America’s Rating as a Free Country Continues to Plummet

Comments Off on America’s Rating as a Free Country Continues to Plummet

This is a sad article for me to post….we are losing our freedoms folks.

Freedom can be defined in many ways. However, one of the greatest indicators of freedom and liberty is economic freedom. True free-market capitalism is the basis of individual liberty. However, America is no longer a top 5 contender, and we haven’t been for a years. Actually, America is barely even in the top 10. The 2012 Index of Economic Freedom study reports that America continues to fail. Who took first place in economic freedom in 2012? The



answer may surprise you. It was Hong Kong. Hong Kong’s score was an 89.9%, which was a 0.2% increase from 2011. Following Hong Kong in order: Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Switzerland, Canada, Chile, Mauritius, Ireland, and finally America at number 10. America’s economic freedom score was a 76.3%, which is down 1.5% from 2011. In fact, America is no longer even rated as a “Free” nation, which is a title granted only to countries with a score above 80%, but a “Mostly Free” nation. Right behind America rated at number 11 is Denmark. Denmark places the highest total tax pressure on its citizens in the world.

This study takes the following 10 benchmarks into account when rating countries: Freedom from corruption, property rights, individual fiscal freedom, restrained government spending, monetary freedom, business freedom, labor freedom, trade freedom, investment freedom, and financial freedom. As mentioned earlier, economic freedom is more vast than it may sound on the surface. It includes all of the above benchmarks, which affect our everyday lives. Money is not the root of all evil; however it is at the root of our lives and if we are not economically free one must ask themselves if our freedom simply a fallacy. There are 9 other countries more economically free than America and our rating is dropping drastically. In 2010, America was rated number 8.  With the numbers trending down and all of the benchmarks trending towards negative values America’s rating should not be expected to improve when the 2013 ratings are released.

There can be no liberty unless there is economic liberty. -Margaret Thatcher

Read article


federal judge rules against Obamacare insurance mandate

Comments Off on federal judge rules against Obamacare insurance mandate

President Obama’s plan to require individual Americans to purchase health insurance or pay a penalty exceeds the powers granted both the president and Congress by the Constitution, a federal district court judge ruled Tuesday in Harrisburg

Federal District Judge Christopher C. Connor said the federal government’s power to regulate interstate commerce does not give it the power to compel individual citizens to purchase products against their will.

“The nation undoubtably faces a health-care crisis,” Conner said. “Scores of individuals are uninsured and the costs to all citizens are measurable and significant.

“The federal government, however, is one of limited enumerated powers,” Conner continued, “and Congress’ efforts to remedy the ailing health care and health insurance markets must fit squarely within the boundaries of those powers.”

The lawsuit was brought by a married couple in York County who sued Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who is overseeing the health-care plan, to overturn the law. The couple, Barbara Goudy-Bachman and her husband, Gregory Bachman, said they had dropped their own health coverage because it exceeded the cost of their mortgage payments.

They said they preferred to pay for their health care out of pocket.

However, Conner rejected an argument by the couple that the mandate is “disastrous to this nation’s future, such as the Bachmans’ prediction of America evolving into a socialist state. These suggestions of cataclysmic results … are both unproductive and unpersuasive.”

While most of the massive law can remain intact, Conner said, certain provisions are linked to the health insurance requirement and must also be struck down. Those provisions are designed to guarantee that insurance companies cannot discriminate against or deny coverage to the sick or people with pre-existing conditions.

Their complaint is one of 30 different lawsuits in various federal jurisdictions around the country challenging Obama’s health-care plan, which became law in 2010.

Separate lawsuits have already reached appeals courts in Richmond, Va., Atlanta and Cincinnati.

The Supreme Court is expected to eventually take up the issue.

Maine gets break in federal health care overhaul

Comments Off on Maine gets break in federal health care overhaul

Well we can add the entire State of Maine to the over 1,000 waivers that have been issued for Obamacare:

The federal government Tuesday granted Maine a waiver of a key provision in President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, citing the likelihood that enforcement could destabilize the state’s market for individual health insurance.

The U.S. Health and Human Services department said in a letter it would waive the requirement that insurers spend 80 cents to 85 cents of every premium dollar on medical care and quality improvement. Instead, the letter said, the state could maintain its 65 percent standard for three years, with the caveat that HHS intends to review the figures after two years.

The decision makes Maine the first state to receive a waiver of the requirement. Similar requests are pending from Kentucky, Nevada and New Hampshire.

In seeking the waiver, Maine Insurance Superintendent Mila Kofman feared that one of three major insurers offering individual plans in Maine would withdraw from the market altogether if the federal requirement remained in place. The insurer, MEGA Life and Health Insurance Co., has 37 percent of the state’s individual market.

Florida court strikes down Obama’s healthcare reform law

Comments Off on Florida court strikes down Obama’s healthcare reform law

This is the second judge to strike down the provision that forces Americans to purchase government approved health insurance. We also learned today that the Senate is taking up the Repeal Obamacare bill maybe this week and they now have 47 sponsors of that repeal bill. Of course Obama will veto it, but still the House passed the repeal bill already and if the Senate follows suit that is a strong statement to Obama whether he vetos it or not, that tells Obama the American people don’t what this monstrosity.

Here’s what candidate Obama said in 2008 about ‘mandating’ everyone purchase health insurance as Hilliary Clinton was advocating at the time:

Florida court strikes down Obama’s healthcare reform law

WASHINGTON: A US court in Florida has struck down President Barack Obama’s historic healthcare reforms, ruling that the requirement for individuals to purchase insurance is unconstitutional and is too central to making the law function. 

The White House termed it as judicial activism. (What else could the White House say?)

Giving a major blow to the historic Health Care Reform Act which was signed by Obama last year, the US District Judge Roger Vinson in his judgement ruled that the so-called individual mandate exceeds congressional power.

The whole law cannot stand as the law depends on the mandate to work. “I must conclude that the individual mandate and the remaining provisions are all inextricably bound together in purpose and must stand or fall as a single unit,” said Vinson, who on Monday became the second federal judge in two months to rule against the individual mandate.

Vodpod videos no longer available. 1st collector for All of Obamacare Struck Down by Judge
Follow my videos on vodpod

The court cited opposition to a British mandate giving the then East India Company a monopoly and imposing a nominal tax on all tea sold in America, which was the beginning of the country’s freedom struggle.

The Congress does not have the power to compel an individual to purchase insurance, he said.

“It is difficult to imagine that a nation which began, at least in part, as the result of opposition to a British mandate giving the East India Company a monopoly and imposing a nominal tax on all tea sold in America would have set out to create a government with the power to force people to buy tea in the first place,” Vinson wrote.

“If Congress can penalise a passive individual for failing to engage in commerce, the enumeration of powers in the Constitution would have been in vain for it would be “difficult to perceive any limitation on federal power” and we would have a Constitution in name only.

Surely this is not what the founding fathers could have intended,” he wrote.

The judgement, which was immediately opposed by the White House was cheered by the opposition Republican party, which after gaining majority in the House of Representatives repealed the bill from the House this year.

“Today’s ruling – issued by Judge Vinson in the Northern District of Florida – is a plain case of judicial overreaching,” wrote the White House healthcare messaging guru Stephanie Cutter in a blog post.

“We don’t believe this kind of judicial activism will be upheld and we are confident that the Affordable Care Act will ultimately be declared constitutional by the courts,” he said.

“This ruling is well out of the mainstream of judicial opinion. Twelve federal judges have already dismissed challenges to the constitutionality of the health reform law, and two judges – in the Eastern District of Michigan and Western District of Virginia – have upheld the law.

In one other case, a federal judge in the Eastern District of Virginia issued a very narrow ruling on the constitutionality of the health reform law’s “individual responsibility” provision and upheld the rest of the law, he said.

Where’s Our Waiver? (Obamacare)

1 Comment

What was all that Obama said about making everything equal? And what about the 14th amendment? As usual, says one thing, but the opposite is the truth.

Where’s Our Waiver?

ObamaCare: The granting of 500 more exemptions to unions, companies and even states begs the question — why is “affordable health care for all Americans” neither affordable nor for everybody?

The Obama administration has become famous for its crony capitalism, in which companies like General Electric were rewarded while energy companies, for example, were cast into the outer darkness. Now we have what might be called crony health care, with the favored escaping the full consequences of ObamaCare while the rest of us deal with the rising costs and reduced service.

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi once told us we’d have to pass ObamaCare to see what was in it. Now it turns out we have to wait for its implementation to see who is in it. The issuance of more than 500 additional waivers to its draconian mandates by Health and Human Services makes the case for repeal even stronger.

It is a system where everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others. We were told everyone had to be in it, everyone had to be forced to buy government-approved insurance for ObamaCare to work.

As Emily Litella used to say on “Saturday Night Live”: “Never mind.”

Unions, including the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), are particularly favored in this charade. Unions represent 6.9% of the private work force, yet 40% of the workers covered by these waivers are union members.

There are no fewer than 182 union benefit funds, one-fourth of all waivers, now exempted. And of the only 14.6 million union employees in the U.S., 860,000 are already exempted from ObamaCare’s mandated coverage requirements.

The SEIU — whose former head Andy Stern was once the leading visitor to the White House, ahead of Cabinet members and heads of state — had three of its locals exempted from ObamaCare mandates in the first batch of waivers, which reached 222 total: Local 25 SEIU in Chicago, with 31,000 enrollees; Local 1199 SEIU Greater New York Benefit Fund, with 4,544 enrollees; and SEIU Local 1 Cleveland Welfare Fund, with 520 enrollees.

In the latest round of waivers, the SEIU, which lobbied mightily to force everyone else into ObamaCare, added four more locals to the waiver list, which stands at 729. There are now seven SEIU locals that have waivers, covering a total of 45,000 workers.

Other unions and labor groups have also benefited.

One of the largest waivers, for 351,000 people, went to the United Federation of Teachers Welfare Fund, a New York union that covers teachers. The United Agricultural Benefit Trust, a California-based cooperative that provides such low-cost minimal coverage to farmworkers, was allowed to exempt 17,347 workers.

As columnist Michelle Malkin reports, the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW), which trumpeted ObamaCare as “an achievement that will rank among the highest in our national experience,” has secured waivers for 238 of its affiliates. Hypocrisy as a union label.

The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), which said that with ObamaCare “finally, affordable and comprehensive health care coverage will be available for millions of working Americans,” saw eight of its affiliates get waivers.

It seems ObamaCare is neither affordable nor comprehensive.

The exemption list even includes 4 states — Massachusetts, New Jersey, Ohio and Tennessee — that collectively cover 2.1 million workers. As we’ve noted, corporations such as McDonald’s are also on the waiver list, saying ObamaCare makes their plans unworkable and unaffordable.

ObamaCare is in effect repealing itself, waiver by waiver. If it’s so great, the Senate should vote on its repeal without fear.

Defunding should commence, as should House hearings exposing this fraudulent power grab. By the way, these new waivers come a week after Republicans announced plans to investigate the earlier waivers granted to groups for health care reform provisions.

Question: If the provisions these entities are exempt from are a hardship, then isn’t the entire piece of legislation?

How about granting America a waiver?

Where the Constitution authorizes Congress to mandate that individual Americans buy health insurance is not a “serious question”

Comments Off on Where the Constitution authorizes Congress to mandate that individual Americans buy health insurance is not a “serious question”

After Judge Henry Hudson’s ruling yesterday on the unconstitutional provision of “mandating everyone purchase health insurance”….I was reminded of what Nancy Pelosi said last year when asked “where in the Constitution does it allow government to mandate this”? And her answer was…..”are you serious?”

Vodpod videos no longer available.

In pushing Obama health care, Nancy Pelosi dismisses authority of US Constitution

Yesterday, U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson ruled that a key provision in Obama’s health care plan violates the US Constitution. The “minimum essential coverage provision,” Judge Hudson ruled, would force American consumers to buy a government-mandated insurance product whether they wish to buy it or not. There is no provision in the US Constitution that grants Congress the power to force consumers to buy into such a monopoly — the very idea seems ludicrous. 

But not to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. She believes that her power to force Americans to purchase whatever products and services the government wants them to buy is somehow granted by the Constitution.

In what is now seen as a curiously instructive question-and-answer exchange, one year ago Nancy Pelosi engaged in the following dialog with CNS News: “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?

Pelosi: “Are you serious? Are you serious?” “Yes, yes I am.”

CNS News goes on to report: (…)

Pelosi then shook her head before taking a question from another reporter. Her press spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, then told that asking the speaker of the House where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandated that individual Americans buy health insurance as not a “serious question.”

“You can put this on the record,” said Elshami. “That is not a serious question. That is not a serious question.”

Absolute power need not explain itself

What’s clear from this exchange is that Nancy Pelosi believes Congress has absolute power over the people to simply invent whatever mandates, requirements or restrictions it wants, regardless of what powers were actually granted to the Congress under the US Constitution.

It is the Constitution, after all, to which Congress owes its existence in the first place. Certain, specific powers are granted to the Congress under the Constitution, with the remainder of powers being reserved to the People or the States. Nowhere in the Constitution do the founding fathers of our nation grant Congress the power to force the American people to spend their money on government-favored monopoly service providers — and that’s precisely what Obamacare mandates.

The question of where Congress gets its authority to enact such mandates is an intelligent and reasonable question that any lawmaker should be willing to answer. But instead of answering this question, Nancy Pelosi simply dismisses it as ridiculous.

Her aide says, “That is not a serious question.” But I disagree. I believe it is the most serious question of all. Because if the US Congress is now acting outside its limited powers and simply rewriting the Constitution to match whatever political whims it fancies at the moment, then the freedom of our Republic is lost and we already live under tyrannical rule.

Tyrants do not answer pesky questions from the little people

Time and time again, we now see modern bureaucrats dismissing the very notion that even asking about the source of their authority is a legitimate question. To question the authority of Congress now seems to be regarded as something of an act of terrorism. How dare you question your King?

Remember, it is the duty of all free citizens to slap the hands of government when it threatens to overreach its limited authority. With yesterday’s ruling, U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson slapped the hands of both Nancy Pelosi and President Obama, sending them a clear message that you cannot simply steamroll over the Constitution and mandate whatever laws and rules you’d like to see realized in your own megalomaniacal fantasies.

There are protections in the Constitution that were put there precisely to protect the People from tyrants. That is, in fact, the primary purpose of the Bill of Rights — to protect the People from the inevitably expansion of power by bureaucrats who always seek to control more, regulate more, and accumulate more power in taking over more and more areas of everyday life that should be left up to free people.

Your decision of what kind of doctor you wish to choose — conventional versus naturopathic or complementary, for example — is your decision, not the government’s decision. For Big Government to mandate that all people must spend thousands of dollars a year to support a failed, disastrously harmful conventional medical system that actually kills over half a million Americans a year is extremely unethical if not downright illegal.

And yet that’s exactly what Obama’s health care law attempts to do. It seeks to force you to participate in a government-protected sick-care monopoly. And if you choose not to participate, you’ll get a little visit from IRS agents who will simply extract the required money from your bank account… by force if necessary.

That such a scheme could be advocated by Nancy Pelosi and other bureaucrats in Washington tells you just how far they’ve already marched down the seductive path of government tyranny.

It is up to people like you and me to resist this tyranny and stand up for our Constitutional protections so that we may live as free citizens, with our free choice intact, and without the government forcing us to participate in a failed health care system that, statistically speaking, harms far more people than it helps.

Let us hope that the US Supreme Court will also have the wisdom to recognize the constitutional violations in this health care legislation and strike it down.

We’ll keep you updated on this story here at, where the US Constitution remains alive and well in our minds, hearts and souls. We will defend liberty here on NaturalNews, even if we’re the last ones left standing who dare to question the King.

Paul Krugman Recommends ‘Death Panels’ to Help Balance Budget

Comments Off on Paul Krugman Recommends ‘Death Panels’ to Help Balance Budget

Well after everyone making fun of Sarah Palin and others about Obamacare and “death panels”….here we have a liberal Paul Krugman admitting it along with more Sales Tax.

Paul Krugman Recommends ‘Death Panels’ to Help Balance Budget

Nobel prize winning economist Paul Krugman was on The Week with Christiane Amanpour and spoke out on what was needed to solve the US debt crisis.

Some years down the pike, we’re going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes. It’s going to be that we’re actually going to take Medicare under control, and we’re going to have to get some additional revenue, probably from a VAT. But it’s not going to happen now.”

The Obama healthcare plan passed by Congress in 2010 includes government-run healthcare committees with sweeping powers, including the power to engage in competitive pricing and cost analysis, a system Britain uses that has led to rationing of medical care for the elderly. –

Vodpod videos no longer available.

What is scary about this proposal is that Paul Krugman has been an advisor to the Obama administration on economic policy, and is a known Keynesian and socialist.  Rationing of healthcare for Seniors is known in the business as ‘death panels’, and was put into the massive healthcare bill as a spurious way to remove one of the largest groups of social program recipients… the elderly.

You will notice as well, this ‘famed’ economist says nothing about cutting spending or wasteful programs, but instead is advocating a tax (VAT) on every single transaction that occurs in America.

Krugman later attempted to backtrack on his comments in his blog, but the truth of the matter is, when someone speaks without thinking, they are assuredly speaking what they truly feel in their hearts.  Even with his backtracking, Krugman believes in his statements and has a fantasy world ideal of their potential implementation.

Krugman also conceded his solution may be “politically impossible.” But, he added, “I believe that some day — maybe in the first Chelsea Clinton administration — it will actually happen.”

Chelsea Clinton administration?  Is it any wonder why radio host Michael Savage is correct in saying, “Liberalism is a mental disorder.”?

Older Entries