Liberty

Globalization of Healthcare is Blurring State Lines

Globalization of healthcare marches merrily onward with a Michigan bill hearing this week. Corporate lobbies always play a strong role at these events. This time, there’s a twist.

Big Healthcare lobbied for Obamacare in Congress, and drives most healthcare bills in DC and Lansing. More obscure healthcare lobbies are leading centralization of state health occupational licensure. It still violates market principles, and it’s important to your healthcare.

Individual healthcare rights are losing out to population care. Given what’s at stake, we should probably make an effort to push back on this one.

You Betcha! (6)Nuh Uh.(0)

SE Michigan Tea Party Meeting – May 21st (Utica)

It’s not on the website yet, but the next meeting of the SE Michigan Tea Party will be featuring former Michigan State Senator Pat Colbeck who will be discussing the Michigan Grassroots Alliance which is an organization to coordinate interactions with elected officials, community leaders and candidates for public office with vendors and PACs.

The event will be held on Tuesday, May 21st at the Dave and Busters in Utica at the corner of Hall Road & the M-53 expressway. Doors open at 6:00pm and the meeting starts at 7:00pm.

If anyone is interested in learning more about the Michigan Grassroots Alliance, you can read more about them at their website or on Facebook.

 

 

You Betcha! (6)Nuh Uh.(0)

“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

Is Thinkpol next???

If the title of this piece sounds familiar, then it should concern you a great deal.

If not, then you’re looking at the beginnings of the latest round “revisions” concerning what your family will be taught in Michigan’s Public Schools.

{Continued below}

You Betcha! (6)Nuh Uh.(0)

nesseL : Lessen

Not even a month in operation and she’s in damage control mode.

The first-term Democrat testified before the Senate Oversight Committee, where she used her opening statement to dispel what she called “misconceptions” about the unit she officially launched last month.

“We are not policing thoughts or words,” Nessel told lawmakers. “While some people in this state may choose to exercise their right to free speech by thinking hateful thoughts, saying hateful words or associating with hate-filled people, as attorney general it is my job to protect that right, not to prosecute it, even if I vehemently disagree with those thoughts, words or associations.

And, Michiganians are supposed to believe a radical lesbian Democrat that just said this about upholding Law?

Uh-huh, here, pull my finger…

You Betcha! (14)Nuh Uh.(0)

The New Stasi

Michigan's new thought police effort violates the 1st and 14th Amendments according to lawsuit by AFLC

Some of Michigan’s new administration’s nonsense goes beyond ‘virtue signalling’ or shaming.

We’ve had a few minutes for it to settle in.  But the bottom line is that Michigan’s newest Attorney General Dana Nessel is clearly using the power of the state to persecute those who would disagree with her worldview.  To the level legally possible, she is using public monies to pressure those who have something to say to either shut up or be pilloried in the court of public opinion.

And this publicly funded defamation, riding under the guise of fighting ‘hate speech’ is being done indiscriminately, and lazily.  Nessel’s new thought police unit is using a map to target, and developed by the SPLC, a private, ideologically driven legal services cult that frequently identifies churches or family organizations as hate groups.

One of those groups is having none of it.

In a lawsuit naming (the new hate crimes unit) DANA NESSEL, and AGUSTIN V. ARBULU (Michigan dept of civil rights director), the American Freedom Law Center has charged that Nessel has officially sanctioned the SPLC’s opinions as those of the state, putting groups like the AFLC officially under the umbrella of hate as described by a private entity.  Officially sanctioning the partisan opinions with the use of taxpayer dollars and the authority of the office to punish free speech and educational activities engaged in by the AFLC.

You Betcha! (10)Nuh Uh.(0)

Thought Carrie Nation was an Abject Failure? Try, Allah Nation

The first question should be, much like any homicide, does current statute prevent anything? If no, then what’s the point of criminalizing another whole new group of people other than to backdoor prohibition?

State Rep. Abdullah Hammoud concedes that his goal is not just to eliminate drunken driving. He wants to keep anybody who has consumed any amount of alcohol from getting behind the wheel.

“Drink, or drive,” said Hammoud, D-Dearborn. “Choose one. It should never be both.”

Hammoud, 29, a non-drinker with a background in public health, introduced a package of bills last week that would lower the threshold for drunken driving to a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.05, from the current 0.08.

Hammoud a non-drinker? Allah-Shazam! Guess what? He’s a non-pork eater too. Shall we criminalize eating bacon? Why not, Abdullah’s Democrat Party buddy, Alexithymia Ocashew-Cortex wants to ban cow farts, and am pretty sure pigs fart too so, let’s not offend any moslems, right? 🤦‍♂️

You Betcha! (13)Nuh Uh.(0)

A Question To Ask

Who is really in charge here?

Can the Federal Government own land?

Apparently so, if one reads the constitution.  “The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to prejudice any claims of the United States, or of any particular state..” Stated in Article IV reads fairly clear.

But where are the limits?  If one were to go with that part as it has been interpreted, the congress then has power to declare all land to be under it’s jurisdiction, and subject no longer to the respective states, right?  Obviously not if practice is our guide. At some point there is a limit where the states retain control over their respective borders.  A further restraint on the ability of the federal government and Congress to simply take over land.

Yes, it is ALSO in the constitution.  And YES, it has been ignored. Article 1 Section 8 clearly sets forth a manner under which the federal government may acquire and control property.

“To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings; ..”

Emboldened parts being relevant.

You Betcha! (11)Nuh Uh.(0)