Obamacare in 1 sentence

I have not heard anyone put it so perfectly. So succinctly. This lady hits a home run with her description of Obamacare.

Very interesting!!!!!!

Check out this web site that is showing the prominent words spoken at the RNC. Click a word bubble to see quotes of where the word was used and who spoke it. You can even enter a word in the search box if it's not already listed. It's going to be a fascinating comparison between the RNC and DNC once they publish those results.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/08/28/us/politics/convention-word-counts.html

I keep hearing news people say that the Dems have taken the word God out of the platform. God was mentioned 95 times at the RNC according to this site. It will sure be interesting to see the results of the DNC.

How I vote.

I have 3 main criteria I use to determine who I vote for.

1. Morality.
    -I can not support anyone who's OK with killing babies. NO ONE has the right to take the life of an unborn baby. It's not a woman's right or anyone else's.

2. Fiscal Policy
    -I have never worked for a poor person. Poor people don't employ other people. Every place I've ever worked, it has been for a successful business person or successful company. I can't support anyone that wants to punish success and make it harder for businesses to hire and retain employees. Further, I can't support someone that wants to redistribute the earnings of people who work hard for a living and give it to people that refuse to work and live off government handouts. I can't support someone who removes the work requirements from government assistance. I can't support someone that believes government spending and trillions of dollars in debt is the way to stimulate the American economy. Tax & Spend has never worked and never will. The way to improve employment conditions in the US is to make it EASIER for employers to hire, not harder! This will help both the middle class and help give the poor a boost by providing more jobs!

3. Foreign Policy
    -I can not support anyone that does not support Israel. I can not support anyone that bows to other countries and apologizes for the United States of America being the greatest countries on earth. I can not support anyone who will stand by and allow evil to prosper on this planet.

I can't support anyone who's agenda is to destroy this country. To lower it to the status of countries like Cuba and Venezuela. Instead, we need to work to help raise other countries to be better, like us.

I can't support anyone who does not believe in our Constitution and thinks it's outdated and flawed. It may not be perfect, but it's the foundation of the greatest country that was ever on this planet.

I can't support anyone who continues to blame their predecessor for ongoing problems, heck, worsening problems, when they've had plenty of time to affect change for the positive and fail to do so. I hope you understand.

Are we better off than we were 4 years ago? Heck no. Here's a post I made in 2008 (http://bit.ly/PHkiY8). Things are worse now than the statistics I mention in that post. Food prices are higher. Gas prices have fluctuated, but are higher. House values are in the toilet. Unemployment?? I'll let this chart from the Bureau of Labor Statistics speak to that (click the picture to link to the web site):

Obama gets elected and BAM! Unemployment skyrockets.

Just today, the National Debt has reached $16 TRILLION dollars. Under Obama, the debt has increased more in 4 years than it did under President Bush in 8 years. "If Mr. Obama wins re-election, and his budget projections prove accurate, the National Debt will top $20 trillion in 2016, the final year of his second term. That would mean the Debt increased by 87 percent, or $9.34 trillion, during his two terms." (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57400369-503544/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/)

Who's better off?? I'm not. I could expand on each of those 3 points above, but what I've posted is sufficient.

I can not support Obama. He fails the test.

The POWER of Social Media

I used to hate social media. I still hate some aspects of it (all those dang Facebook game requests!). I use Twitter more than any other social medium, but I have it post to my Facebook status sometimes (I use Selective Tweets). I sometimes blog on this blog, and my other blog about music. I just checked in on Foursquare (which I just started using last week) in my neighborhood and stole the mayorship. Yes, folks, I'm now the Mayor of Stonehaven. I'm learning about a couple new services that look interesting. One is Medium and the other is Branch. Both are 'invitation only' right now, but I'm sure after they see I mentioned them in this post they'll extend my invite. :)

I'm starting to really like social media. I've learned about the POWER of social media, for both good and bad. It's amazing the reactions people have to a Twitter or Facebook post. It's also amazing what companies will do when you post about them.

I once heard a story about a woman who posted something rather unpleasant about her boss on her Facebook  status. Her boss promptly commented that she must have forgotten that she friended him on Facebook. She was summarily fired. I've seen a lot of good and bad happen on Facebook. It's a great way to catch up with friends and family, but you really better be careful about what you post, cause you know the person that would be offended by it is sure to see it! Other social media platforms can be dangerous too. Better be careful what you tweet about your job or family or friends! I don't really like Facebook much, but I use it anyway. Good things come from Facebook too. For example, I was in a restaurant about to pay for our dinner when I noticed a sign that said if you check in on Facebook and like their Facebook page, you get a discount. 10% off, baby! (Disclaimer: this restaurant may or may not be currently offering this or other discounts, you'll have to check for yourself). I think Foursquare sometimes has the same type of deals... I dunno, I haven't really used it much yet.

Twitter, however has been my friend. I got into Twitter because I saw this story about a journalist named James Buck who got arrested during a protest in Egypt and had time to tweet only 1 word: Arrested. His friends and family saw it and knew something was wrong and was able to immediately start working to help him. Awesome.

I've had a lot of good come from some of my tweets.

We currently use AT&T for our wireless service. Honestly, they've hacked me off quite a bit, especially their customer service. Really the only reason we are still with them is we are 'grandfathered' in on their old unlimited data plan. I think they are really trying to get rid of customers like me, or at least they are trying to force us to change data plans. Apparently they don't like unlimited data users. Just recently they announced that they will not allow FaceTime to work on these older data plans. You have to move to their more expensive Mobile Share plans to be able to use Facetime. I think that sucks. But what sucks more is what I think is deliberate harassment of their unlimited data plan users. Back in December 2011, I got a nasty-gram from AT&T telling me that they would throttle my data speeds if I kept using so much data! This was news to me. I'd never used more than about 1GB of data in a month. Suddenly my data usage was at an amazing 8GB! Check out this usage chart from my account:

Uh....say what?? Data usage inexplicably jumps from 1.1GB or less per month to a whopping 7.9GB! I can assure you that my phone usage did not change at all. No new data-sucking apps or media streaming or anything out of the ordinary.

I contacted AT&T. They said I use too much data and they can throttle me if they want. I could not get them to cooperate with me to figure out what the heck happened. WHY was my data suddenly so HUGE?? Since AT&T would not cooperate with me and assure me that my data would not be throttled, I decided to become somewhat vocal about it. Hello, Twitter! I posted several posts expressing my displeasure at the situation. I searched the net for other people experiencing the same issue. Guess what I found? I found this article about a guy that sued AT&T for throttling his data. Guess who won? The guy. Not the mega-huge communications corporation. I started tweeting and posting about this relentlessly. AT&T responded a couple times, basically telling me if I didn't like it to change data plans. But then I think they got tired of all the negative publicity.... check this out:

Uh...say what? Data usage inexplicably DROPS from 7.9GB to... is that for real? 0.6GB. Yup. back to pre-December levels. What gives? I guess AT&T was starting to feel the pressure of negative publicity?  

I've used Twitter against them for another problem. When I signed up for U-Verse, they promised me all these discounts. Those discounts never happened. That is until I tweeted about it and their Twitter customer service people picked up on it. They contacted me, and to their credit, made it right.

That's not the only thing that's happened for the good after I tweeted something. Here's some other examples:

Back in July was my #4th birthday. I decided to do an experiment. I tweeted the following 2 tweets to see what would happen:

"Lets see if I can get any celebrities to wish me happy birthday..." (including the @ of celebrities I follow)

"Hmm....Wonder if I can get any companies to send me a b-day gift?" (including the @ of the companies I follow)

This experiment had AMAZING results. You can read all about it on my Twitter Experiment post on my other blog. In summary; several celebrities responded, and I got nice gifts from a few companies as well. It was a great birthday! (I think I'll try it again next year! Or maybe for Christmas! Hmmmm....)

The reason I'm writing this post, however, is due to what happened today.

In May 2012 I bought a new Ford Focus. With my lovely new little car came a Sirius satellite radio. When I called Sirius to activate the radio, the dude told me I was getting 15 months free trial. Cool. My dealer said 6 months, but this dude is telling me 15 months. I kinda argued with him some but he insisted that there was some special promotion or something going on for new Ford owners. 15 months. Cool.

I got some mail from Sirius the other day telling me to call them and they'll upgrade my trial to their Premium package for 6 months. Premium. Cool. So I called and inquired about it. While I was talking to this different dude, I asked when my current subscription would end (I didn't have the papers in front of me and I couldn't remember.) He said November 12, 2012.

Uh....say what? I can count pretty well and that's not 15 months. Not cool.

Dude says he sees that I had a 15 month trial but that it had been cancelled. I sure as heck didn't cancel it. He says that only myself or my dealer can cancel it, so it must have been the dealer. He also said only the dealer can change it back. I called the dealer. They said that they don't do anything with anyone's Sirius account. Once you drive your car off the lot, the deal is between you and Sirius and they're out of the picture. So I call Sirius back. I won't tell you about the conversation, because it was unpleasant. Basically they kept telling me only the dealer can change it. Dealer says they have nothing to do with it. I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Twitter to the rescue!! I posted the following tweet earlier today: "@SIRIUSXM is losing a customer in me. I don't like being lied to!"

Almost immediately I get a reply from them. Here's the ensuing Twitter conversation:

I sent them an email explaining the situation. A couple hours later I get a call from another dude. I like this dude. Didn't like the other dudes. Cool Dude apologizes and says they're leaving the 6 month trial in place, but then adding 12 months of free PREMIUM service starting the day the trial ends. Check out this email I got from Cool Dude: "Thank you for taking the time to speak to me today. As we discussed I have added a 1 year follow on plan to start on Nov.12/2012 and will run until Nov.12/2013. At that time you will receive an invoice in the mail letting you know that your service is up for renewal and the cost."

Dang. That there, my friends, is what you call good customer service. Cool Dude even gave me his direct contact information and said if I had any further problems to contact him directly and he'd help. Follow-up tweets:

I'm now a happy Sirius customer, and I'm much more likely to renew the subscription once my free trial ends. This is how companies should treat their customers.

Social Media. Power. I never really expected these things to happen, but it's fascinating that these situations turned out the way they did. Companies clearly don't like negative publicity, even from a nobody like me. You can use Social media for good or for bad. You can get results. You could even save your life. Just ask Buck.

Now they're trying to take our guns.....

Obamacare Upheld. Sorta. November just got a lot more interesting.

"The Affordable Care Act is constitutional in part and unconstitutional in part The individual mandate cannot be upheld as an exercise of Congress's power under the Commerce Clause. That Clause authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce, not to order individuals to engage it. In this case, however, it is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but choose to go without health insurance. Such legislation is within Congress's power to tax." ~Chief Justice John Roberts

"The individual mandate cannot be upheld as an exercise of Congress's power under the Commerce Clause. That Clause authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce, not to order individuals to engage it."


This statement makes this ruling a victory for those against Obamacare. This was the most critical point. For this to be ruled a TAX is a huge blow to Obama who stated that it was "ABSOLUTLEY NOT A TAX".

EDIT: Here's the video: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/09/obama-mandate-is-not-a-tax/#.T-xtyHsqo_Y.twitter

Here's an article about an interview with Obama and George Stephanopoulos (http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/06/28/read-obamas-2009-abc-news-interview-health-care-law-is-not-a-tax/) Obama said,

OBAMA: ...for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is ***absolutely not a tax increase.*** What it’s saying is, is that we’re not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore than the fact that right now everybody in America, just about, has to get auto insurance. Nobody considers that a tax increase. People say to themselves, that is a fair way to make sure that if you hit my car, that I’m not covering all the costs....

STEPHANOPOULOS: But you reject that it’s a tax increase?

OBAMA: I absolutely reject that notion.

Brilliant move on Robert's part.


Edit:
The following portion of the decision is the crux of the issue and Roberts really did a fantastic job explaining it:

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS concluded in Part III–A that the individual mandate is not a valid exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause. Pp. 16–30. (a) The Constitution grants Congress the power to “regulate Commerce.” Art. I, §8, cl. 3 (emphasis added). The power to regulate commerce presupposes the existence of commercial activity to be regulated.This Court’s precedent reflects this understanding: As expansive as this Court’s cases construing the scope of the commerceCite as: 567 U. S. ____ (2012) 3 Syllabus power have been, they uniformly describe the power as reaching “activity.” E.g., United States v. Lopez, 514 U. S. 549, 560. The individual mandate, however, does not regulate existing commercial activity. It instead compels individuals to become active in commerce by purchasing a product, on the ground that their failure to do so affects interstate commerce. Construing the Commerce Clause to permit Congress to regulate individuals precisely because they are doing nothing would open a new and potentially vast domain to congressional authority. Congress already possesses expansive power to regulate what people do. Upholding the Affordable Care Act under the Commerce Clause would give Congress the same license to regulate what people do not do. The Framers knew the difference between doing something and doing nothing. They gave Congress the power to regulate commerce, not to compel it. Ignoring that distinction would undermine the principle that the Federal Government is a government of limited and enumerated powers. The individual mandate thus cannot be sustained under Congress’s power to “regulate Commerce."

I say Roberts was brilliant because I believe he voted on the side he doesn't necessarily agree with so that:

1. He could write the majority opinion himself, and, 
2. He would have the more liberal justices 'on his side'  in the majority which, to the American people who largely don't understand how this stuff works, it will appear as if they agree with his opinion.

Wikipedia gives a good description of the Chief Justice's power and duties. Check this out (emphasis mine):

Despite the seniority and added prestige, the Chief Justice's vote carries the same legal weight as each of the other eight justices. In any decision, he has no legal authority to overrule the verdicts or interpretations of the other eight judges or tamper with them. However, in any vote, the most senior justice in the majority decides who will write the Opinion of the Court. Being the most senior member, the Chief Justice—when in the majority—decides who writes the Court's opinion. This power to determine the opinion author (including the option to select oneself) allows a Chief Justice in the majority to influence the historical record. Two justices in the same majority, given the opportunity, might write very different majority opinions (as evidenced by many concurring opinions); being assigned the opinion may also cement the vote of an Associate who is viewed as only marginally in the majority (a tactic that was reportedly used to some effect by Earl Warren). A Chief Justice who knows the Associate Justices can therefore do much—by the simple act of selecting the justice who writes the Opinion of the Court—to affect the "flavor" of the opinion, which in turn can affect the interpretation of that opinion in cases before lower courts in the years to come. It is said that some chief justices, notably Earl Warren^{[citation needed]} and Warren Burger, sometimes switched votes to a majority they disagreed with to be able to use this prerogative of the Chief Justice to dictate who would write the opinion.^[5]

This is exactly what I think Roberts did today, "It is said that some chief justices...sometimes switched votes to a majority they disagreed with to be able to use this prerogative of the Chief Justice to dictate who would write the opinion."


Roberts ensured that the decision would cement the fact that the Commerce Clause could now never be used to allow Congress to mandate that individuals purchase something (which is what this whole law was about to begin with, not healthcare). He also ensured that the decision revealed the intent of the democrats for what it is, a new, HUGE tax on the American people. Further, he ensured that it appears that the liberal justices agree with his opinion.

This is a HUGE Constitutional victory. **The whole issue was not about healthcare.** Democrats pushed this under the guise of healthcare, but it really was about control. The whole issue was whether or not Congress can mandate that an individual purchase a certain product. Had this been upheld under the Commerce Clause (which the decision very pointedly stated it was UNCONSTITUTIONAL) then Congress would have the precedent and could then mandate that an individual purchase anything they saw fit. Roberts was brilliant. He ensured that this did not get passed under the Commerce Clause and also showed that this really was a tax, which Obama very specifically stated that it is not, thus this decision hurts his campaign by showing that once again he was not truthful with the American people.

Obama Ignores the Constitution AGAIN...

Obama violates his oath of office once again: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/06/15/obama-move-on-immigration-is-unconstitutional-disaster-for-unemployed

"The Constitution gives immigration policy powers to Congress alone. The president has no authority to give a de facto amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. And doing so right now is a stab in the back to the 20 million Americans who can’t find a full-time job."


This guy has GOT to go!! Nov. 2012!!!