by Doug Book, Editor

The IRS has admitted to harassing conservative groups seeking tax exempt status, singling out for extra special scrutiny organizations which featured “patriot” or “tea party” designations in their name. We now know that a number of these groups were forced to withdraw their applications, being unable or unwilling to continue what in some cases had become a 3 year battle with the corrupt federal agency.

But few in the media have bothered to ask who directed the IRS to engage in this criminal behavior. It has been reported that Senators Chuck Schumer and Al Franken addressed a letter to IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman in early 2012, “…demanding the IRS target conservative groups or face legislation forcing them to do so.” (1)

Yet Democrat demands that the IRS investigate conservative organizations were nothing new. Senators Dick Durbin and Max Baucus offered their own “suggestions” that the Service concentrate their ... Continue Reading:IRS Smoking Gun just blew a hole in Obama’s plans]]>

by Doug Book,  Editor

The IRS has admitted to harassing conservative groups seeking tax exempt status, singling out for extra special scrutiny organizations which featured “patriot” or “tea party” designations in their name. We now know that a number of these groups were forced to withdraw their applications, being unable or unwilling to continue what in some cases had become a 3 year battle with the corrupt federal agency.

But few in the media have bothered to ask who directed the IRS to engage in this criminal behavior. It has been reported that Senators Chuck Schumer and Al Franken addressed a letter to IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman in early 2012, “…demanding the IRS target conservative groups or face legislation forcing them to do so.” (1)

Yet Democrat demands that the IRS investigate conservative organizations were nothing new. Senators Dick Durbin and Max Baucus offered their own “suggestions” that the Service concentrate their efforts on such groups in 2010, (2) Durbin claiming his missive resulted from the Supreme Court’s Citizen’s United decision which “…created a rush for organizations seeking tax exempt status…” (3) Of course that “rush” excuse was a lie as the number of organizations seeking tax exempt status actually declined both during the year of the Citizens United decision (2010) and the year after. (4)

But it appears the IRS shoe has finally dropped, right on Barack Hussein’s head. The story has broken that National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) President Colleen Kelley met with Obama on March 31^st of 2010, exactly one day before the IRS began to target Tea Party and other conservative groups across the nation. As the Treasury Department’s Inspector General’s report reveals, “April 1-2, 2010: The new Acting Manager, Technical Unit [of the IRS], suggested the need for a Sensitive Case Report on the Tea Party cases. The Determinations Unit Program Manager Agreed.”  (5)

Oddly enough, neither Colleen Kelley, the NTEU or Barack Hussein want to talk about that coincidentally timed, 2010 meeting. Responding to a Washington Post inquiry via email, Kelley said the “NTEU is working to get the facts but does not have any specifics at this time. Moreover, IRS employees are not permitted to discuss taxpayer cases. We cannot comment further at this time…” (5)

And when Barack was asked about White House knowledge of IRS targeting, he did his best impersonation of Bill Clinton by ignoring the question that was asked and answering one that wasn’t. Bloomberg News asked Obama: “Can you assure the American people that nobody in the White House knew about the [IRS] actions before your Counsel’s Office found out on April 22nd?” Obama’s answer: “I can assure you that I certainly did not know anything about the IG report before the IG report had been leaked through the press.” (5)

The IG report? Bloomberg didn’t ask about the IG report. The News service asked if anyone at the White House had prior knowledge of IRS corruption!  When in doubt (or guilty as Hell), just Duck, Dodge and Hide!

Of all the corrupt schemes engineered by the Obama Regime, this is the most dangerous to their future plans. If Republicans remain steadfast in their criticism of Obama and continue the political pressure, the One might be forced to play defense during much of his last 4 years. That is certainly NOT what he had in mind after the election.  

(1) http://conservativefiringline.com/flashback-chuck-schumer-al-franken-sign-letter-demanding-irs-target-tea-party-groups-in-2012/

(2) http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/17/politics/camp-irs-hearing/index.html

(3) http://blogs.suntimes.com/politics/2013/05/us_sen_dick_durbins_name_brought_into_the_mix_during_irs_hearing.html

(4) http://weaselzippers.us/2013/05/18/shocker-irs-chief-apparently-lied-during-testimony-yesterday-there-was-no-greater-flood-of-tax-exempt-applications-in-2010/

(5) http://spectator.org/archives/2013/05/20/obama-and-the-irs-the-smoking

by Doug Book, editor

Coach is Right published this article well before the current IRS scandals had broken. We thought readers might be interested in taking another look at this slight infraction committed by our “voluntary” taxing authorities.

In September of 2011, 60 million health records involving 10 million Americans were illegally confiscated by members of the IRS. The theft took place at an unidentified place of business in California.

Referring to itself as the John Doe Company in a lawsuit filed last week against the 15 IRS agents who took part, plaintiffs claim that “no search warrant authorized the seizure of these records; no subpoena authorized the seizure of these records; none of the 10,000,000 Americans were under any kind of known criminal or civil investigation and their medical records had no relevance whatsoever to the IRS search.” (1)

One of the IRS agents who took ... Continue Reading:Obama using the IRS for blackmail as well as intimidation?]]>

by Doug Book, editor

Coach is Right published this article well before the current IRS scandals had broken. We thought readers might be interested in taking another look at this slight infraction committed by our “voluntary” taxing authorities.

In September of 2011, 60 million health records involving 10 million Americans were illegally confiscated by members of the IRS. The theft took place at an unidentified place of business in California.

Referring to itself as the John Doe Company in a lawsuit filed last week against the 15 IRS agents who took part, plaintiffs claim that “no search warrant authorized the seizure of these records; no subpoena authorized the seizure of these records; none of the 10,000,000 Americans were under any kind of known criminal or civil investigation and their medical records had no relevance whatsoever to the IRS search.” (1)

One of the IRS agents who took part in the theft told John Doe Company officials that the government was searching for records involved in a “tax matter” pertaining to a former John Doe employee. Yet when informed that their search warrant did NOT allow for the confiscation–or even the search—of the 60 million health records taken, the IRS “…threatened to ‘rip’ the servers containing the medical data out of the building…” if the records were not turned over willingly! (2)

The Doe Company complaint continues:

Moreover, even though Defendants knew that the records they were seizing were not included within the scope of the search warrant, the Defendants nonetheless searched and seized the records without making any attempt to segregate the files from those that could possibly be related to the search warrant. In fact, no effort was made at all to even try maintaining the illusion of legitimacy and legality. (2)

Never mind the breathtaking arrogance of Obama’s foot soldiers or the contempt they display for the law and the American people. Those are old stories. In this case the truly relevant question is WHY? What was the real purpose behind this IRS theft? The John Doe Company is presumed to be an insurance company or repository of insurance records. Of the 10 million individuals whose medical records were taken it is believed that nearly 90% live outside of California making the IRS theft one of truly national significance. The records stolen are said to include those of every state judge in California, all state court employees and “…prominent citizens in the world of entertainment, business and government, from all walks of life.” The medical information includes “… psychological counseling, gynecological counseling, sexual or drug treatment and a wide range of medical matters covering the most intimate and private of concerns.” (3)

In short, if ever a politician needed information with which to coerce a powerful, recalcitrant friend or blackmail an outright enemy, these stolen records could provide a treasure trove of “mineable” dirt! Was this a Regime-ordered fishing expedition, a search for potentially damaging information concerning the more recognizable individuals within a very long list of otherwise less than noteworthy names? Or were millions of files stolen in order to provide a healthy margin of cover for the relatively few which Regime operatives REALLY wanted!

The IRS has operated with utter disregard for law and the Constitution for decades. Intimidation became the “new normal” for that contemptible band of bureaucratic thugs long before Obama began his Marxist blitzkrieg. Was their thuggish behavior in California a warning to the nation’s insurers from the Pennsylvania Avenue Cosa Nostra that resistance–legal or otherwise– to New World Order patricians will not be tolerated? Have we just witnessed the method by which ObamaCare’s principle collection agency intends to assemble and review claims information for the nation’s insured?

Remember, they’re from the government and they’re here to help you.  

(1) http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/irs-face-lawsuit-over-theft-60-million-patient-health-records?topic=08,18

(2) http://docs.ismgcorp.com/files/external/IRS_medical_record_case_3_15_13.pdf

(3) http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/03/14/55707.htm

by Doug Book, staff writer

“In the days of the Malleus, if the physician could find no evidence of natural illness, he was expected to find evidence of witchcraft: today, if he cannot diagnose organic illness, he is expected to diagnose mental illness.” (1)

The Malleus Maleficarum was a 15th century text which instructed Inquisitors on the proper method of identifying, trying and burning witches. Though it was many years ago that renowned psychiatrist Thomas Szasz (1920-2012) used the example of the Malleus to comment on the diagnostic practices of his fellow physicians, it seems he might have been on to something as today psychiatrists and educators alike are concerned that the recently completed “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders V” (DSM 5) will be responsible for psychiatrists improperly diagnosing millions of Americans as mentally ill.

Produced exclusively by the American Psychiatric Association, the DSM provides physicians with ... Continue Reading:Millions of Americans could be misdiagnosed as mentally ill]]>

by Doug Book,  staff writer

“In the days of the Malleus, if the physician could find no evidence of natural illness, he was expected to find evidence of witchcraft: today, if he cannot diagnose organic illness, he is expected to diagnose mental illness.” (1)

The Malleus Maleficarum was a 15^th century text which instructed Inquisitors on the proper method of identifying, trying and burning witches. Though it was many years ago that renowned psychiatrist Thomas Szasz (1920-2012) used the example of the Malleus to comment on the diagnostic practices of his fellow physicians, it seems he might have been on to something as today psychiatrists and educators alike are concerned that the recently completed “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders V” (DSM 5) will be responsible for psychiatrists improperly diagnosing millions of Americans as mentally ill.

Produced exclusively by the American Psychiatric Association, the DSM provides physicians with a handy checklist of mental illnesses. Simply fit a patient into a category and a diagnosis follows, complete with treatment and prescribed medication approved by insurers and the federal Medicare bureaucracy.

But with the introduction of a new and broader category of diagnosis under the heading of Somatic Symptom Disorders (SSD), the DSM 5 literally threatens to “…license the application of a mental health diagnosis for all illnesses…” (2) Duke University professor emeritus Allen Frances writes that  “…a person will meet the criteria for SSD by reporting just one bodily symptom that is distressing and/or disruptive to daily life and having just one of the following three reactions to it that persist for at least six months: 1) ‘disproportionate’ thoughts about the seriousness of their symptom(s); or 2) a high level of anxiety about their health; or, 3) devoting excessive time and energy to symptoms or health concerns. (3)

In short, should a physician believe a patient to be pre-occupied or overly concerned with a physical illness, a diagnosis of Somatic Symptom Disorder may be added to the patient’s file. The doctor could therefore make a purely “…subjective and fallible judgment that the patient’s life has become ‘subsumed’ with health concerns and preoccupations…” (3)

Dr. Frances voices a fear which should concern current and prospective patients alike:

Do we really want to burden and stigmatize seriously ill people with an additional diagnosis of mental illness, just because they are worried about being sick and are vigilant about their symptoms? Might patients with life threatening diseases become reluctant to report new symptoms that might be early indicators of recurrence, metastasis or secondary disease – for fear of attracting a diagnosis of ‘SSD’? (3)

And what might be the “real world” ramifications of such a diagnosis? Could individuals deemed to be suffering from SSD be denied certain types of work or face difficulties at their current job? Could they be refused future health insurance coverage? Will they be considered hypochondriacs and therefore be placed at medical risk as physicians  ignore their complaints of “not feeling well?

ObamaCare is expected to cost Americans $2.6 trillion in its first full decade of existence (2014-2023.) (4) It will also add another trillion in taxes over the same time period. (5) And now costs associated with healthcare may skyrocket simply because countless patients have been wrongly diagnosed as mentally ill.

Soon we won’t be able to afford to be sick OR well!

(1) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/allen-frances/terrible-news-dsm-5-refus_b_2473321.html

(2) http://dxrevisionwatch.com/2012/05/26/somatic-symptom-disorder-could-capture-millions-more-under-mental-health-diagnosis/

(3) http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dsm5-in-distress/201212/mislabeling-medical-illness-mental-disorder

(4) http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obamacare-now-estimated-cost-26-trillion-first-decade_648413.html

(5) http://www.atr.org/trillion-obamacare-tax-hike-hitting-jan-a7393

by Doug Book, staff writer

While gun owners have been fixated on threats to ban “assault weapons” and virtually every other sort of semi-automatic rifle and pistol, Barack Obama and Regime, gun confiscationists have quietly advanced a far more insidious assault on 2nd Amendment rights.

In New York State, the thoroughly unconstitutional SAFE Act is responsible for the confiscation of Pistol Owner ID Cards (one needs a state approved ID Card to own a pistol in the Empire State) along with pistols themselves. And the gun owners currently being honored with this violation of their right to keep and bear arms “…have been discovered to have been prescribed …different types of psychotropic drugs, such as those for Depression or Anxiety.” (1)

In short, “…unknown sources have seen fit to take it upon themselves to share confidential medical records with NY State Officials without authorization, a massive HIPPA violation.” (1) Lists of users of ... Continue Reading:Obama Regime will ban owners, not guns]]>

by Doug Book,  staff writer

While gun owners have been fixated on threats to ban “assault weapons” and virtually every other sort of semi-automatic rifle and pistol, Barack Obama and Regime, gun confiscationists have quietly advanced a far more insidious assault on 2^nd Amendment rights.

In New York State, the thoroughly unconstitutional SAFE Act is responsible for the confiscation of Pistol Owner ID Cards (one needs a state approved ID Card to own a pistol in the Empire State) along with pistols themselves. And the gun owners currently being honored with this violation of their right to keep and bear arms “…have been discovered to have been prescribed …different types of psychotropic drugs, such as those for Depression or Anxiety.”  (1)

In short, “…unknown sources have seen fit to take it upon themselves to share confidential medical records with NY State Officials without authorization, a massive HIPPA violation.” (1) Lists of users of prescribed medications have been illegally supplied to NY officials where they are compared with lists of New York’s holders of Pistol Owner ID Cards. Anyone on the left still want to suggest that national firearm registration by Big Brother would not really represent a danger to 2^nd Amendment rights?

And how will the Regime apply such illegally acquired medical information to the violation of 2nd Amendment rights on the national stage? Last year, voters in Colorado and Washington State decided to ignore federal law by legalizing marijuana use in the 2 states. Did the Obama Department of Justice launch immediate legal action against the two states as they had against Arizona when that state chose to ENFORCE federal immigration law? Uh, no. In fact, attorneys for the Congressional Research Service made it clear that the federal government could exercise great “flexibility” in prosecuting citizens of Washington or Colorado for marijuana use.

However, these Regime attorneys were QUITE certain “…that federal firearms regulators will be aggressive about banning anyone who uses marijuana from buying – or possessing – a weapon.” (2) Rest assured that the names of marijuana users will be collected by both states and turned over to the FBI where they will be included in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), making it impossible for these individuals to purchase a firearm.

And will Americans insured under ObamaCare also have their personal information on drug use become part of a national database? Will the use of marijuana in 1994, recently confessed to an ObamaCare physician, eliminate an individual from consideration for the purchase of a firearm?

Make no mistake, the Obama Regime will use any means, any excuse, to prevent American citizens owning a gun. The criminal misuse of medical records will become a standard method of banning gun ownership.

The left realize that banning guns is far too dangerous a tack at the present time. So Regime minions have decided to aggressively ban owners.  

(1) http://beforeitsnews.com/survival/2013/04/ny-gun-confiscation-underway-citizens-told-to-turn-in-pistol-owner-id-firearms-2468726.html?utm_campaign=&utm_term=http%3A%2F%2Fb4in.info%2Fd0oR&utm_medium=verticalresponse&utm_content=beforeit39snews-verticalresponse&utm_source=direct-b4in.info

(2) http://dancingczars.wordpress.com/2013/04/27/marijuana-laws-new-tool-to-ban-gun-ownership/#more-83019

by Doug Book, staff writer

The Newtown killings had anti-gunners licking their chops from CNN to Capitol Hill. Years of working to undermine the right to keep and bear arms had come virtually to naught for gun confiscationists, but they knew the deaths of 20 children could be manipulated any way they liked, allowing them to make the most asinine and unsupportable claims imaginable about the evils of gun ownership. Call it a benefit of owning the national media.

So Barack and friends spent months dancing on the graves of 20 sons and daughters while cooking up senate bills and executive “actions” advocating every conceivable violation of 2nd Amendment rights.

But rather than intimidate Americans into disposing of firearms, every new assault on gun rights, every announced scheme to ban the purchase and ownership of weapons only accelerated public demand, especially for guns the political ruling class had threatened to confiscate!

Gun ... Continue Reading:We don’t trust you, Barack and you’ll not have our guns]]>

by Doug Book,  staff writer

The Newtown killings had anti-gunners licking their chops from CNN to Capitol Hill. Years of working to undermine the right to keep and bear arms had come virtually to naught for gun confiscationists, but they knew the deaths of 20 children could be manipulated any way they liked, allowing them to make the most asinine and unsupportable claims imaginable about the evils of gun ownership. Call it a benefit of owning the national media.

So Barack and friends spent months dancing on the graves of 20 sons and daughters while cooking up senate bills and executive “actions” advocating every conceivable violation of 2^nd Amendment rights.

But rather than intimidate Americans into disposing of firearms, every new assault on gun rights, every announced scheme to ban the purchase and ownership of weapons only accelerated public demand, especially for guns the political ruling class had threatened to confiscate!

Gun sales went through the proverbial roof. And today, even firearms no one particularly wanted 6 months ago are in such short supply that replacements might not be available for a year or more. And all of this took place in spite of gun control forces holding what many believed to be a “pat hand” at the beginning of the year.

So what happened to derail the left’s dreams of gun bans and national registration? After all, the killing of 20 children at Sandy Hook had provided the gut-wrenching scene of carnage which gun grabbers across the U.S. have dreamed of for decades.

First of all the left badly underestimated the importance which an informed American people place on their 2nd Amendment rights. According to a poll taken less than a month after the Newtown killings, “two-out-of-three Americans recognize[d] that their constitutional right to own a gun was intended to ensure their freedom.”  (1) Seventy two percent of those with a gun in their home and 57% of those without told pollsters that they “…regard the 2^nd Amendment as a protection against tyranny.” (1) All of the deliberately misleading, liberal chatter about hunting being the real reason for the 2^nd Amendment has fooled no one.

And gun control advocates also failed to appreciate the extent to which the people distrust Barack Obama. His contempt for the United States and the American public have been returned in spades by a people who recognize his lies and insatiable appetite for power as serious threats to their well-being and liberty.

In short, Americans know that being armed is vital to remaining a free people. And they don’t trust the intentions of a corrupt, self-important usurper and would-be dictator.

Barack and Co were beaten before they started. New, unconstitutional gun control legislation would have been ignored throughout the nation and its proponents roundly defeated in 2014 because Americans don’t trust the ruling elite. To drive that point home, millions have armed themselves with guns which will only be surrendered by force and possibly only “from cold, dead hands.”

I sure wouldn’t want the job of collecting them.

 (1)http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/gun_control/65_see_gun_rights_as_protection_against_tyranny

by Doug Book, staff writer

In 2009, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) estimated that the yearly cost of providing healthcare for illegal aliens was $10.7 billion. It was a difficult figure to approximate as hospitals are not permitted to ask if an emergency room patient is in the country illegally. After all, should an exact total of monies spent even on the delivery of anchor babies (about $10,000 per “anchor”) become known, it would enrage an American public which Democrats especially hope to keep blissfully ignorant about one of the principle reasons for skyrocketing healthcare and health insurance prices—uncompensated costs. (1)

In 1986, EMTALA was signed into law. Part of the COBRA act, EMTALA requires hospitals to provide treatment to anyone who needs it regardless of citizenship status or ability to pay. As the government does NOT reimburse hospitals for such care, a number of hospitals nationwide were forced to close ... Continue Reading:Free healthcare for illegals continues the ObamaCare way]]>  

by Doug Book,  staff writer

In 2009, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) estimated that the yearly cost of providing healthcare for illegal aliens was $10.7 billion. It was a difficult figure to approximate as hospitals are not permitted to ask if an emergency room patient is in the country illegally. After all, should an exact total of monies spent even on the delivery of anchor babies (about $10,000 per “anchor”) become known, it would enrage an American public which Democrats especially hope to keep blissfully ignorant about one of the principle reasons for skyrocketing healthcare and health insurance prices—uncompensated costs. (1) 

 In 1986, EMTALA was signed into law. Part of the COBRA act, EMTALA requires hospitals to provide treatment to anyone who needs it regardless of citizenship status or ability to pay. As the government does NOT reimburse hospitals for such care, a number of hospitals nationwide were forced to close their doors, being unable to provide millions of dollars in free services.  (2)

Though hospitals are able to recoup a minimal portion of this massive expense via Medicaid reimbursement, the only way to remain solvent is by raising prices to paying patients. Naturally this drives up the cost of both healthcare and health insurance.

Enter Barack Obama and his namesake “healthcare” program. When arguing the constitutionality of ObamaCare before the Supreme Court, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli claimed that the individual mandate requiring everyone either purchase health insurance or pay a penalty was necessary in order to stop the  practice of charging “…uncompensated costs … directly to other market participants…” (3)

In short, the Regime was ostensibly outraged that responsibility for payment of these uncompensated costs was being placed on others by healthcare providers who routinely  “…charge[d] higher rates in order to cover the cost of uncompensated care…”  Mr. Obama’s Justice Department minions argued that, although millions of Americans did not WANT to purchase health insurance, the federal government had both a right and an obligation to force them to do so in order to halt the “unfair practice” of the uninsured taking advantage of and driving up prices for the insured! (3)

So by charging EVERYONE, whether they wanted insurance or not, there would be no more unfair, uncompensated costs because everyone would be paying for healthcare!  The freeloaders, formerly gaming the system by getting free care paid by others would now be forced to pay their “fair share!”

Did Congress consider changing the EMTALA LAW–the real reason for uncompensated costs–rather than forcing ObamaCare on the American people? Of course not.  Will illegals have to buy healthcare? No. They will STILL be getting “free” care, paid by those who ARE required to buy ObamaCare approved healthcare or pay a “penalty.” (A “TAX” if you’re Justice Roberts.) 

In short, thanks to ObamaCare, billions in healthcare costs for illegals will be neatly covered up by the individual mandate. (4) And Democrats will eagerly state that illegals are NOT being covered by ObamaCare and that any healthcare expense associated with illegals is at worst, minimal.

It’s the LEAST the Democrat Party can do for 30 million undocumented voters, isn’t it!

(1) http://cnsnews.com/news/article/illegal-immigrants-account-107-billion-nation-s-health-care-costs-data-show

(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Medical_Treatment_and_Active_Labor_Act

(3) http://www.webpronews.com/obamacare-has-a-tough-day-in-the-supreme-court-2012-03

(4)  http://healthcare-coalition.org/_blog/Prescription_For_Disaster/post/ObamaCare%27s_Individual_Mandate_a_Cover-Up_to_Hide_the_Impact_of_Illegal_Immigration/

In their haste to impose an historic affront to individual liberty, the authors of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) neglected to provide the federal bureaucracy with either the funding necessary to build ObamaCare exchanges within the various states OR the authority to award tax credits or impose penalties on the American public.

For when the ACA was written it was foolishly believed by lawmakers that each of the 50 states would immediately take on the near 100 million dollar responsibility of completing an ObamaCare exchange within its borders—an exchange being the sales center without which no ObamaCare business may be transacted, no healthcare policies sold.

But today a desperate Kathleen Sebelius and her Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have gone from depending on states to implement the Affordable Care Act to threatening those same states for dragging their feet and performing acts of outright rebellion against both the law and the ... Continue Reading:The Supreme Court re-wrote ObamaCare in order to salvage it. Now the IRS takes its turn]]> by Doug Book,  staff writer

In their haste to impose an historic affront to individual liberty, the authors of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) neglected to provide the federal bureaucracy with either the funding necessary to build ObamaCare exchanges within the various states OR the authority to award tax credits or impose penalties on the American public.

For when the ACA was written it was foolishly believed by lawmakers that each of the 50 states would immediately take on the near 100 million dollar responsibility of completing an ObamaCare exchange within its borders—an exchange being the sales center without which no ObamaCare business may be transacted, no healthcare policies sold.

But today a desperate Kathleen Sebelius and her Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have gone from depending on states to implement the Affordable Care Act to threatening those same states for dragging their feet and performing acts of outright rebellion against both the law and the Obama Regime itself.

And Sebelius’ fears are well founded, for the ACA makes it clear that only state run exchanges may offer the tax credits which will make ObamaCare “affordable” to both individuals and businesses.  And only state run exchanges may impose penalties on business and fines on individuals for not obeying the letter of the law.

The long and the short of Sebelius’ problem is quite simple–no state run exchanges, no ObamaCare! And as of today, some 30 states have refused to build an ObamaCare exchange, meaning the federal government will be forced to build 30 ObamaCare exchanges with no funding and impose fines and credits with no legal authority to do so.

Enter the Internal Revenue Service with a series of new rules intended to save the day and the Affordable Care Act. Of course, no one should really mind that the Department’s 73 page usurpation of congressional authority happens to be illegal.  (1)

For it seems the IRS decided to unilaterally re-make the Affordable Care Act by ignoring the wishes of lawmakers who wrote that only state run exchanges may offer tax credits or impose penalties. According to the new IRS rules, federally run exchanges will be permitted to do exactly the same things, even though that authority is NEVER mentioned in the law except as belonging to state run exchanges!

As Michael Cannon of the Cato Institute and Case Western University Law Professor Jonathan Adler told the House Oversight Committee:

Contrary to the clear language of the statute and congressional intent, this [IRS] rule issues tax credits in health insurance “exchanges” established by the federal government. It thus triggers a $2,000-per-employee tax on employers and appropriates billions of dollars to private health insurance companies in states with a federal Exchange, also contrary to the clear language of the statute and congressional intent. (1)

Already lawsuits have been filed against the IRS for its clear misappropriation of congressional authority. And what will ObamaCare attorneys argue before the court? Perhaps something along the lines of: “Never mind what the law SAYS. Take our word for what we really MEANT it to say, especially now that things haven’t worked out the way we hoped.”

Should this obvious IRS attempt to overstep its authority be judged illegal, the Affordable Care Act will have to depend upon cowardly or corrupt Republican legislators and governors to save it from extinction.

Unfortunately that’s not the longshot it should be.

(1) http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/michaelfcannon/2012/08/19/illegal_irs_rule_to_increase_taxes__spending_under_obamacare

So far, 26 states have opted against building ObamaCare exchanges making it clear to Kathleen Sebelius that her Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will have to do all of the work and pay the tab for the creation of any Affordable Care Act “sales center” within their borders. And as the Act provides no funds for the Department to build or staff an exchange, implementation of ObamaCare rules and regulations would seem impossible within those states.

Moreover, in addition to throwing the financial burden of the Affordable Care Act back in the lap of an unprepared HHS, a number of state legislatures have passed laws making the Act’s implementation and enforcement illegal.

But Barack has different ideas.

“The Obama administration has announced its intent to disregard state laws and state constitutional amendments prohibiting the enforcement of ObamaCare. Federal agents from the Department of Health and Human Services will ... Continue Reading:States may be FORCED to implement ObamaCare whether they like it or not!]]> by Doug Book,  staff writer

So far, 26 states have opted against building ObamaCare exchanges making it clear to Kathleen Sebelius that her Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will have to do all of the work and pay the tab for the creation of any Affordable Care Act “sales center” within their borders. And as the Act provides no funds for the Department to build or staff an exchange, implementation of ObamaCare rules and regulations would seem impossible within those states.

Moreover, in addition to throwing the financial burden of the Affordable Care Act back in the lap of an unprepared HHS, a number of state legislatures have passed laws making the Act’s implementation and enforcement illegal.

But Barack has different ideas.

“The Obama administration has announced its intent to disregard state laws and state constitutional amendments prohibiting the enforcement of ObamaCare. Federal agents from the Department of Health and Human Services will assume absolute control over states’ health insurance industry and regulation in states that refuse to comply with the federal healthcare mandates.” (1)

What could be more convenient than to “disregard” those things which threaten your plans!  

This latest example of the limitless hubris of the Obama Regime began when Oklahoma Insurance Commissioner John Doak received a letter from Gary Cohen, Director of the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight (CCIIO) informing him that “…the federal government will impose ObamaCare regulations on insurance companies in Oklahoma.” (1)

Cohen’s letter came in response to a law passed by the Oklahoma legislature nullifying the implementation of ObamaCare in the state. HHS decided to take a hand by informing all health insurance providers in the state that “…enforcement of the law’s requirements will be handled by [HHS].” (2)  Shortly thereafter, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) demanded all state providers “…submit all group and individual health insurance policy forms, certificates, riders, endorsements, and amendments, as well as any other requested material pertinent to the market reforms of the Affordable Care Act to CMS for review.” (2)

In short, the federal bureaucracy intends to utterly ignore the will of the people of Oklahoma by summarily overturning any “unfriendly” statutes written by their elected representatives!

What will this mean for health insurance customers in the state? Apparently those who purchase insurance through the federally managed ObamaCare exchange will wind up with different policies, be forced to follow different procedures and generally pay much higher premiums than residents who purchase coverage directly from an insurance company, whether individually or as part of a group through their employer. Two sets of rules will exist in the state.

But rest assured, as HHS will not tolerate competition, Katherine Sebelius & Co will soon disallow the purchase of any insurance plan unless it be through the ObamaCare exchange. 

Of course, that is an ObamaCare exchange which has yet to be built and for which the Affordable Care Act itself made no financial provision!

In 2010, Barack assured the American public that anyone fortunate enough to be protected under ObamaCare will save an average of $2500 in premium expense compared with his “old” policy.

No doubt this will be true if, like their Lord and Master, ObamaCare customers are permitted to disregard those things which disturb them–like premium billing statements.

(1) http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/14892-obama-admin-ignores-nullification-federal-agents-will-enforce-obamacare

(2) http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/03/obama-ignores-nullification-says-federal-agents-will-enforce-obamacare/comment-page-15/

“A law repugnant to the Constitution is void.” Though Chief Justice John Marshall’s decision in the landmark case Marbury vs Madison has led to 2 centuries of power-abusing mischief on the part of our federal government, he did have the premise correct—a law which is unconstitutional is not a law at all. What he did not add, but might have I suspect, is that such a “law” need not be followed and should not be enforced, especially not by those who have sworn an oath to uphold and defend that Constitution.

For months the American people have been threatened with legislation promoting gun confiscation, “assault weapons” bans and schemes which would lead quite inevitably to the national registration of firearms and their owners. New York and Colorado have already enacted such legislation, all in typical leftist, knee-jerk response to the Newtown killings.

Each new piece of gun control legislation proposed by the ... Continue Reading:Obama demands sheriffs enforce federal gun control legislation whether constitutional or not]]> by Doug Book,  staff writer

“A law repugnant to the Constitution is void.” Though Chief Justice John Marshall’s decision in the landmark case Marbury vs Madison has led to 2 centuries of power-abusing mischief on the part of our federal government, he did have the premise correct—a law which is unconstitutional is not a law at all. What he did not add, but might have I suspect, is that such a “law” need not be followed and should not be enforced, especially not by those who have sworn an oath to uphold and defend that Constitution.

For months the American people have been threatened with legislation promoting gun confiscation, “assault weapons” bans and schemes which would lead quite inevitably to the national registration of firearms and their owners. New York and Colorado have already enacted such legislation, all in typical leftist, knee-jerk response to the Newtown killings.

Each new piece of gun control legislation proposed by the left, whether at the state or national level, has one thing in common—an utter disregard for the right of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. But while our would-be masters have been scheming to disarm the American people, sheriffs across the nation have proudly made it clear that “…they will not enforce federal or state gun laws they consider unconstitutional.” (2)

In fact, 28 of 29 Utah sheriffs wrote directly to Barack Obama announcing their position on federal gun control legislation:

 ”We, like you swore a solemn oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and we are prepared to trade our lives for the preservation of its traditional interpretation.” (3)

To which they added:

“Make no mistake, as the duly-elected sheriffs of our respective counties, we will enforce the rights guaranteed to our citizens by the Constitution. No federal official will be permitted to descend upon our constituents and take from them what the Bill of Rights-in particular Amendment II-has given them.” (3)

Of course, our Muslim Monarch has different ideas. “I think as a general proposition we think that people ought to follow the law,” (that is, whatever WE proclaim the law to be) commented White House Press Secretary Jay Carney when told that nearly 500 sheriffs nationwide have sworn to uphold the Constitution and NOT the gun control agenda of Barack Obama. Yet according to the Regime, local officials should simply do what the federal government tells them to do and not worry about how legal or constitutional it might be.

Obama has already informed states which have refused to implement ObamaCare that the federal government would be taking over all health insurance operations and decisions within their borders. Does anyone imagine the most corrupt and thuggish administration in the nation’s history would do any less upon the passage of federal gun control legislation? (4)

The Supreme Court has ruled that the federal government cannot force states to “enforce or enact federal law.” (5) Naturally the Obama Regime will ignore these inconvenient rulings as it demands local officials do what they are told while threatening any who resist.

Strange, isn’t it, that this administration sued Arizona for its desire to enforce federal immigration law, yet now demands that states enforce the provisions of the affordable Care Act and will no doubt do the same should decidedly unconstitutional, federal gun control legislation become the law of the land!  

(1) http://libertyhallnetwork.com/blog/2013/03/17/supreme-court-unconstitutional-laws-not-laws-at-all/

(2) http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/03/white-house-demands-american-sheriffs-enforce-gun-control/#ixzz2P2ahDIx7

(3) http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/utah-sheriffs-warn-obama-no-federal-official-will-be-allowed-take-our

(4) http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/14892-obama-admin-ignores-nullification-federal-agents-will-enforce-obamacare

(5) http://dancingczars.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/the-tenth-amendment-nullification-for-lawyers/

In September of 2011, 60 million health records involving 10 million Americans were illegally confiscated by members of the IRS. The theft took place at an unidentified place of business in California.

Referring to itself as the John Doe Company in a lawsuit filed last week against the 15 IRS agents who took part, plaintiffs claim that “no search warrant authorized the seizure of these records; no subpoena authorized the seizure of these records; none of the 10,000,000 Americans were under any kind of known criminal or civil investigation and their medical records had no relevance whatsoever to the IRS search.” (1)

One of the IRS agents who took part in the theft told John Doe Company officials that the government was searching for records involved in a “tax matter” pertaining to a former John Doe employee. Yet when informed that their search warrant did NOT allow for the confiscation–or even the ... Continue Reading:Obama using the IRS for blackmail as well as intimidation?]]> by Doug Book,  staff writer

In September of 2011, 60 million health records involving 10 million Americans were illegally confiscated by members of the IRS. The theft took place at an unidentified place of business in California.

Referring to itself as the John Doe Company in a lawsuit filed last week against the 15 IRS agents who took part, plaintiffs claim that “no search warrant authorized the seizure of these records; no subpoena authorized the seizure of these records; none of the 10,000,000 Americans were under any kind of known criminal or civil investigation and their medical records had no relevance whatsoever to the IRS search.” (1)

One of the IRS agents who took part in the theft told John Doe Company officials that the government was searching for records involved in a “tax matter” pertaining to a former John Doe employee. Yet when informed that their search warrant did NOT allow for the confiscation–or even the search—of the 60 million health records taken, the IRS “…threatened to ‘rip’ the servers containing the medical data out of the building…” if the records were not turned over willingly! (2)

The Doe Company complaint continues:

Moreover, even though Defendants knew that the records they were seizing were not included within the scope of the search warrant, the Defendants nonetheless searched and seized the records without making any attempt to segregate the files from those that could possibly be related to the search warrant. In fact, no effort was made at all to even try maintaining the illusion of legitimacy and legality. (2)

Never mind the breathtaking arrogance of Obama’s foot soldiers or the contempt they display for the law and the American people. Those are old stories. In this case the truly relevant question is WHY? What was the real purpose behind this IRS theft? The John Doe Company is presumed to be an insurance company or repository of insurance records. Of the 10 million individuals whose medical records were taken it is believed that nearly 90% live outside of California making the IRS theft one of truly national significance. The records stolen are said to include those of every state judge in California, all state court employees and “…prominent citizens in the world of entertainment, business and government, from all walks of life.” The medical information includes “… psychological counseling, gynecological counseling, sexual or drug treatment and a wide range of medical matters covering the most intimate and private of concerns.” (3)

In short, if ever a politician needed information with which to coerce a powerful, recalcitrant friend or blackmail an outright enemy, these stolen records could provide a treasure trove of “mineable” dirt! Was this a Regime-ordered fishing expedition, a search for potentially damaging information concerning the more recognizable individuals within a very long list of otherwise less than noteworthy names? Or were millions of files stolen in order to provide a healthy margin of cover for the relatively few which Regime operatives REALLY wanted!

The IRS has operated with utter disregard for law and the Constitution for decades. Intimidation became the “new normal” for that contemptible band of bureaucratic thugs long before Obama began his Marxist blitzkrieg. Was their thuggish behavior in California a warning to the nation’s insurers from the Pennsylvania Avenue Cosa Nostra that resistance–legal or otherwise– to New World Order patricians will not be tolerated? Have we just witnessed the method by which ObamaCare’s principle collection agency intends to assemble and review claims information for the nation’s insured?

Remember, they’re from the government and they’re here to help you.  

(1) http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/irs-face-lawsuit-over-theft-60-million-patient-health-records?topic=08,18

(2) http://docs.ismgcorp.com/files/external/IRS_medical_record_case_3_15_13.pdf

(3) http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/03/14/55707.htm