Obamacare = Anti-Gun

imported post

Obamacare is planned for a vote in the House this weekend, onSunday 3/21/10. This week could be our last chance to stop this legislation. Obamacare may affect gun owners, Gun Owners of America has released alerts explaining the dangers of socialized healthcare to firearm owners (links below explain better than I can). The Dems. in the House of Reps. are planning to use a budget trick called “reconciliation” to pass it, but they're also considering using a concept called "deem & pass" as a backup. Neither of these ideas are Constitutional but they’re going to force it anyway because they know Obamacare is illegal, the people don’t want it, and would be filibustered in the Senate if it followed the normal legislative path.

It's in our interest to pressure Congress to stop this from passing. I know we can’t all contact every Representative, but we don’t have to. A man by the name of Dick Morris, a political strategist & author (he’s been on Sean Hannity's show & Newsmax). He’s put together 31 Democrat Representatives that are “on the fence” about Obamacare, and listed their names and D.C. phone numbers on the front page of his website (linked below), so people can Call and pressure them to stop Obamacare. Their district zip codes are also available so we can email them if preferred (I‘ve listed them below). The reason is, the Congressional email system won’t allow messages through without a proper zip code (I‘d advise keeping yourself anonymous if you email).

Also, Dick Morris is working with an organization called the League of American Voters, who's been running TV adds in each of the "swing" Congressman's districts to pressure them to vote against Obamacare. The TV adds seem to be working, but they need donations to continue running them (a sample of which is on their front page). Everything is linked below. Let’s keep the pressure on by calling, emailing, and helping to keep the TV adds running. (D.C. phone numbers listed below as well)



Education Links:

G.O.A. article explaining dangers of Obamacare to gun owners - http://gunowners.org/a110409.htm

G.O.A. article explaining dangers of Reconciliation - http://gunowners.org/a022510.htm


G.O.A. article about "deem & pass" scheme - http://gunowners.org/a031610.htm


TownHall.com article "Obamacare May Target Gun Owners" - http://townhall.com/columnists/Jill...rget_gun_owners


Video of Dick Morris explaining Danger of Obamacare & Reconciliation - http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid20971858001?bclid=22770165001&bctid=68367790001

Video of Dick Morris explaining the Urgency of stopping Obamacare -

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid20971858001?bclid=22770165001&bctid=70283645001


Video- Dick Morris Update on Obamacare Vote - http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid20971858001?bclid=22770165001&bctid=72285478001

Video- Rep. Steve King (R) discussing Obamacare Vote - http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid20971858001?bclid=22770165001&bctid=72360404001

Sean Hannity's Chart of House Dem. Healthcare Stances -->
http://beta.hannity.com/pages/where-your-representative-stands-on-obama-care




Resources:

Dick Morris website with 31 Democrat Congressmen’s names & phone numbers - http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/

League of American Voters website (running TV adds against Obamacare / needs donations) - http://leagueofamericanvoters.com/home.aspx

U.S. House of Reps., List of Congressmen by Name & links to websites (for emails) -http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml




31 “swing” Congressmen’s District Zip Codes for emails:

Harry Mitchell - 85268

Gabrielle Giffords - 85603

Ann Kirkpatrick - 86001

Jerry McNerney - 95240

John Salazar - 81520

Jim Himes - 06611

Alan Grayson - 32726

Bill Foster - 60510

Baron Hill - 47150

Mark Schauer - 49201

Gary Peters - 48340

Dina Titus - 89005

Carol Shea-Porter - 03820

Tim Bishop - 11727

John Hall - 10566

Bill Owens - 13601

Mike Arcuri - 13045

Dan Maffei - 13201

Earl Pomeroy - 58701

Steven Driehaus - 45239

Mary Jo Kilroy - 43123

Zach Space - 43701

Kathy Dahlkemper - 16501

Patrick Murphy - 19030

Christopher Carney - 17801

Paul Kanjorski - 18603

John Spratt - 29108

Tom Perriello - 22901

Alan Mollohan - Standard email address, no zip code needed

Nick Rahall - 25901

Steve Kagen - 54115



31 “swing” Congressmen’s DC phone numbers:

Harry Mitchell - (202) 225-2190

Gabrielle Giffords - (202) 225-2542

Ann Kirkpatrick - (202) 225-2315

Jerry McNerney - (202) 225-1947

John Salazar - (202)-225-4761

Jim Hines - (202) 225-5541

Alan Grayson - (202) 225-2176

Bill Foster - (202) 225-2976

Baron Hill - (202) 225 5315

Mark Schauer - (202) 225-6276

Gary Peters - (202) 225-5802

Dina Titus - (202) 225-3252

Carol Shea-Porter - (202) 225-5456

Tim Bishop - (202) 225-3826

John Hall - (202) 225-5441

Bill Owens - (202) 225-4611

Mike Arcuri - (202) 225-3665

Dan Maffei - (202) 225-3701

Earl Pomneroy - (202) 225-2611

Steven Driehaus - (202) 225-2216

Mary Jo Kilroy - (202) 225-2015

Zach Space - (202) 225-6265

Kathy Dahlkemper - (202) 225-5406

Patrick Murphy - (202) 225-4276

Christopher Carney - (202) 225-3731

Paul Kanjorski - (202) 225-6511

John Spratt - (202) 225-5501

Tom Perriello - (202) 225-4711

Alan Mollohan - (202) 225-4172

Nick Rahall - (202) 225-3452

Steve Kagen - (202) 225-5665

imported post

You watch. They ARE gonna shove this crap down our throats. They will.

I fight every way I know, and will NOT quit. I will refuse it afterward some way.....but it IS coming. Get ready.:cuss:

imported post

DOC: "Mr. Jones, we have a few questions we need answered if you don't mind."
MAN: "Ok."
DOC: "Do you drive to work?"
MAN: "Yes."
DOC: "What kind of vehicle do you use?"
MAN: "An SUV - Ford Excursion".
DOC: (notes answer) "How many miles to work?"
MAN: "Oh, I'd say 30+."
DOC: (notes answer) "Where do you eat lunch?"
MAN: "Chinese carry out, Wendy's, sometimes a Mexican place."
DOC: (notes answer) "Do you fish?"
MAN: "Yes, occasionally."
DOC: (notes answer) "Hunt?"
MAN: "Yes."
DOC: (notes answer) "You have guns in the house?"
MAN: "Yes."
DOC: (notes answer with comments) "What kind of guns?"
MAN: "Shotguns, rifles, handguns."
DOC: (more comments noted) "Handguns? How do you store them?"
MAN: "In my safe except for the one I keep for protection."
DOC: "You keep a loaded gun out in the open?" (makes lots of notes)
MAN: "Well not entirely in the open, but yes.. it is available to me should I need it."
DOC: "Out in the open? Are there children in the house?" (lots of notes)
MAN: "Sure. I have three young kids."
DOC: "You have young children and you have a loaded gun unsecured in your home?"
MAN: "Of course. How would I be able to protect them if I didn't?"
DOC: "Ok Mr. Jones. I think we have everything we need. Thank you for coming in."

(Man leaves the doctor's office)

DOC: "Betty, get me the Child Protective Services on the phone. I think we have a dangerous situation here.

imported post

That is a real hypothetical progression but I have not heard recently - within the year - of anecdotes suggesting that it is being pursued.

I've seen a number of MDs for initial visits recently and none have been so intrusive. I did have a most satisfying conversation with IIRC an officer of a nearby county medical association that plainly set out his conservative principles.

imported post

Master Doug Huffman wrote:

That is a real hypothetical progression but I have not heard recently - within the year - of anecdotes suggesting that it is being pursued.

I've seen a number of MDs for initial visits recently and none have been so intrusive. I did have a most satisfying conversation with IIRC an officer of a nearby county medical association that plainly set out his conservative principles.

Click to expand...

Considering how hard Obama, Pelosi, and Reid have tried to pass this monstrosity without the public knowing what's in it, I have no doubt that this Obamacare thing will be detrimental to gun owners in some way.

Think about these possibilities:

• Gun owners could face higher premiums for having firearms in the home.
• The Environmental and Child Welfare agencies could team up and make it a criminal offense to store ammo in homes with children, citing health risk from exposure to lead.
• Government could impose mandatory firearm registration to recieve health care coverage.

I'm sure more could be thought up. The liberals in our governmentcan be creative rascals when the want to be.

All of these may be un-constitutioal, but what do the Dems care about the Constitution? The public option included in Obama care is un-constitutional, in itself.

imported post

Task Force 16 wrote:

Master Doug Huffman wrote:

That is a real hypothetical progression but I have not heard recently - within the year - of anecdotes suggesting that it is being pursued.

I've seen a number of MDs for initial visits recently and none have been so intrusive. I did have a most satisfying conversation with IIRC an officer of a nearby county medical association that plainly set out his conservative principles.

Click to expand...

Considering how hard Obama, Pelosi, and Reid have tried to pass this monstrosity without the public knowing what's in it, I have no doubt that this Obamacare thing will be detrimental to gun owners in some way.

Think about these possibilities:

• Gun owners could face higher premiums for having firearms in the home.
• The Environmental and Child Welfare agencies could team up and make it a criminal offense to store ammo in homes with children, citing health risk from exposure to lead.
• Government could impose mandatory firearm registration to recieve health care coverage.

I'm sure more could be thought up. The liberals in our governmentcan be creative rascals when the want to be.

All of these may be un-constitutioal, but what do the Dems care about the Constitution? The public option included in Obama care is un-constitutional, in itself.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. More harm in the name of good has been done to people than we can imagine. Once that camel's nose is under the medical care tent, all manner of insidious mischief will follow.

imported post

Except this isn't the nose of the camel but rather the entire back-end and you know what that camel is going to do in our tent once it gets its butt in there....

imported post

deepdiver wrote:

Except this isn't the nose of the camel but rather the entire back-end and you know what that camel is going to do in our tent once it gets its butt in there....

Click to expand...

Camel? I thought it was a jackass.

imported post

deepdiver wrote:

Except this isn't the nose of the camel but rather the entire back-end and you know what that camel is going to do in our tent once it gets its butt in there....

Click to expand...

You've got that right.

imported post

Dems. in House started reconciliation process on Monday. Pelosi pushing for vote as early as Saturday 3/20/10.

imported post

What is being contemplated by Pelosi is basically a smokescreen whereby the item being voted on will be a slate of proposed amendments to the Senate bill which, if they pass, will be sent to the Senate as a seperate bill to be debated there. But also if they pass, then according to the "rule of debate" formulated by the House Rules Committtee the Senate bill will be "deemed" to have passed and will be sent to Obama to be signed into law.

This is intended to give a smokescreen to all those Democrat reps who are hesitant by enabling them to try to get their constituents to believe that they did not vote for the Senate bill, just for some amendments to make it better but- whoopsie! - wound up allowing the Senate bill to pass.Confused? The Ratz hope so.

That ain't all folks. See, the "Senate" bill isn't a Senate bill. It can't be because it contains provisions for raising revenue that will be administered by the Infernal Revenooers. But actually the Senate bill started out in the House Ways and Means committee. Senator Warner has a marvellous FAQ that explains what happened next. The Senate upon recieving the House tax bill just stripped out all the house language, put their own in, and then sent it back to the House for approval. Calling it of course "the Senate Bill" except that it has a House frame around it, making it a "tax bill that originated in theHouse" - and then got gutted and filled full of taxes by the Senate. Then it gets debated in the House and people who hear it being called "the Senate bill" think they are not going to incur more taxes because of it.

Little do they know, and that's the way Pelosi likes it.

imported post

So much for transparency in government.

:banghead::banghead::banghead::cuss::cuss:

imported post

Task Force 16 wrote:

So much for transparency in government.

:banghead::banghead::banghead::cuss::cuss:

Click to expand...

I think maybe what Obama meant about "transparency" was he thought it meant transferring authority in raising your kids to the government, (sorry, no dancing banana. It ain't funny.)

imported post

Alexcabbie wrote:

Task Force 16 wrote:

So much for transparency in government.

:banghead::banghead::banghead::cuss::cuss:

Click to expand...

I think maybe what Obama meant about "transparency" was he thought it meant transferring authority in raising your kids to the government, (sorry, no dancing banana. It ain't funny.)

Click to expand...

Ironic that you bring up that facet.

http://mises.org/daily/1406<-- "What Government has done to our Families"

And you're right, it isn't funny.

imported post

Well folks the latest is that the House is going to let it pass through without a vote. Forget the reconciliation, now it's the Slaughter tactic. They use this instead of having to pass the bill. Just wondering what part of NO don't they understand?

imported post

KansasMustang wrote:

Well folks the latest is that the House is going to let it pass through without a vote. Forget the reconciliation, now it's the Slaughter tactic. They use this instead of having to pass the bill. Just wondering what part of NO don't they understand?

Click to expand...

Government health care... my, my, my,... with provisions to control the amount of, the nature of, the degree of, and the availability of, care that is a matter of life and death for the patient... all based upon cost effectiveness.

The "Slaughter tactic" seems to me to be an ironic and appropriate name to put to the entire bill.

imported post

And timely coincidental with our recent discussions of The Slaugherhouse Cases and the Fourteenth Amendment.

imported post

KansasMustang wrote:

Well folks the latest is that the House is going to let it pass through without a vote. Forget the reconciliation, now it's the Slaughter tactic. They use this instead of having to pass the bill. Just wondering what part of NO don't they understand?

Click to expand...

Only if Obama and Pelosi can convince those Dems who care about their seats that their constituents are stupid enough to believe that their rep did not know that a vote for the Slaughter package was a vote to put Obamacare on "president" Obama's desk.

It is not at all clear this will be possible. Even with the "Slaughter Rule" they still need a majority of votes. If they had the votes, they would have voted already. Unfortunately for Pelosi, this little monkey shine has been exposed for the flim-flam it is, and people have been calling Emailing and visiting their Representatives to tell them that the know what is up and they will be held responsible.

The upside to all this is that the far-left statists who have taken over the Democrat Party have shown their true colors to everyone. They have told 3/4 of the People that they, the DemonRatz, are morally and intellectually superior to the common run and so should by right rule over them. And the People are repulsed.

Slaughter? Yep. Either way it is coming in November.

imported post

Task Force 16 wrote:

Master Doug Huffman wrote:

That is a real hypothetical progression but I have not heard recently - within the year - of anecdotes suggesting that it is being pursued.

I've seen a number of MDs for initial visits recently and none have been so intrusive. I did have a most satisfying conversation with IIRC an officer of a nearby county medical association that plainly set out his conservative principles.

Click to expand...

Considering how hard Obama, Pelosi, and Reid have tried to pass this monstrosity without the public knowing what's in it, I have no doubt that this Obamacare thing will be detrimental to gun owners in some way.

Think about these possibilities:

• Gun owners could face higher premiums for having firearms in the home.
• The Environmental and Child Welfare agencies could team up and make it a criminal offense to store ammo in homes with children, citing health risk from exposure to lead.
• Government could impose mandatory firearm registration to recieve health care coverage.

I'm sure more could be thought up. The liberals in our governmentcan be creative rascals when the want to be.

All of these may be un-constitutioal, but what do the Dems care about the Constitution? The public option included in Obama care is un-constitutional, in itself.

Click to expand...

Juiced enough?


Well, they COULD sendour guns to the moon too -- that is if it were part of the legislation -- and had built a big enough rocket ship.

But its not. No gun stuff. No public option. No constitutional monstrosities. No rocket ship.

The right has us foaming at the mouth over a "self-executing rule" and a health care bill that is far more modest than the one Richard Nixon proposed.

imported post

Hey Donk, tell Connolly he's fired.