Help Defend Colorado From ObamaCare

[...] Give us your contact info to help gather signatures. [...]

In a supreme twist of irony we are all deeply indebted to Obama. He has once and for all made it abundantly clear that America is no longer a constitutional republic. Libertarians, Objectivists, Conservatives and patriots have long debated the burning question, “At what point do we risk our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor and openly resist statist tyranny?” That question has been answered: the time is now.

In a supreme twist of irony we are all deeply indebted to Obama. He has once and for all made it abundantly clear that America is no longer a constitutional republic. Libertarians, Objectivists, Conservatives and patriots have long debated the burning question, “At what point do we risk our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor and openly resist statist tyranny?” That question has been answered: the time is now.

[...] Give us your contact info to help gather signatures. [...]

308,921,081 Americans
32,000,000 Uninsured

90% paying for 10% Seems a little unbalanced to me.

308,921,081 Americans
32,000,000 Uninsured

90% paying for 10% Seems a little unbalanced to me.

“WE'LL REMEMBER COME NOVEMBER”

“WE’LL REMEMBER COME NOVEMBER”

[...] My parents have been acting kind of gloomy recently. You know, the whole nasty, arrogant government takeover of health care by Congress and the President. It might be part of the reason I didn’t put up anything on my blog yesterday. Things have started to cheer up a bit, though, since mom and dad learned there is something they can do to help defend our own Colorado from Obama Care. [...]

[...] Give us your contact info to help gather signatures. [...]

[...] some mighty statements. First, state legislators joined my boss Jon Caldara to urge support for the Defend Colorado from Obama Care ballot initiative, called on Attorney General John Suthers to join the lawsuit of states’ [...]

Obama says you can keep your current coverage if you want to. If so, then why does he also say that medicare senior advantage coverage will be taken away from all seniors?

Obama says you can keep your current coverage if you want to. If so, then why does he also say that medicare senior advantage coverage will be taken away from all seniors?

I'm inspired to fight here and now like NEVER BEFORE. We MUST rollback the size and power of the Fed Gov or we will ALL go down with it…….

I’m inspired to fight here and now like NEVER BEFORE. We MUST rollback the size and power of the Fed Gov or we will ALL go down with it…….

As a doctor, a patient, and a citizen I support the healthcare reform movement. Although imperfect in many ways, the current bill is a valuable statement of principle, that healthcare is a human right and not a privilege of wealth. Like other landmarks in social progress, it will not be reversed by your rabid right wing zealotry. Do what you will, in the end you will merely stand revealed as reactionary troglodytes. As President Obama said today, if you think you can repeal healthcare reform, how that it has passed, “Go for it!”

People often claim that health care is a right, but provide no reasons. Here are some links to articles explaining why health care is not a right:
http://www.patientpowernow.org/2009/08/27/right…
http://www.patientpowernow.org/2009/09/08/healt…
Thomas Jefferson:
http://www.patientpowernow.org/2008/07/04/jeffe…
http://www.patientpowernow.org/2008/05/12/healt…
http://westandfirm.org/Peikoff-01.html

People often claim that health care is a right, but provide no reasons. Here are some links to articles explaining why health care is not a right:
http://www.patientpowernow.org/2009/08/27/right-to-health-care/
http://www.patientpowernow.org/2009/09/08/health-care-not-a-privilege-right/
Thomas Jefferson:
http://www.patientpowernow.org/2008/07/04/jefferson-rights-health-care/
http://www.patientpowernow.org/2008/05/12/health-care-not-a-right/
http://westandfirm.org/Peikoff-01.html

As a doctor, a patient, and a citizen I support the healthcare reform movement. Although imperfect in many ways, the current bill is a valuable statement of principle, that healthcare is a human right and not a privilege of wealth. Like other landmarks in social progress, it will not be reversed by your rabid right wing zealotry. Do what you will, in the end you will merely stand revealed as reactionary troglodytes. As President Obama said today, if you think you can repeal healthcare reform, how that it has passed, “Go for it!”

It they're going to base their arguments on the Declaration of Independence,
libertarians need to brush up on elementary grammar and syntax. “We hold
these truths to be self evident,” the Declaration states, “That all men are
created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of
happiness.” Notice the wording! Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness
are *among* the rights bequeathed to men. Clearly other rights can and
do exist! To claim otherwise is to assert that Jefferson was careless in
his choice of words, a somewhat precarious position to take, I would think.

In fact, every society defines the rights it considers appropriate, as well
as restrictions on those rights, that best serve its needs. Over the course
of our history Americans have agreed to extend their understanding of rights
beyond what the Framers or their contemporaries may have considered
appropriate. These include the right to a fair wage, to decent conditions of
employment, to clean air and water and uncontaminated food. We are currently
engaged in extending the definition further, to include adequate
healthcare. Indeed it's hard to understand how the pursuit of happiness can
be guaranteed absent a basic claim to good health. This possibility didn't
exist two centuries ago, so it would be futile and absurd to look to our
Founders for guidance in this area. The very concept would have been
meaningless to them.

It's easy to see why libertarians favor an eighteenth century worldview that
ignores any form of social responsibility. “Every man for himself and the
Devil take the hindmost!” works well, if you've managed to scramble to the
top of the heap; but most of us have grown beyond this kind of puerile
selfishness. Fortunately we outnumber those who haven't.

It they’re going to base their arguments on the Declaration of Independence,
libertarians need to brush up on elementary grammar and syntax. “We hold
these truths to be self evident,” the Declaration states, “That all men are
created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of
happiness.” Notice the wording! Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness
are *among* the rights bequeathed to men. Clearly other rights can and
do exist! To claim otherwise is to assert that Jefferson was careless in
his choice of words, a somewhat precarious position to take, I would think.

In fact, every society defines the rights it considers appropriate, as well
as restrictions on those rights, that best serve its needs. Over the course
of our history Americans have agreed to extend their understanding of rights
beyond what the Framers or their contemporaries may have considered
appropriate. These include the right to a fair wage, to decent conditions of
employment, to clean air and water and uncontaminated food. We are currently
engaged in extending the definition further, to include adequate
healthcare. Indeed it’s hard to understand how the pursuit of happiness can
be guaranteed absent a basic claim to good health. This possibility didn’t
exist two centuries ago, so it would be futile and absurd to look to our
Founders for guidance in this area. The very concept would have been
meaningless to them.

It’s easy to see why libertarians favor an eighteenth century worldview that
ignores any form of social responsibility. “Every man for himself and the
Devil take the hindmost!” works well, if you’ve managed to scramble to the
top of the heap; but most of us have grown beyond this kind of puerile
selfishness. Fortunately we outnumber those who haven’t.

Constraining federal government to its enumerated powers is essential to the survival of our republic.

Constraining federal government to its enumerated powers is essential to the survival of our republic.

Health care reform has reduced our individual freedom. As personal liberty recedes, so does prosperity. It may not be reversed by our “rabid right wing zealotry,” but will be revealed for what it is in time, as its inefficiency does what social reform always has done and always will do. The USSR was the greatest “landmark in social progress,” and it was revealed for what it was.

Dear ajhill,
please read the posts of wakalix before replying to them. Everything you claimed was addressed in his links. Are we our brothers keeper? Yes. And the most good will be done to the most people if the efficiency of freedom and the free market is able to take hold. You cannot say that this has not yet worked because for as long as we've had any need for better healthcare, we have been under more and more intensive government regulation.

Dear ajhill,
please read the posts of wakalix before replying to them. Everything you claimed was addressed in his links. Are we our brothers keeper? Yes. And the most good will be done to the most people if the efficiency of freedom and the free market is able to take hold. You cannot say that this has not yet worked because for as long as we’ve had any need for better healthcare, we have been under more and more intensive government regulation.

Health care reform has reduced our individual freedom. As personal liberty recedes, so does prosperity. It may not be reversed by our “rabid right wing zealotry,” but will be revealed for what it is in time, as its inefficiency does what social reform always has done and always will do. The USSR was the greatest “landmark in social progress,” and it was revealed for what it was.

If we succeed in protecting Coloradoans from ObamaCare, we still are subject to increase premiums and income taxes, are we not?:

If it is a right then I want it now! Not in one, two, three or more years, NOW! Since I can't be heallthy unless I eat then food must also be a right therefore I want it NOW too! I am told that red wine is healthy for my heart so I want it NOW too! In my persuit of happiness I could get there much quicker in a new corvettee so I want that NOW too! Don't get me started on the list of things that will make me happy.

Natures law (GOD given) was the way the founders, including Jefferson, were describing their position that there are unalienable rights that come from a higher power other than other men. Read from federalist 51 ” If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.”
The overarching purpose in writing the constitution as they did was to limit the power of the federal government! They wrote it to protect the people from a government run by men with all of thier inherant imperfections!

If it is a right then I want it now! Not in one, two, three or more years, NOW! Since I can’t be heallthy unless I eat then food must also be a right therefore I want it NOW too! I am told that red wine is healthy for my heart so I want it NOW too! In my persuit of happiness I could get there much quicker in a new corvettee so I want that NOW too! Don’t get me started on the list of things that will make me happy.

Natures law (GOD given) was the way the founders, including Jefferson, were describing their position that there are unalienable rights that come from a higher power other than other men. Read from federalist 51 ” If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.”
The overarching purpose in writing the constitution as they did was to limit the power of the federal government! They wrote it to protect the people from a government run by men with all of thier inherant imperfections!

The health care freedom of choice initiative would prevent the state from forcing people to enroll in a health plan. It also guarantees that people will have the freedom to pay cash for the health care that they wish.

The initiative does not protect anyone from premium increases or income taxes. Income taxes are legal under the US and Colorado constitutions. Premiums are prices for the financial protection that health insurance provides. Arbitrarily fixing them would be enacting a price control. Price controls always do serious damage, and in this case would make the market for health insurance even less functional than it is. ObamaCare, by the way, does enact backdoor price controls via minimum loss ratios and various regulatory bodies.

What the proposed amendment would do is keep Colorado from imposing a single health care system (legal under ObamaCare if the state got a waiver) on the citizens of Colorado. Proponents of single payer could still have a single payer system. All they would have to do is create such a good system that everyone would want to voluntarily be a member.

The way to stop premium increases is to reduce the cost of health care. Two major things will do that–a reduction in unnecessary regulation, which accounts for 10 percent of annual spending, and an increase in consumer directed care. Consumer directed care has been shown to increase people's satisfaction and reduce costs by 20 to 30 percent.

ObamaCare and state run health care do just the opposite. They increase unnecessary regulation by making people prepay even their smallest health care expenses, and they force people to purchase unnecessarily expensive insurance plans with benefits they neither want nor need. Government run care is also populated with innumerable boards and commissions with grants, regulatory, and pilot programs that given innumerable government functionaries cushy positions from which they can tell others what to do. It also turns otherwise free people into fawning, dependent, rent seekers begging this or that commission to give them an advantage over others.

Existing evidence shows that the Obama approach makes costs explode, and that consumer directed care, even for people in Medicaid, makes costs fall.

Passing the freedom of health care choice initiative will help contain the damage done by government meddling in medical care and set the stage for letting free people get on with the job of implementing real, proven, reforms that set physicians and patients free, improve health care, and lower costs.

If we succeed in protecting Coloradoans from ObamaCare, we still are subject to increase premiums and income taxes, are we not?:

The health care freedom of choice initiative would prevent the state from forcing people to enroll in a health plan. It also guarantees that people will have the freedom to pay cash for the health care that they wish.

The initiative does not protect anyone from premium increases or income taxes. Income taxes are legal under the US and Colorado constitutions. Premiums are prices for the financial protection that health insurance provides. Arbitrarily fixing them would be enacting a price control. Price controls always do serious damage, and in this case would make the market for health insurance even less functional than it is. ObamaCare, by the way, does enact backdoor price controls via minimum loss ratios and various regulatory bodies.

What the proposed amendment would do is keep Colorado from imposing a single health care system (legal under ObamaCare if the state got a waiver) on the citizens of Colorado. Proponents of single payer could still have a single payer system. All they would have to do is create such a good system that everyone would want to voluntarily be a member.

The way to stop premium increases is to reduce the cost of health care. Two major things will do that–a reduction in unnecessary regulation, which accounts for 10 percent of annual spending, and an increase in consumer directed care. Consumer directed care has been shown to increase people's satisfaction and reduce costs by 20 to 30 percent.

ObamaCare and state run health care do just the opposite. They increase unnecessary regulation by making people prepay even their smallest health care expenses, and they force people to purchase unnecessarily expensive insurance plans with benefits they neither want nor need. Government run care is also populated with innumerable boards and commissions with grants, regulatory, and pilot programs that given innumerable government functionaries cushy positions from which they can tell others what to do. It also turns otherwise free people into fawning, dependent, rent seekers begging this or that commission to give them an advantage over others.

Existing evidence shows that the Obama approach makes costs explode, and that consumer directed care, even for people in Medicaid, makes costs fall.

Passing the freedom of health care choice initiative will help contain the damage done by government meddling in medical care and set the stage for letting free people get on with the job of implementing real, proven, reforms that set physicians and patients free, improve health care, and lower costs.

[...] April, and WE NEED HELP!  If you can volunteer to gather signatures please give us your contact information here. And if you’d like to give some cash for our fight go [...]

[...] Jon Caldara, president of the Independence Institute, would like to turn Colorado into “a sanctuary state for quality health care.” Toward that end, his organization is spearheading a petition effort to amend the state constitution (PDF). Among other things, the amendment would be a rejoinder to the insurance mandate imposed by Congress. You can get information about the effort on the site Patient Power. [...]

“As personal liberty recedes, so does prosperity.” This little bit of
libertarian cant is full of error and unjustified assumption. The basic
mistake is to assume that laissez faire capitalism constitutes liberty. In
fact, it's better described as license – the ability of the wealthy and
powerful to do whatever they please at the expense of everyone else. Social
Darwinism, the underlying philosophy of this kind of economy, celebrates
freedom for some and serfdom (pace' Hayek) for the masses.
In fact, the “greatest landmark in social progress” was the New Deal, not
Bolshevik communism, which no one on the left favors. The New Deal produced
the greatest flowering of the middle class and the national economy in
history, reversed only by the rise of Reaganomics, which after thirty years
of continuous right wing domination has brought us to our present sorry
state.

What regulation? The health insurance companies have been specifically exempted from anti-trust regulation for years. And what vaunted “efficiency” of the free market are you talking about? The one that allowed the Savings and Loans to precipitate a financial meltdown? The one that took Detroit to the summit of the automobile industry? The one that produced such success for Enron and its investors? The most recent banking disaster? You libertarians are hilarious. Every time business and the market have been allowed free rein rather than subjected to prudent regulation, they’ve crashed and burned, usually bringing lots of innocent bystanders down with them.

“As personal liberty recedes, so does prosperity.” This little bit of

libertarian cant is full of error and unjustified assumption. The basic

mistake is to assume that laissez faire capitalism constitutes liberty. In

fact, it's better described as license – the ability of the wealthy and

powerful to do whatever they please at the expense of everyone else. Social

Darwinism, the underlying philosophy of this kind of economy, celebrates

freedom for some and serfdom (pace' Hayek) for the masses.

In fact, the “greatest landmark in social progress” was the New Deal, not

Bolshevik communism, which no one on the left favors. The New Deal produced

the greatest flowering of the middle class and the national economy in

history, reversed only by the rise of Reaganomics, which after thirty years

of continuous right wing domination has brought us to our present sorry

state.

[...] April, and WE NEED HELP!  If you can volunteer to gather signatures please give us your contact information here. And if you’d like to give some cash for our fight go here. … If you help, we are going [...]

Could not agree more Bob, good to see your name & you are still around.

I would like to know where you have the petitions. I will refer my friends so that they may sign. Lring@att.net

I would like to know where you have the petitions. I will refer my friends so that they may sign. Lring@att.net

Read the Condstitution. #!. The rights do not come from gorenment, but God.
#2. Health care is not a right, even the great Progressive FDR knew that and tried to establish a new bill of rights which included Healthcare along with a right to a job, and right to a home. Fortunately, we still had a Congress with some gumption and whose place in the balance of power was still recognized by even the near dictatorial authority of FDR.

#3. No one I know denies the need for Healthcasre Reform, but that does automatically call for Government take-over.

Read the Condstitution. #!. The rights do not come from gorenment, but God.

#2. Health care is not a right, even the great Progressive FDR knew that and tried to establish a new bill of rights which included Healthcare along with a right to a job, and right to a home. Fortunately, we still had a Congress with some gumption and whose place in the balance of power was still recognized by even the near dictatorial authority of FDR.

#3. No one I know denies the need for Healthcasre Reform, but that does automatically call for Government take-over.

Excellent;

We're doing the exact same thing here in Ohio.

http://www.theohioproject.com

http://www.ohiolibertycouncil.com

We have until 30 June to get over 600,000 signatures.

Good luck to you folks out there in Colorado, We'll be thinking of you also as we work the Petition signing booths and events.

John Mc

Excellent;

We're doing the exact same thing here in Ohio.

http://www.theohioproject.com

http://www.ohiolibertycouncil.com

We have until 30 June to get over 600,000 signatures.

Good luck to you folks out there in Colorado, We'll be thinking of you also as we work the Petition signing booths and events.

John Mc

[...] make it to Territory Days?  No problem, there are plenty of other opportunities to help, even if you’re not in Colorado Springs.  Get a petition and gather signatures from friends, [...]

[...] Give us your contact info to help gather signatures. [...]

I would support Obamas and his new health care insurance program, but I didn't hear from him what “medical rationing” means and that sounds exactly like what insurance companies are doing right now: denying people claims for expensive treatments which keep them alive. So unless Obama can guarantee that people who suffer from cancer, aids and other diseases that need an expensive treatment will get that treatment, well, I can't give him my vote.

I would support Obamas and his new health care insurance program, but I didn't hear from him what “medical rationing” means and that sounds exactly like what insurance companies are doing right now: denying people claims for expensive treatments which keep them alive. So unless Obama can guarantee that people who suffer from cancer, aids and other diseases that need an expensive treatment will get that treatment, well, I can't give him my vote.
_________________________________
James T. – Insurance Agent