Posted on 04/24/2010 3:19:30 PM PDT by pissant
Only hours after the Florida House and Senate voted to “opt out” of the new federal health law, the top U.S. health official said Thursday night that will not be permitted.
Without mentioning any particular state or going into detail, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said that state and local officials can vent all they want about a so-called “federal takeover” of health care. But they cannot deny their citizens access to its benefits or requirements, she told the Association of Health Care Journalists.
“They may want to opt out, but they don’t get to opt out all of their citizens who want and need health care,” Sebelius said.
Florida has an estimated 4 million uninsured, most of whom will be covered when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) takes full effect in 2014.
At least 30 states have passed state constitutional amendment legislation similar to that approved by the Florida Legislature, according to theNational Conference of State Legislatures.
Sebelius said the backlash against the ACA has been ginned up by “misinformation,” much of it deliberate. Thus HHS will be setting up an Internet site to answer frequent questions and a toll-free helpline, similar to that operated for Medicare beneficiaries. HHS staff members present at the conference said they hope to have the Internet site up by July 1 and the help desk soon after.
(Excerpt) Read more at healthnewsflorida.org ...
Didn’t most everyone own slaves at one time. Even blacks.
For certain Africa sold blacks.
But it’s the citizens of the twenty first century that are paying for it.
Well put. This is lost on some posters here.
No, the US Civil War was not all about State’s Rights.
States Rights, cotton tariffs and free trade overseas were all major issues behind cessation by the initial states to do so. It was not the major issue.
The MAIN issue that caused cessation was whether the spread of slavery to all of the states would be allowed and the diminishing political power of the south to be tyrannized by the north. Slavery was the major issue. That is why the book “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” outsold every book in the USA up to that time, except for the Bible.
There were several reasons why the southern states got fed up with their declining political power and the increasing loss of autonomous control to the much more populous northern states, but the biggest reason for the Civil War was the issue of slavery.
It took me a long time and lots of reading to finally reach that conclusion after thinking for a decade or two that States Rights and cotton tariffs were the biggest issues.
They have planned very well. This sort of thing is why EVERYTHING has to be done and done FAST with this socialist administration. Just too bad the other administration seniles don't have the nads to fight.
You’ve had the misfortune of learning history from books written by the victors, which of course is one of the normal spoils of winning. It’s just unfortunate that the statists won.
Northern volunteers did not join the military and fight in wars to free the slaves. Lincoln did not even declare the slaves freed until after Gettysburg. Soldiers of the north fought to preserve the union, and nothing more. That is a fact. Even Lincoln admitted as much.
My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. Lincoln to Horace Greeley (22 August 1862)
The Southron states seceded over slavery. The Northern states fought over preserving the union. That is why they were called the "Union" Army and not the "Northern" Army.
Does that fooool in a skirt who always drinks the NObama Kool Aid know about the 10th Amendment?????
Executive Mansion,
Washington, August 22, 1862.
Hon. Horace Greeley:
Dear Sir.
I have just read yours of the 19th. addressed to myself through the New-York Tribune. If there be in it any statements, or assumptions of fact, which I may know to be erroneous, I do not, now and here, controvert them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I do not now and here, argue against them. If there be perceptable in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I waive it in deference to an old friend, whose heart I have always supposed to be right.
As to the policy I “seem to be pursuing” as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt.
I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be “the Union as it was.” If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.
I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free.
Yours,
A. Lincoln.
What slavery ban are you talking about? Could you please document what slavery ban this country went to war about? Please be very specific....dates, quotes, etc., if you don't mind.
I’m grateful for Pelosie, Reed, and now Sebelius.
In many ways God is still blessing America.
“...The Civil War was about human rights! Not states rights...”
-
So, when did Lincoln free the slaves in the northern states?
(trick question)
The Civil War was about human rights! Not states rights.
You might want to brush up on your pre-civil war history just a wee bit.....””
NOt much correct history taught in the screwals for a great many years.
Whole parts of the USA history is totally being eliminated by today’s school boards & teachers.
Mr. Obama -
Keep overreaching.
You are waking
the sleeping masses!"
Why did they secede?
*************************
Because of domestic terrorism and murders directed towards the average citizenry by the likes of Beecher, Brown etc. and celebrated and supported by many in the North; because of Northern attempts to impose trade restrictions upon the South similar to those earlier imposed by Britain upon the American colonies; because the cultural divisions between the apostate Puritan North and the anarchic Celtic South were only increasing, as they continue to do to this day.
Dissolution will come eventually, just as the Austro-Hungarian Empire was doomed at the outset.
Freedom and Secular-Puritanism are incompatible. What are the Greens, the Redistributionists, NAMBLA, unions et al. but the fully grown children of post-Christian New England? We have our Lindsey Grahams and Bill Clintons in the South to set alongside the Barney Franks and the Barack Obamas of the North, but that is because the dominant culture is the one which Lincoln and his fellow travellers built, and because concentration camps always have their kapos. But the divide then and the divide today is the result of the metastasis of apostate American Puritans - smug, condescending, bullying, dictatorial and always, infallibly, eventually murderous.
When the federal government eventually falls, it will fall unmourned and of its own weight and incompetence, as did the Soviets before them.
“God will vindicate us” - certainly we have failed in our own might.
Well, sadly I smell blood, like that spilled over slavery
of 1860’s. This slavery battle will be that Americans will
refuse to put on the yoke of slavery, willingly. So those
who refuse will have to fight the yoke holders-the federal
beast.
The world is a dynamic place not a static one FReeper friend.
“I really don’t think the States will try to secede—I think that the States are in the process of SUCCESSFULLY reasserting their sovereignty within their own borders as prescribed by the US Constitution, within the Union.”
I agree with your assessment. The federal response though, may be overt or false flag violence.
Yep, as soon as I hit “post” I knew I should have said “no state borders AND NO STATE GOVERNMENTS”.
I don’t think Sebelius can get out of bed in the morning without someone directing her where to put her feet on the floor. How on earth did she ever get so far in politics? The people in KS aren’t that ignorant, are they? We didn’t have a choice when she got to the federal level but why was she even on anyone’s list to be advanced? What does she have that’s so attractive to the administration? Perhaps NO BRAIN - follow orders blindly mentality - kind of like DOD Gates?
The agency she now heads up will have more enforcement power with obamacare than any other agency in the federal government as far as I can see.
Why the sad face?
Us conservative have been spoiling for this fight for years, decades.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.