Outlawing Private Medical Insurance, Back-door Hate Crimes, Isreal to Attack Iran?

"'I wish it need not have happened in my time,' said Frodo.  'So do I,' said Gandalf, 'and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.'" — J.R.R. Tolkien (The Fellowship of the Ring) 1) It's Not An Option Congress: It didn't take long to run into an "uh-oh" moment when reading the House's "health care for all Americans" bill. Right there on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal. When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee. It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of "Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage," the "Limitation On New Enrollment" section of the bill clearly states: "Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" of the year the legislation becomes law. So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won't be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers (emphasis mine). …The legislation is also likely to finish off health savings accounts, a goal that Democrats have had for years. They want to crush that alternative because nothing gives individuals more control over their medical care, and the government less, than HSAs. With HSAs out of the way, a key obstacle to the left's expansion of the welfare state will be removed. The public option won't be an option for many, but rather a mandate for buying government care. A free people should be outraged at this advance of soft tyranny (emphasis mine). See: http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=332548165656854 2) Dems sneaking 'hate crimes' through on soldiers' bill? Piggybacking controversial act onto military funding legislation Democrats are expected to sneak the hate crimes bill through the Senate as early as tomorrow after they offered it as an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill.  The Senate approved the same hate crime legislation last year as part of the military funding bill, but it was never reconciled with the House's bill.  The current House version – H.R. 1913, or the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 – was passed April 29 and referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary.  Now the Senate is considering the military appropriations bill, or S.1390, and the Senate "hate crimes" act, or S. 909, may be passed as an amendment soon. The "hate crimes" legislation now faces its best chance in years to become federal law. See: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104034 3) Netanyahu tight-lipped about imminent Iran attack Israeli warships cross Red Sea in apparent signal to Tehran JERUSALEM – Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office refused to respond to a report today purporting to quote an Israeli defense official stating the recent deployment of warships across the Red Sea should be seen as serious preparation for an attack on Iran.  "It is not our policy to comment on such reports," Mark Regev, Netanyahu's spokesman, told WND.  Earlier this week, two Israel Navy gunboats openly sailed through the Suez Canal into the Red Sea with permission from Egypt.  "This is preparation that should be taken seriously. Israel is investing time in preparing itself for the complexity of an attack on Iran. These maneuvers are a message to Iran that Israel will follow up on its threats," the Times of London today quoted what it said was an Israeli defense official as saying. See: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104156 4) Social Security spends $700,000 on Phoenix conference RUSH: Have you heard the story about 700 executives from the Social Security Administration on a party junket to Phoenix? While Obama is telling everybody else in the world don't travel, you can't fly your plane to Vegas, those days are over, federal bureaucrats are filling the vacuum. "Members of Congress are giving the Social Security Administration just two days to turn over all records about a $700,000 management conference at the Arizona Biltmore Resort and Spa." ABC did an investigation on this, and we've got some audio on it.   Claiming they need "to learn how to reduce stress because of a growing number of death threats made against them, nearly 700 executives from the Social Security Administration," 700 executives! It cost $700,000. That's a thousand dollars per attendee. "We received threats against our employees by people who are in the American public," said Social Security Administration Regional Commissioner for San Francisco, Peter Spencer, in defense of the conference. He said, "There is a tremendous amount of stress involved in the job that we do." …"Social Security's head of West Coast operations said the conference was essential, that teleconferencing was not an option." Somebody needs to tell 'em it's called GoToMeeting.com. Folks, the interesting thing here about all of this, this is more and more like the Politburo each and every day. The politburo had its hierarchy of leaders from the premier, president on down to these clowns at the Kremlin, they all had their dachas, their houses out there, their girls, their liquor and so forth, people in the country couldn't find food in the stores. Now we've got these people in Washington who are treating the US Treasury as a personal piggy bank to go party. They're better than everybody else, and they're so stressed out 'cause they're getting death threats. Seven-hundred thousand for three days for 700 people. Social Security executives. Okay. See: http://www.abc15.com/content/news/investigators/story/Social-Security-spends-700-000-on-Phoenix/RrHYWi4IRka1mC7wJTm4uQ.cspx See: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_071609/content/01125104.guest.html 5) Pentagon orders soldier fired for challenging prez Army warrior terminated from job after questioning Obama eligibility The Department of Defense has compelled a private employer to fire a U.S. Army Reserve major from his civilian job after he had his military deployment orders revoked for arguing he should not be required to serve under a president who has not proven his eligibility for office.  According to the CEO of Simtech Inc., a private company contracted by the Defense Security Services, an agency of the Department of Defense, the federal government has compelled the termination of Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook. See: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104044