Retiree Health Care Mailing

[Stugots]

So the changes have arrived.

 

Copay on generic drugs go from $7 to $20.

 

Brand name drugs rise to $50.

 

Blue cross dental no more.

 

Some other changes.

 

Chirper told us this was coming over a month ago.

 

Thanks again for the advanced warning my friend.

 

It sucks, however knowing what was coming made it easier to stomach I suppose..... NOT.

 

Solidarity

[tbldbxorntnap]

So the changes have arrived.

 

Copay on generic drugs go from $7 to $20.

 

Brand name drugs rise to $50.

 

Blue cross dental no more.

 

Some other changes.

 

Chirper told us this was coming over a month ago.

 

Thanks again for the advanced warning my friend.

 

It sucks, however knowing what was coming made it easier to stomach I suppose..... NOT.

 

Solidarity

When Did you recive your mailing? I'm a retiree out of NAP, was the quote for bcbs or local hmo, I have cinga health here.I knew dental was gone when i recived last mailing, what about vision anything on that?please try to give more info.

[Stugots]

My retired mother who is on a fixed income received hers yesterday.

 

If no one else posts it, when I speak with her again I will ask about the vision.

[fatfender]

At UAW Retirees meeting last week at 425 the VEBA people were there and explained some of the changes affecting those in Ohio. Each state is somewhat different, but from what the rep said:

 

All HMO's dropped everyone going to traditional coverage. You pay office calls.

 

There is a deductible involved for single and family coverage but I couldn't hear that part (to many talkers visiting each other)

 

Kaiser Permanente will also be available, but only to certian zip codes which leaves most retirees left with only the traditional option.

 

Dental will be through Delta. (heard blue cross getting out of dental???)

 

Vision will be through SVS

 

Mail in drugs for 90 days will be 20 bucks generic, 50 name brand through Medco

 

As of 1/1/10 some drugs not covered anymore, Nexium, or erectial were the two mentioned.

 

They claim they are trying to do some HMO style coverage or office call coverage if it happens it won't be till after the first of the year, maybe by spring. Believe it when you see it.

 

The rep stated in a side conversation that all HMO's nationwide were going away, it wasn't just Ohio retirees that were taking a hit. I feel for alot of these guys as many just had a huge weight placed on their shoulders money wise. Didn't realize how many people were going through different treatments and how costly just the doctors office visits were for the specialists. some were quoted at 400 + for just one visit.

 

Don't know much about Kaiser, many people say the are to strict, have to use their drugs, and preappove everything, and their paperwork is terrible, others say they are content with them. Alot of Ohio won't have them as a choice though.

[Furious1Auto]

Time to stand behind health care reform. If nothing is done you will see a slow progression towards reducing benefits, coverage levels, and rising out of pocket costs to our retirees. We have to protect the benefits to those who have fought for what you earn.

[Stugots]

Yes sir, it's time!

[longball]

Furious... I want health care cost reductions as much as anyone else...Do you think from what you have heard that this bill will accomplish that?

[flipuaw164]

So the changes have arrived.

 

Copay on generic drugs go from $7 to $20.

 

Brand name drugs rise to $50.

 

Blue cross dental no more.

 

Some other changes.

 

Chirper told us this was coming over a month ago.

 

Thanks again for the advanced warning my friend.

 

It sucks, however knowing what was coming made it easier to stomach I suppose..... NOT.

 

Solidarity

WELCOME TO THE REAL WORLD IT WILL GET WORSE

[forddaughter]

SVS was what they had to use when still working. I hate them. Messed up three times.

[forddaughter]

There's three different plans at Delta for Dental. Do you know which one?

 

Plan: Delta Dental Premier

(formerly DeltaPremier USA)

Delta Dental PPO

(formerly DeltaPreferred Option USA)

DeltaCare USA

 

 

My dentist is only listed under the first one.

[fatfender]

There's three different plans at Delta for Dental. Do you know which one?

 

Plan: Delta Dental Premier

(formerly DeltaPremier USA)

Delta Dental PPO

(formerly DeltaPreferred Option USA)

DeltaCare USA

 

 

My dentist is only listed under the first one.

 

 

They weren't specific about that but just guessing would be probably bottom of the line. It's unfortunate but my quess would be a continuing slide backwards for the retirees.

[Furious1Auto]

Furious... I want health care cost reductions as much as anyone else...Do you think from what you have heard that this bill will accomplish that?

 

Currently yes, as long as they don't compromise the language by rewriting it. The public option forces the insurers, and medical facilities to compete. Also it will force waste reductions bringing about savings. There is a trigger to remove the program if it doesn't bear fruit, but I'm confident you will realize cost reductions with in the next 4 years as a result. If we do nothing within the next 4 years, Ford will be looking to shift more liability to the active, and the UAW to the retired as costs continue to incline at their current pace!

[longball]

I believe the price of care will continue to increase .... I have heard nothing about cost containment... just adding people to the roles...this will do nothing but reduce quality or increase price...these are the only possibilities.

[051071]

People need to wake up. Has anyone read the so called Health Care Bill. Do you know that there are GUN CONTROLS hidden in this so called Health Care Bill. That's why it's so important to Washington that it passes exactly the way it's written with no changes. They don't care about health care all they care about is GUN CONTROL!!!!

Edited November 27, 2009 by 51071

[TBodette68]

We already have too much government control of everything. They should stay away from my healthcare. As long as the so called government has their own healthcare they have no business messing with the common mans healthcare. Everything the think they are fixing always ends up costing more and the service is worse than it was.

[Bowie]

People need to wake up. Has anyone read the so called Health Care Bill. Do you know that there are at least 6 GUN CONTROL BILLS hidden in this so called Health Care Bill. That's why it's so important to Washington that it passes exactly the way it's written with no changes. They don't care about health care all they care about is GUN CONTROL!!!!

 

 

Do you have a link to prove this?Do you have any proof of this?! I challenge you to prove what you are saying.If you can provide verifiable proof I will be completely against this bill.

[Bowie]

We already have too much government control of everything. They should stay away from my healthcare. As long as the so called government has their own healthcare they have no business messing with the common mans healthcare. Everything the think they are fixing always ends up costing more and the service is worse than it was.

 

 

Would you be saying this if you didn't have the best health care that money can buy,or if you didn't have any health care at all?

[051071]

November 25, 2009

 

The White House is pulling out all the stops to pass ObamaCare, including an attack on Gun Owners of America and the Second Amendment.

 

Unable to pass a bill that is openly hostile to millions of gun owners, the President and his anti-gun allies are forced to try to attack us through deception.

 

On the official White House blog, deputy communications director Dan Pfeiffer denied that the health care bill would affect gun owners. After all, he writes, “there is no mention [of] ‘gun-related health data’ or anything like it anywhere in either the Senate or the House bills.”

 

Well, unlike so many in Congress, GOA attorneys have actually read the bills, something they have been doing since before Mr. Pfeiffer was born.

 

So, how would this bill attack gun rights?

 

First of all, the fact that the bills do not mention the words “gun related health data” is meaningless. Those who know even a little bit about gun law understand the increasing use of statutes which do not mention guns – and common law which was not intended to apply to them – in order to vent hatred for the Second Amendment.

 

For example, within the past year, the federal district court for the District of Columbia used the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to overturn Bush regulations involving guns in parks. NEPA did not purport to apply to guns.

 

Increasingly, zoning ordinances are being used to put gun ranges and gun dealers out of business. These ordinances do not mention guns.

 

Thirty-five jurisdictions have brought lawsuits to try to put gun manufacturers out of business, arguing negligence, product defect, and nuisance law which was not previously thought to apply to guns.

 

And, over the last decade, veterans suffering from PTSD have been denied the right to purchase a gun. This was not supposed to happen when the Brady Law was enacted in 1994, but that did not keep Clinton’s Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) from using the law to disarm thousands upon thousands of veterans, without any due process.

 

Turning to what is written in the health care bill, section 1104 would give the Secretary of Health and Human Services (currently anti-gunner Kathleen Sebelius) broad authority to promulgate rules with respect to "electronic standards." Subsection (B) (2), for example, amends the Social Security Act to require the Secretary to "adopt a simple set of operating rules ... with the goal of creating as much uniformity in the implementation of the electronic standards as possible." The same section goes on to require health plans to certify, in writing, "that the data and information systems for such plans are in compliance with any applicable standards ..." It goes on to provide that a health plan is not in compliance unless it "demonstrates to the Secretary that the plan conducts the electronic transactions ... in a manner that fully complies with the regulations of the Secretary ... "

 

Furthermore, anyone who provides services to a provider must comply as well. Again, the section requires health plans to certify to the Secretary "in such form as the Secretary may require, ... that the data and information systems for such plan are in compliance with any applicable revised standards and associated operating rules ... " The Secretary is authorized to conduct "periodic audits" to insure this is so, and substantial penalties are provided for.

 

What health-related “gun” data do we fear would be required to be submitted under these rules? Increasingly, protocols are requiring that kids (and adults) be asked by physicians about loaded firearms in the household. A keyword search by BATF of a federal database created by section 13001 of the stimulus bill – but enforced by the Reid bill – could produce something pretty close to a national gun registry.

 

In addition, between 115,000 and 150,000 veterans have had their gun rights permanently taken away from them because the VA has appointed a financial guardian for them when they received counseling for common illnesses such as post-traumatic stress disorder – and all of this with no due process or trial in a court of law. Under BATFE regulations promulgated during the Clinton administration, a diagnosis by a psychiatrist in connection with a government program (such as the Education of All Handicapped Children Act, Medicare, etc.) is sufficient to declare the person a “prohibited person” under 18 U.S.C. 922(g) (4).

 

Hence, BATFE could similarly take the position that a finding of Alzheimer's, PTSD, or ADHD should result in the loss of gun rights. And, under the Reid bill, this information could be obtained by BATFE under a keyword search of a federal database.

 

Incidentally, HIPAA's privacy protections do not apply to law enforcement agencies like BATFE.

 

Pfeiffer also writes: "NOTHING IN THE SENATE HEALTH REFORM BILL WOULD LEAD TO HIGHER PREMIUMS FOR GUN OWNERS ... Section 2717 section [sic] ... specifically lists what types of programs would be involved – such as smoking cessation, physical fitness, nutrition, heart disease prevention ...”

 

Well, as any lawyer would know, that list in section 2717 is "inclusive," but is not "exclusive."

Section 1201 of the bill (inserting section 2705 into the Public Health Service Act) creates "wellness" programs which allow consideration of behavioral issues in setting premiums and, presumably, determining activities which are so dangerous that coverage might be suspended.

 

The definition of "wellness" includes some very broad issues, including obesity and "lifestyle."

 

But even these broad categories are not exclusive and do not prevent, for example, the consideration of firearms ownership, as State Farm and Prudential have already, on some occasions, done.

 

Section 1201 specifically prevents consideration of the health of a person for purposes of setting rates, but, for any other "health status factor," premiums can vary up to 30%, which may be increased to 50% under the discretion of the HHS Secretary. A "reward may be in the form of a discount or rebate of a premium or contribution, a waiver of all or part of a cost-sharing mechanism (such as deductibles, copayments, or coinsurance), the absence of a surcharge, or the value of a benefit that would otherwise not be provided under the plan." A "wellness" program qualifies under this section if it "has a reasonable chance of improving the health of ... participating individuals."

 

One of the more intriguing aspects about the copious fraud which is being promulgated on behalf of ObamaCare is that the liars almost always accompany their deceit with a heaping dose of arrogance.

 

We have dealt with these self-appointed "experts” before. "Politifact" [sic] called us to assert that only age, family size, and location could be used to set premiums. When we blew their theory out of the water over the phone, using the previous week's Washington Post as our source, they jettisoned their phony argument and attacked us on other grounds, without giving us an opportunity to respond.

 

The Obama administration and congressional Democrats have spent the last several months lying to us, trying to defraud us, and working to take away our constitutional rights. GOA will continue to oppose ObamaCare – as well as any similar plan to slip gun control through the back door.

 

© 2009 by Gun Owners of America

8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 - Phone: 703-321-8585 - Fax: 703-321-8408

The information contained herein may be disseminated for non-commercial purposes as long as credit is given to GOA.

[TBodette68]

Would you be saying this if you didn't have the best health care that money can buy,or if you didn't have any health care at all?

 

 

I want the same plan our congressman and senators have.

[longball]

You and me both....anything less is an insult...what the hell is the matter with you people?

[Furious1Auto]

November 25, 2009

 

The White House is pulling out all the stops to pass ObamaCare, including an attack on Gun Owners of America and the Second Amendment.

 

 

Your a fruitloop, and are the same as every gun dealer in the country swearing that Obama plans to take away our guns to drive up the retail pricing. This artificial panic drove the demand through the roof and cost me an additional $400.oo for my AR-15. A month before this B.S. and an M4-A3 only cost $879.00 but when I went to buy mine they were $1,279.00 What about the B.S. about imposing a ownership tax per firearm in each home, the legislation never existed even though people where citing the Bill number!

 

 

I want the same plan our congressman and senators have.

 

 

Then call HR tomorrow and cancel your BCBS that the company pays for, because even it is not as good as what those d-cks on capital hill get! You don't support social health care, because someone else is paying for yours, and if you had to pay directly, or had none you would think differently! Wait till Ford has you paying more for less coverage in the next contract, if nothing changes they are not going to be whiling to pick up the tab for the difference mark my words!

[Bowie]

November 25, 2009

 

The White House is pulling out all the stops to pass ObamaCare, including an attack on Gun Owners of America and the Second Amendment.

 

Unable to pass a bill that is openly hostile to millions of gun owners, the President and his anti-gun allies are forced to try to attack us through deception.

 

On the official White House blog, deputy communications director Dan Pfeiffer denied that the health care bill would affect gun owners. After all, he writes, “there is no mention [of] ‘gun-related health data’ or anything like it anywhere in either the Senate or the House bills.”

 

Well, unlike so many in Congress, GOA attorneys have actually read the bills, something they have been doing since before Mr. Pfeiffer was born.

 

So, how would this bill attack gun rights?

 

First of all, the fact that the bills do not mention the words “gun related health data” is meaningless. Those who know even a little bit about gun law understand the increasing use of statutes which do not mention guns – and common law which was not intended to apply to them – in order to vent hatred for the Second Amendment.

 

For example, within the past year, the federal district court for the District of Columbia used the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to overturn Bush regulations involving guns in parks. NEPA did not purport to apply to guns.

 

Increasingly, zoning ordinances are being used to put gun ranges and gun dealers out of business. These ordinances do not mention guns.

 

Thirty-five jurisdictions have brought lawsuits to try to put gun manufacturers out of business, arguing negligence, product defect, and nuisance law which was not previously thought to apply to guns.

 

And, over the last decade, veterans suffering from PTSD have been denied the right to purchase a gun. This was not supposed to happen when the Brady Law was enacted in 1994, but that did not keep Clinton’s Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) from using the law to disarm thousands upon thousands of veterans, without any due process.

 

Turning to what is written in the health care bill, section 1104 would give the Secretary of Health and Human Services (currently anti-gunner Kathleen Sebelius) broad authority to promulgate rules with respect to "electronic standards." Subsection (B) (2), for example, amends the Social Security Act to require the Secretary to "adopt a simple set of operating rules ... with the goal of creating as much uniformity in the implementation of the electronic standards as possible." The same section goes on to require health plans to certify, in writing, "that the data and information systems for such plans are in compliance with any applicable standards ..." It goes on to provide that a health plan is not in compliance unless it "demonstrates to the Secretary that the plan conducts the electronic transactions ... in a manner that fully complies with the regulations of the Secretary ... "

 

Furthermore, anyone who provides services to a provider must comply as well. Again, the section requires health plans to certify to the Secretary "in such form as the Secretary may require, ... that the data and information systems for such plan are in compliance with any applicable revised standards and associated operating rules ... " The Secretary is authorized to conduct "periodic audits" to insure this is so, and substantial penalties are provided for.

 

What health-related “gun” data do we fear would be required to be submitted under these rules? Increasingly, protocols are requiring that kids (and adults) be asked by physicians about loaded firearms in the household. A keyword search by BATF of a federal database created by section 13001 of the stimulus bill – but enforced by the Reid bill – could produce something pretty close to a national gun registry.

 

In addition, between 115,000 and 150,000 veterans have had their gun rights permanently taken away from them because the VA has appointed a financial guardian for them when they received counseling for common illnesses such as post-traumatic stress disorder – and all of this with no due process or trial in a court of law. Under BATFE regulations promulgated during the Clinton administration, a diagnosis by a psychiatrist in connection with a government program (such as the Education of All Handicapped Children Act, Medicare, etc.) is sufficient to declare the person a “prohibited person” under 18 U.S.C. 922(g) (4).

 

Hence, BATFE could similarly take the position that a finding of Alzheimer's, PTSD, or ADHD should result in the loss of gun rights. And, under the Reid bill, this information could be obtained by BATFE under a keyword search of a federal database.

 

Incidentally, HIPAA's privacy protections do not apply to law enforcement agencies like BATFE.

 

Pfeiffer also writes: "NOTHING IN THE SENATE HEALTH REFORM BILL WOULD LEAD TO HIGHER PREMIUMS FOR GUN OWNERS ... Section 2717 section [sic] ... specifically lists what types of programs would be involved – such as smoking cessation, physical fitness, nutrition, heart disease prevention ...”

 

Well, as any lawyer would know, that list in section 2717 is "inclusive," but is not "exclusive."

Section 1201 of the bill (inserting section 2705 into the Public Health Service Act) creates "wellness" programs which allow consideration of behavioral issues in setting premiums and, presumably, determining activities which are so dangerous that coverage might be suspended.

 

The definition of "wellness" includes some very broad issues, including obesity and "lifestyle."

 

But even these broad categories are not exclusive and do not prevent, for example, the consideration of firearms ownership, as State Farm and Prudential have already, on some occasions, done.

 

Section 1201 specifically prevents consideration of the health of a person for purposes of setting rates, but, for any other "health status factor," premiums can vary up to 30%, which may be increased to 50% under the discretion of the HHS Secretary. A "reward may be in the form of a discount or rebate of a premium or contribution, a waiver of all or part of a cost-sharing mechanism (such as deductibles, copayments, or coinsurance), the absence of a surcharge, or the value of a benefit that would otherwise not be provided under the plan." A "wellness" program qualifies under this section if it "has a reasonable chance of improving the health of ... participating individuals."

 

One of the more intriguing aspects about the copious fraud which is being promulgated on behalf of ObamaCare is that the liars almost always accompany their deceit with a heaping dose of arrogance.

 

We have dealt with these self-appointed "experts” before. "Politifact" [sic] called us to assert that only age, family size, and location could be used to set premiums. When we blew their theory out of the water over the phone, using the previous week's Washington Post as our source, they jettisoned their phony argument and attacked us on other grounds, without giving us an opportunity to respond.

 

The Obama administration and congressional Democrats have spent the last several months lying to us, trying to defraud us, and working to take away our constitutional rights. GOA will continue to oppose ObamaCare – as well as any similar plan to slip gun control through the back door.

 

© 2009 by Gun Owners of America

8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 - Phone: 703-321-8585 - Fax: 703-321-8408

The information contained herein may be disseminated for non-commercial purposes as long as credit is given to GOA.

[Bowie]

November 25, 2009

 

The White House is pulling out all the stops to pass ObamaCare, including an attack on Gun Owners of America and the Second Amendment.

 

Unable to pass a bill that is openly hostile to millions of gun owners, the President and his anti-gun allies are forced to try to attack us through deception.

 

On the official White House blog, deputy communications director Dan Pfeiffer denied that the health care bill would affect gun owners. After all, he writes, “there is no mention [of] ‘gun-related health data’ or anything like it anywhere in either the Senate or the House bills.”

 

Well, unlike so many in Congress, GOA attorneys have actually read the bills, something they have been doing since before Mr. Pfeiffer was born.

 

So, how would this bill attack gun rights?

 

First of all, the fact that the bills do not mention the words “gun related health data” is meaningless. Those who know even a little bit about gun law understand the increasing use of statutes which do not mention guns – and common law which was not intended to apply to them – in order to vent hatred for the Second Amendment.

 

For example, within the past year, the federal district court for the District of Columbia used the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to overturn Bush regulations involving guns in parks. NEPA did not purport to apply to guns.

 

Increasingly, zoning ordinances are being used to put gun ranges and gun dealers out of business. These ordinances do not mention guns.

 

Thirty-five jurisdictions have brought lawsuits to try to put gun manufacturers out of business, arguing negligence, product defect, and nuisance law which was not previously thought to apply to guns.

 

And, over the last decade, veterans suffering from PTSD have been denied the right to purchase a gun. This was not supposed to happen when the Brady Law was enacted in 1994, but that did not keep Clinton’s Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) from using the law to disarm thousands upon thousands of veterans, without any due process.

 

Turning to what is written in the health care bill, section 1104 would give the Secretary of Health and Human Services (currently anti-gunner Kathleen Sebelius) broad authority to promulgate rules with respect to "electronic standards." Subsection (B) (2), for example, amends the Social Security Act to require the Secretary to "adopt a simple set of operating rules ... with the goal of creating as much uniformity in the implementation of the electronic standards as possible." The same section goes on to require health plans to certify, in writing, "that the data and information systems for such plans are in compliance with any applicable standards ..." It goes on to provide that a health plan is not in compliance unless it "demonstrates to the Secretary that the plan conducts the electronic transactions ... in a manner that fully complies with the regulations of the Secretary ... "

 

Furthermore, anyone who provides services to a provider must comply as well. Again, the section requires health plans to certify to the Secretary "in such form as the Secretary may require, ... that the data and information systems for such plan are in compliance with any applicable revised standards and associated operating rules ... " The Secretary is authorized to conduct "periodic audits" to insure this is so, and substantial penalties are provided for.

 

What health-related “gun” data do we fear would be required to be submitted under these rules? Increasingly, protocols are requiring that kids (and adults) be asked by physicians about loaded firearms in the household. A keyword search by BATF of a federal database created by section 13001 of the stimulus bill – but enforced by the Reid bill – could produce something pretty close to a national gun registry.

 

In addition, between 115,000 and 150,000 veterans have had their gun rights permanently taken away from them because the VA has appointed a financial guardian for them when they received counseling for common illnesses such as post-traumatic stress disorder – and all of this with no due process or trial in a court of law. Under BATFE regulations promulgated during the Clinton administration, a diagnosis by a psychiatrist in connection with a government program (such as the Education of All Handicapped Children Act, Medicare, etc.) is sufficient to declare the person a “prohibited person” under 18 U.S.C. 922(g) (4).

 

Hence, BATFE could similarly take the position that a finding of Alzheimer's, PTSD, or ADHD should result in the loss of gun rights. And, under the Reid bill, this information could be obtained by BATFE under a keyword search of a federal database.

 

Incidentally, HIPAA's privacy protections do not apply to law enforcement agencies like BATFE.

 

Pfeiffer also writes: "NOTHING IN THE SENATE HEALTH REFORM BILL WOULD LEAD TO HIGHER PREMIUMS FOR GUN OWNERS ... Section 2717 section [sic] ... specifically lists what types of programs would be involved – such as smoking cessation, physical fitness, nutrition, heart disease prevention ...”

 

Well, as any lawyer would know, that list in section 2717 is "inclusive," but is not "exclusive."

Section 1201 of the bill (inserting section 2705 into the Public Health Service Act) creates "wellness" programs which allow consideration of behavioral issues in setting premiums and, presumably, determining activities which are so dangerous that coverage might be suspended.

 

The definition of "wellness" includes some very broad issues, including obesity and "lifestyle."

 

But even these broad categories are not exclusive and do not prevent, for example, the consideration of firearms ownership, as State Farm and Prudential have already, on some occasions, done.

 

Section 1201 specifically prevents consideration of the health of a person for purposes of setting rates, but, for any other "health status factor," premiums can vary up to 30%, which may be increased to 50% under the discretion of the HHS Secretary. A "reward may be in the form of a discount or rebate of a premium or contribution, a waiver of all or part of a cost-sharing mechanism (such as deductibles, copayments, or coinsurance), the absence of a surcharge, or the value of a benefit that would otherwise not be provided under the plan." A "wellness" program qualifies under this section if it "has a reasonable chance of improving the health of ... participating individuals."

 

One of the more intriguing aspects about the copious fraud which is being promulgated on behalf of ObamaCare is that the liars almost always accompany their deceit with a heaping dose of arrogance.

 

We have dealt with these self-appointed "experts” before. "Politifact" [sic] called us to assert that only age, family size, and location could be used to set premiums. When we blew their theory out of the water over the phone, using the previous week's Washington Post as our source, they jettisoned their phony argument and attacked us on other grounds, without giving us an opportunity to respond.

 

The Obama administration and congressional Democrats have spent the last several months lying to us, trying to defraud us, and working to take away our constitutional rights. GOA will continue to oppose ObamaCare – as well as any similar plan to slip gun control through the back door.

 

© 2009 by Gun Owners of America

8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 - Phone: 703-321-8585 - Fax: 703-321-8408

The information contained herein may be disseminated for non-commercial purposes as long as credit is given to GOA.

 

 

What kind of silly horse shit is this?This is just an opinion,no facts.Simply Paranoid bull shit!

[Bowie]

I want the same plan our congressman and senators have.

 

Actually their plans aren't that much better than Ford/UAW employees,and we don't have to pay any premiums.The Congress and Senate as well as most Federal employees do have many choices,but they also pay part of their own premiums according to this Louisville's Courier Journal article.Congress and the Senate do receive free hospital care at Bethesda.Here's a link to Friday's Courier Journal article regarding this subject.

 

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/200...es+with+the+job

Edited November 28, 2009 by Bowie

[soupy]

People need to wake up. Has anyone read the so called Health Care Bill. Do you know that there are GUN CONTROLS hidden in this so called Health Care Bill.

 

And let's not forget about the death panels and insuring illegals. Your Rebublican lies are pathetic. If you don't like the Dem plan then try offering something more positive then your fear mongering! Simply voting 'NO' to appease your insurance industry lobbyists is even worse!

Guess how many Dems have been pounding on my front door demanding my guns since Obama took over? None! Guess how much 380 ammo I've been able to buy since your right-wing BS about Obama gun-control has made the rounds? None.

So thanks for your politics of fear and lies and in my own small way I'll return the favor by never voting for one of you dck-headed lying repubs again!