Yeah, tax the fatsos but not my soda and ding dongs.

Still think we’re not already living in a totalitarian state? Are you awake yet? Are you ready to fight?

Is Totalitarian Conquest of USA Already Complete?


By Sher Zieve Wednesday, October 7, 2009
As the ruling (no longer governing) political party in the US continues to work fast and furiously to create and pass legislation designed to eliminate any remaining liberties guaranteed US citizens by the US Constitution and create a massive dependent-class of said citizens beholden only to it—and the opposition party ignores its works and sits on its collective derrière—the answer to my question “is the totalitarian conquest of the USA already a fait accompli?” has become tragically obvious.

With Obama continuing to build his ‘you-report-only-to-me’ force of Marxist Czars (seemingly calculated to replace those positions that have traditionally had to pass Congressional scrutiny) and his already expressed disdain for the US’ establishment document, it strongly appears to be so. But there are even more definitive examples. Let’s take a look at a few.

With regards to the ongoing attempts by US citizens to gain the truth about Obama’s “natural born citizen” status, the Dictator-in-Chief has spent at least $1-1.5 Millions to keep his true birth certificate and all of his college and other school records hidden from the public. On the other hand, when Congress and others demanded that his competitor for the position of POTUS produce “proof” that he is “natural born” McCain did so. Obama, however, still refuses—which leads to strong and logical speculation that he is not a US citizen. Is Obama exempt because of his skin color (he is partially black)? Or, are Marxists who have for years designed the destruction of the USA excused from presenting their true qualifications for the highest office in the land? Why are Republicans in leadership positions not asking for proof, as real American citizens are doing? It seems even Republicans are complicit in this possible if not probable fraud. Note: The supposed Hawaiian COLB (Certificate of Live Birth) that has floated on the Internet is not a valid birth certificate.

Obama is also being represented in a current lawsuit by Attorneys who were appointed by US Attorney General Eric Holder. Apparently, they are being paid for their services by the US taxpayer. So…Holder was appointed by Obama and he appointed attorneys who are being paid by the US taxpayers to continue to keep Obama’s records hidden from them? Does this make sense to you? Is this even legal and constitutional? I doubt it.

A friend also brought up the question “how can the attorneys representing Barack Obama claim in court they are representing the President of the United States of America when that IS the specific issue the plaintiffs in the case are claiming is false—due to Obama‘s ineligibility to hold the office? And why didn‘t plaintiff’s attorneys [in the Obama eligibility case currently before US District Court Judge David O. Carter] object with ‘by what authority do you recognize Barack Obama as POTUS‘!?” These are great questions and they deserve—no they NEED—answers from Obama’s We-the-People funded attorneys. Note: If I’m paying for them, don’t I have a stake—i.e. standing—in the outcome? If I am not afforded this, cannot I also claim harm? Why are Obama’s attorneys (who are apparently being funded by us) not being asked to produce the proof that Obama is eligible to be President of the USA, in order to support the defense‘s claim? Is this merely another example of totalitarianism having replaced our former Republic? Now, we have to openly pay for everything the Obama does—including defending himself in lawsuits?

On 4 September, I wrote a column entitled “Is MA Storm Trooper bill a Test Case for Obama Takeover?” In it I identified the content, page and line numbers of the specifically Machiavellian Massachusetts’ Pandemic Act of 2009—st02028. Although the usual leftist contingent vilified me with the usual ad hominem attacks (including one large forum that used to be conservative), no one could deny that what I had quoted from the Massachusetts’ Pandemic Act of 2009 was (and still is) actually included in the now-passed legislation. This becomes, I believe, even more important when coupled with the following information.

In an interview of medical writer and editor Jane Burgermeister, conducted in Austria on 8 September 2009 by Project Camelot, the draconian reasons for the Swine flu’s mandatory implementation emerge. Burgermeister advises that the International Health Regulation Act of 2005 , control is given to the WHO (World Health Organization) over member countries—this includes the USA. In a declared pandemic (which the WHO declared for H1N1 Swine flu), the WHO has the authority to take over police and health forces of every member country. In the almost hour long interview (link provided below), Burgermeister also outlines the other groups and foundations that have brought this coordinated attack against the world’s people to bear. In this country—thus far in Massachusetts—laws exist that place mandatory compliance for everyone to take vaccinations when the ruling government deems it so. Those who refuse are currently, in MA, subject to a $1,000 fine, police forcibly entering their private homes and quarantining or even imprisoning them. Did you know that? Please read the Massachusetts Pandemic Act of 2009 (st02028). All of these Orwellian provisions are included therein.

Still think we’re not already living in a totalitarian state? Are you awake yet? Are you ready to fight?

You mean people should pay more, be accountable and responsible for their actions like they do by paying higher car insurance premiums if they crash into everything all the time and get speeding tickets every day?

Lefties won't like this idea at all but I think it is just the ticket. I would add that if they don't loses weight their expensive health insurance should be cancelled - like when the government takes their drivers license away from them for bad behaviour that they refuse to change adn their car insurance provider drops them like a hot potato.

Why should I pay to cover fat people who are too lazy to lose weight? I also don't want to cover anyone who is too lazy to get a job or is an illegal alien or smokes or - and here is the kicker, anyone including myself, unless I chose to do so and others I want to cover - my free choice. I don't pay for their car insurance with my tax money and I shouldn't have to pay for their health insurance with it either.

Let them pay their own freight for once and take responsibility for their lives. while I hold them accountable for their own actions or inaction. They are not my minor children and not my responsibility.

Do the have an option for those who have medical conditions that make them obese and it's not their fault?A lot of people have these types of problems

I agree with this plan. If state workers don't like the state health insurance rules, then they shouldn't work for the state. It's that simple. If I am a tobacco user or am extremely overweight and at risk for some serious health issues in the private sector, then my insurance premium will usually reflect that. As a North Carolina taxpayer and someone who must buy my own insurance, I don't think it's fair for state employees to expect me to not only subsidize their health insurance but then also pick up the slack for their poor decisions! Give me a break! This is where personal responsibility comes in to play. If you don't want to pay a higher premium then lose weight and/or stop smoking.

Mary, what makes you think that anybody should be accountable for their neighbor's lifestyle? You seem to be saying that I am my brother's keeper. Is my brother a drooling idiot?

OK, NOW WE WILL DETERMINE HEALTH INSURANCE COST BY THE WAY WE ARE, RIGHT? SO ANOTHER WORDS MY WIFE IS OVER WEIGHT, AND MY DAUGHTER IS UNDER WEIGHT. MY NEIGHBOR WHO RUNS 5 MILES A DAY BUT DRINKS BOOZE AND ON THE OTHER SIDE IS A NEIGHBOR IS IN GREAT HEALTH AND IS POPULAR WIT H IN THE COMMUNITY. SO WHO DETERMINES THE COST RATES. YOU. OR THE DOCTOR THAT I REALIZED WAS RIPPING ME OFF FOR OVER-CHARGES THAT I THREATENED LEGAL ACTION WITH. WHAT IS HE GOING TO PUT ON THAT FORM. I KNOW - THAT I AM A FAT, DIRTY, DRUG ADDICT THAT NEEDS TO BE LOCKED UP FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE. I HOP YOUR SMART ENOUGH TO SEE WHAT I AM SAYING HERE. HEALTH INSURANCE IS FOR THE PEOPLE, ALL THE PEOPLE.

Dear Stella,


The Republicans ARE the fat & unemployed welfare takers of our nation. Don't believe me, go to this Non-partisan site & see for yourself:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22685.html


Surprise, surprise, all these years we've been listening to the Republican Party tell us that Democrats are on welfare & it was all another BIG LIE!
Democratic States pay the taxes, while Republican States take the welfare checks.

The chronically Republican States are the Welfare Queens of the Union. Tax Foundation breaks it down, State by State as to how much each State pays in Federal taxes & how much they take back from the Fed., in Welfare and entitlements.

The red or Republican States are the Welfare Queens, while the blue or Democratic States are paying with their tax money for the Republican welfare checks. Among the worst Republican State offenders are South Carolina, with $1.35 in welfare for every $1.00 paid in taxes, and also Alaska and Arizona!