious going on there, right? Did an outbreak of killer swine flu happen that I didn’t hear about? Is The Stand about to play out tomorrow? If so, Bloomberg should get the Walking Dude’s part down pat. And there’s more to this – he is pushing for a registry of certain individuals who have been admitted for mental evaluation or treatment:

With the clock running out on its final term, the Bloomberg administration is pushing two assertive new mandates through the city’s Board of Health.

The city Department of Health wants to require all children under age 5 in city-licensed day care programs receive annual flu vaccinations. And in a move with heightened relevance following the Washington Navy Yard massacre, the city is calling on hospitals to report personal details on patients admitted for psychosis to the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.

Both items are on the agenda for the next Board of Health meeting, on October 22.

The proposed rules follow the administration’s so-far thwarted effort to impose a ban on supersize sodas and other sugary drinks, which judges have ruled overreached the board’s powers. The members of the board are appointed by the mayor.

Under the new proposals, hospitals in the city would have to promptly report the identities of patients between the ages of 18 and 30 admitted for psychotic incidents. The city health agency intends to follow up with the patients to ensure they receive further treatment. Currently, fewer than half actually get such care.

“Without follow-up treatment, more than one quarter of these individuals will be expected to relapse and to be rehospitalized within one year,” the Department of Health explains in its plan. “Early, high-quality treatment can reduce the risk of relapse and increase chances for long-term remission.”

The department promises that the personal information collected – to include the patient’s name, age, gender, address, telephone number, insurance type and diagnosis – would be destroyed within 30 days. The remaining data would be made available for epidemiological studies.

A Department of Health spokesperson was not available for comment.

The collection of personal data on people with high risk of paranoia raises a red flag for Mark Heyrman, who teaches mental health law at the University of Chicago Law School.

“The more we say we will be collecting data on people who have mental illnesses, the more likely it is that mentally ill people will think that the information might eventually be used against them in some way,” said Heyrman. “The question is whether there will be enough positive effects to outweigh the fact that, as our friend Edward Snowden has shown us, our government is not particularly good at protecting its own privacy efforts.”

Hmmm. Considering gun confiscations have already begun in New York, you can add these individuals to the list of the ones who have their arms taken away. Screw the Constitution – screw the Second Amendment. The Politburo has spoken.

Many parents object to flu shots. There are suspicions that they are connected to autism. Some have life-threatening allergic reactions to them and other negative side affects. Some children die from them. According to a Board of Health notice made public in September, influenza results in 20,000 hospitalizations and 30 to 150 deaths in children under 5 nation-wide each year. But how many wind up in the hospital, ill or dead because of the shots?

Myself, I don’t take flu shots. For me, when I do, it causes me to get the flu or pneumonia. Some will say that is ridiculous. I don’t – it has happened to me every time. They can stuff their flu shots.

We were not mandated when we were kids to get all these shots. Now, if you don’t immunize your children for everything mandated, they kick them out of daycare or school altogether. The State is now basically telling you that your children belong to them. They may go home to you at night, but they are on loan and Big Brother is watching.

The flu is serious. It can kill you and does kill many people each year. There is no cure and no sure way to prevent it, except to stay healthy and when you get the flu to take care of yourself and go to a doctor if need be. Good luck with that under Obamacare. And here’s the dirty little secret the government isn’t telling you. Even if you get immunized, if a killer flu strain mutates into existence, chances are your shot will do nothing for it. So, why the big push?

Parents should be the final arbiter of whether their children get immunized for the flu or not. I expect Bloomberg to shove through more fascist crap before he exits stage left (and I do mean Left). Look for de Blasio to kick the Marxism into high gear and to radically increase such fascist moves as mandatory flu vaccines for children and lists for those who have received mental assistance. What do you expect from a Communist? Well done, New York. Bloomberg and de Blasio – fascists of a red feather, in lockstep together.

Monday, December 9, 2013

Judge Jeanine Pirro Slashes Obama for Incompetence and Indifference, Dec 7, 2013

This is the Judge's "Opening Statement" from Dec 7, 2013, "Justice with Judge Jeanine Pirro" show.

Video: Judge Jeanine Pirro Slashes Obama for Incompetence and Indifference, Dec 7, 2013

Judge Jeanine Pirro, Dec 7, 2013, tears into Obama and his minions for stupefying overreach and incompetence in implementing Obamacare. The price may be the very lives of Americans who cannot get the healthcare they had before Big Government's meddling. Further, Obama's spokespersons, especially Jay Carney, try to trivialize the crisis by claiming that only a small number of Americans, just 5%, will suffer. Small comfort.

How can these people be this incompetent you wonder?  Perhaps because of the Dirty Little Secret: Rationing is at Heart of ObamaCare and that the goal is Single-Payer Socialized Medicine for all but the Elite.

‘Cannibal Sandwiches’ Could Make For An Unhealthy Holiday ...

Cannibal Sandwiches Wisconsin

[Image via Shutterstock]

Inquisitor: Cannibal sandwiches might sound appealing to some folks, but officials warn that the odd holiday appetizer could send you running for the nearest hospital.

If you don’t live in Wisconsin, then cannibal sandwiches might sound like something found in a low-budget horror movie. According to Fox News, the concoction consists of raw ground beef positioned carefully on a cracker. These strange treats are often topped with onions.

Although the Center for Disease Control and Prevention previously warned folks not to eat the cannibal sandwiches because of the dangers associated with consuming raw meat, this apparently hasn’t stopped people from serving the dish in question to their family and friends. Some people never learn.

Officials said that over a dozen people were reportedly sickened by the appetizer last year alone. Milwaukee historian John Gurda explained that the cannibal sandwiches began as a tradition at funerals and holiday parties in Germany and Poland. However, the appetizer became increasingly obscure due to the dangers associated with eating raw meat.

ABC News reports that the dish is popular in certain regions of the Midwest, though it’s commonly found in southern Wisconsin around the holidays. In addition to E. coli infections, those with a fondness for the dish also have to worry about salmonella, listeria, and campylobacter.

Wisconsin Department of Health epidemic intelligent service officer Abbey Canon warned cannibal sandwich aficionados that ground beef should reach an internal temperature of at least 160 degrees in order to kill off any harmful bacteria. Otherwise, you’re putting others at risk. In short: Eat the appetizer in question at your own peril.

Despite efforts from officials to spread the word about the dish, some people insist on scarfing down raw meat on a cracker. In fact, six people who were seriously sickened by cannibal sandwiches said they wouldn’t have a problem eating the appetizer again.

According to Top News, the CDC previously encountered over 50 cases of cannibal sandwich-related sickness in 1972, 1978 and, 1994 through Wisconsin. Although officials tried their best to warn folks about the inherent dangers of eating raw meat, people who simply adore the dish can’t help themselves around the holidays.

“In spite of progressing effort deliberations tending to the dangers connected with expending undercooked or crude ground meat, this territorial occasion convention proceeds to be connected with flare-ups,” the CDC said in a recent statement.

What do you think about Wisconsin residents scarfing down cannibal sandwiches during the holidays? Would you risk your health to try one of these peculiar appetizers?


Saturday, December 7, 2013

Harry Reid: Obamacare 'Costs Me About $4,500 More'

Image: Harry Reid: Obamacare 'Costs Me About $4,500 More'

NewsMax: President Barack Obama may have famously promised his signature healthcare plan would cost consumers less money — but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is proof that it's often not true.

"Under Obamacare, my insurance costs me about $4,500 more than it did before," Reid told the Reno Gazette Journal. "Yes, because it is age-related and it wasn't like that before."
Reid, while noting that 150 million families get insurance through their employers, "so should all federal employees."

Reid's comments came while he denied a CNN story claiming he is the only top congressional leader to exempt some of his staff from having to buy coverage through the Obamacare exchanges.

"I followed the Affordable Care Act,” Reid said. “It is the law. The law says that if you have committee staff, leadership staff, they stay where they are. If you have other staff, which is most everyone, they go to the exchanges."

Reid is worth $2.8 to $6.2 million, according to an OpenSecrets.org report, so he would not qualify for subsidies that would lower his Obamacare insurance costs.

But his rate hike is an eye-opener after promises made by people like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who told Meet the Press last year that "everybody would have lower rates" under Obamacare.

And the healthcare rate increases under ObamaCare have been eye-openers for not only the rich, but for many in the middle class and after all is said and done there will be as many uninsured Americans as before only now the government controls one sixth of the U.S. budget through healthcare as well as everyone’s healthcare options.  Wake-up America, the outcome of the next two elections will be the only chance to change this.  Time to oust the Harry Reids, Nancy Pelosis and Barack Obama’s

Pelosi denied to The Weekly Standard in a later report that she'd made the statement, saying she doesn't "remember saying that everybody in the country would have a lower premium."
But a study earlier this year by two members of the American Academy of Actuaries found that tens of millions will see higher insurance costs, reports Forbes, with or without the subsidies — and just like Harry Reid.

James Carville: Don’t Blame Republicans; Blame Obama

CapitalismInstitute: The roll-out of Obamacare has been nothing short of a disaster. Naturally, the Obama Administration has pathetically tried to pin the blame on Republicans.

But, even James Carville, a top Democratic strategist, says Obamacare was a “self-inflicted … disaster.”

Blind party loyalty should never trump facts and Carville demonstrated this in an interview with Fox Business Network recently.

The Washington Examiner reports:

The rollout of this has been awful, and it didn’t have to be that way at all. I think the president has himself to blame as much as anybody. I don’t think he was done in, in this instance by the Republicans, or done in by the media, done in by anything.

While Carville (mistakenly) believes that Obamacare is “going to get better” with time, he is right about one thing: The roll-out of Obamacare was a “massive mess-up” and no one else is to blame but Obama.

Carville is also a little off on the “massive mess-up" as well… It’s more like the “planned dirty Secret behind” ObamaCare,,, rationing, that no one’s talking about and that the goal is Single-Payer Socialized Medicine for all but the elite, but again, either way it all falls into the lap of Obama and the Democrats… not the Republicans, but as long as the media plays the lap dog for the administration, you won’t get the straight scoop from the mainstream media news.

Carville continued:

I look at these polls, and I got to tell you, I think it is all self-inflicted. I think this rollout, which I think they got to get right, was a disaster; it was a joke.

Carville joins the rest of the American people in recognizing Obamacare for what it is: a joke.

He addressed Obama’s “if you like it, you can keep it” lie:

Well, the truth of the matter is, it could be said that he could have — he could have said it a lot more elegantly than he did. …

And there was a way to talk about, you know, how many people would get to keep their health insurance in a way that wasn’t causing this much trouble.

In other words: You should avoid lying to the American people about the consequences of your economically catastrophic law. To say the least, it could “[cause] some grief.”

Even the Obama Administration’s long-time allies are realizing that Obamacare has been a disaster – and no one else is to blame except Obama. If you agree, “recommend” this article on Facebook, Twitter and forward it to help spread the word.

Wednesday, December 4, 2013

New Obamacare Bombshell - Rpt: No System Yet For Exchange Payment - The Kelly File

Video: New Obamacare Bombshell - Rpt: No System Yet For Exchange Payment - The Kelly File

My fellow citizens… Nobody is this incompetent of stupid!! This is all part of the plan.  The plan has always been to make this roll out and the actual process so horrendous that they can jump in at the last minute and fix it… creating a single-payer plan, which is socialized medicine, which they wanted in the first place so they can control every aspect of your life, including who lives and dies and when.

Don’t fall for this.  Clean house in the 2014 and 2016 Elections.  Do your homework.  Elect people who are not part of the Washington DC system and are willing to fight for you.  And replace everyone who voted for ObamaCare or was associated with the Obama Administration!!

The Dirty Secret Behind ObamaCare No One’s Talking About

Attention Main Stream Media. Regarding Obamacare… I Told You So!

Wake-Up… ObamaCare Eliminates Your Plan by Design

Millennials Abandon Obama and Obamacare

A majority of America's youngest adults would vote to recall the president.

(JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images)

National Journal: Young Americans are turning against Barack Obama and Obamacare, according to a new survey of millennials, people between the ages of 18 and 29 who are vital to the fortunes of the president and his signature health care law.

The most startling finding of Harvard University's Institute of Politics: A majority of Americans under age 25 -- the youngest millennials -- would favor throwing Obama out of office.

The survey, part of a unique 13-year study of the attitudes of young adults, finds that America's rising generation is worried about its future, disillusioned with the U.S. political system, strongly opposed to the government's domestic surveillance apparatus, and drifting away from both major parties. "Young Americans hold the president, Congress and the federal government in less esteem almost by the day, and the level of engagement they are having in politics are also on the decline," reads the IOP's analysis of its poll. "Millennials are losing touch with government and its programs because they believe government is losing touch with them."

The results blow a gaping hole in the belief among many Democrats that Obama's two elections signaled a durable grip on the youth vote.

Indeed, millennials are not so hot on their president.

Obama's approval rating among young Americans is just 41 percent, down 11 points from a year ago, and now tracking with all adults. While 55 percent said they voted for Obama in 2012, only 46 percent said they would do so again.

When asked if they would want to recall various elected officials, 45 percent of millennials said they would oust their member of Congress; 52 percent replied "all members of Congress" should go; and 47 percent said they would recall Obama. The recall-Obama figure was even higher among the youngest millennials, ages 18 to 24, at 52 percent.

While there is no provision for a public recall of U.S. presidents, the poll question revealed just how far Obama has fallen in the eyes of young Americans.

IOP director Trey Grayson called the results a "sea change" attributable to the generation's outsized and unmet expectations for Obama, as well as their concerns about the economy, Obamacare and government surveillance.

The survey of 2,089 young adults, conducted Oct. 30 through Nov. 11, spells trouble for the Affordable Care Act. The fragile economics underpinning the law hinge on the willingness of healthy, young Americans to forgo penalties and buy health insurance.

According to the poll, 57 percent of millennials disapprove of Obamacare, with 40 percent saying it will worsen their quality of care and a majority believing it will drive up costs. Only 18 percent say Obamacare will improve their care. Among 18-to-29-year-olds currently without health insurance, less than one-third say they're likely to enroll in the Obamacare exchanges. 

More than two-thirds of millennials said they heard about the ACA through the media. That's a bad omen for Obamacare, given the intensive coverage of the law's botched rollout. Just one of every four young Americans said they discussed the law with a friend or through social media. Harvard's John Della Volpe, who conducted the poll, said the president has done a poor job explaining the ACA to young Americans.


Republican and Democratic leaders should find little solace in the results. The survey said that 33 percent of young Americans consider themselves Democrats and 24 percent identify with the GOP. The largest and growing segment is among independents, 41 percent of the total.

Democrats' advantage among young voters is fading. Among the oldest millennials (ages 25 to 29), Democrats hold a 16-point lead over the GOP: 38 percent say they're Democrats, and 22 percent call themselves Republicans. Among the youngest of this rising generation (ages 18 to 24), the gap is just 6 points, 31 percent for Democrats and 25 percent for Republicans.

Approval ratings of Congress have declined steeply in the past few years, with congressional Democrats now at 35 percent and congressional Republicans at just 19 percent.

Young blacks say they are much less likely to vote in the 2014 midterm election than they were in November 2009, signaling a worrisome level of engagement among a key Democratic constituency.

In addition to health care, domestic spying is an issue that puts Obama on the wrong side of the rising generation. While split on whether Edward Snowden is a "patriot" or a "traitor" for revealing Obama's surveillance programs, strong majorities of 18-to-29-year-olds oppose the government collecting information from social networks, Web-browsing histories, email, GPS locations, telephone calls, and text messages.  

College loans are a big issue with young Americans, too. Nearly six of 10 called student debt a major problem, and another 22 percent called it a minor one. Seventy percent said their financial situation played into their decision whether to attend college.

Respondents were given a list of options for shrinking the nation's debt. Majorities favored suggestions to tax the rich, cut foreign economic aid in half, slash the nuclear-warhead arsenal, and reduce food stamps.

The results conform with a story I did this summer with the help of the IOP ("The Outsiders: How Can Millennials Change Washington If They Hate It?"), arguing that while Millennials are deeply committed to public service they don't see government as an efficient way to improve their lives or their communities.

The IOP report issued today said: "This is not to say that young Americans are rejecting politics, the role of government and the promise of America more generally. They are sending a message to those in power that for them to re-engage in government and politics, the political process must be open, collaborative and have the opportunity for impact -- and not one that simply perpetuates well-worn single issue agendas."

The survey was conducted online. The National Journal generally refrains from covering online-only polls but has made past exceptions. In this case, Harvard's IOP survey uniquely focuses on millennials with accumulated data set and a credible polling operation.

(Find full poll results here: http://www.iop.harvard.edu/)