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 ...
correct
those slaves were not freed up there and they really made a lot of profit off slavery.
many forget how justice was then given tot he indians but also that justice was also going on out west during the war for southern independence
Well done!! I will pass this around at work.
how do you explain my state joining the confederacy when my state never had slavery when we joined plus the north did
if slavery was an issue and the main reason for the war then my state did not have slavery and yet still joined, my state is old florida.
“The GOP men are wimps, generally speaking.”
That is why I sometimes refer to them as adult males.
“Men” for some of them is too strong a word.
The South still needed slaves to drive its economy, big time. But 2 decades time would have seen automation and immigration make slavery obsolete.
I have long felt that the smartest thing the South should have done was declare all slaves freed. They would have fled to the north, where northern racism would have shut them out of all northern social life. While a few of the slaves would have found work in the north, they were unwanted as freed men in the north, and the vast majority of them would soon have found themselves back working the same plantations for slave’s wages.
The only other option would have been that blacks would have been limited by practice, not law, to only the worst and least popular of jobs in the north, Irish, Italian and Chinese immigrants would have found themselves working the Southern plantations for slave’s wages.
The South was noble in their zeal for free autonomous government, and they equated their own effort to the Revolutionary War of just 2 generations earlier (wasn’t Light Horse Harry Lee, Robert E. Lee’s father?). So many, many Southroner felt they were fighting a noble fight against tyranny, every bit the equal to the founders fighting King George.
That said, they were stupid politically. They made a bold move they knew the North would have to respond to, when all they had to do was free the slaves and hire them back at minimal wages. This would have completely disarmed the motivation of Northerners against the south.
I agree that the power of State’s Rights has never been the same since the Constitutional abuses of power by Lincoln during the Civil War.
Yes, my spelling is atrocious, especially today.
However, I stand by my assertion that God has blessed us with Pelosi, Reed, and Sebelius.
Since we have a Democrat controlled Congress and a Democrat President it is a given that those positions would be held by Democrats.
God has blessed us by giving those positions to incompetent boobs.
If we weren’t on Gods side, those positions would be held by accomplished, effective, politicians who would have enacted health care last summer instead of stumbling and bumbling into it just weeks ago.
you beat me to it but thank you for posting that.
If slavery was an issue then why did my state florida join to fight when we had no slavery?
I asked this to some liberals the other week and they just looked confused and said we had never thought of that
the look on their face was priceless
Ah. I misconstrued your point and argument. I thought you were praising them for their wonderfullness. My error, and my sincere apologies.
I agree with you.
Northern invasion
J.C.Calhoun started it with South Carolina’s nullification act.. >State Rights.
Nothing has changed from what J.C. said.
NOW we will see in our own time who is right. (see below)........
J.C. Calhoun S.C.
A state’s sovereignty within the federal compact is what gives it the legal standing to “nullify” a federal law in the first place. Nullification and secession are inextricably linked, according to Calhoun, and if that right does not exist, then “the character of the Government has been changed in consequence, from a federal republic, as it originally came from the hands of its framers, into a great national consolidated democracy.” [John C. Calhoun, Southern States May Be Forced to Leave the Union.
President Andrew Jackson S.C.
This logic was countered by President Andrew Jackson, who claimed that the inherent error in South Carolina’s reasoning was the mistaken belief that the Constitution was a compact between sovereign states, when it was actually ratified by the American people via their respective state conventions. States thus lost their sovereignty, and the people’s allegiance was transferred to the government of the United States. [Kenneth M. Stampp, “The Concept of a Perpetual Union,” The Journal of American History, Vol.65, No.1 (June, 1978): 31-32.]
President Abraham Lincoln Not from S.C.
“A dozen years before assuming the burdens of the presidency, the young politician Abraham Lincoln was willing to concede that: ‘Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, - a sacred right…Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people can, may revolutionize, and make their own, of so much of the territory as they inhabit.” [Ibid. 110] Lincoln was a secessionist – at least for a while, anyway. Like many politicians, Mr. Lincoln was not immune from switching positions for reasons of political expediency.
(President Abraham Lincoln would be profoundly influenced by Jackson’s rationale in the ensuing decades.) However, Jackson’s line of reasoning distorts the philosophical premise of George Mason when he proposed the “state convention ratification” concept during the Constitutional Convention in 1787.
Three decades later, South Carolina would, of course, refer to the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, and the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution as evidence of the right to secede when creating its Declaration for the Causes of Secession in December of 1860.
Kenneth S. Imbriale
the left knows many blacks will not come out to vote as a black man is not running so the only way to get them all wound up is to play the race card and you know what.
It is gong to get worse from the MSM
Absolutely not! You had to be rich to own slaves. Slaves were very expensive. They didn't come free off the docks in Boston. Slaves were expensive and the vast majority of family farms could never have afforded them. The numbers of slave owners in the South was tiny. The numbers who owned large gangs of slaves was miniscule and the owners very very rich and powerful. It takes money to make money.
If you meant that it was a widespread practice in many nations, yes it was. If you meant that many Americans owned slaves, then absolutely not. Far from it. Almost nobody could afford it. This is also why slaves were generally not mistreated. A rich person might treat slaves as disposable, but for most people, a slave was a major investment that had to be cared for, not abuse. That is not to say they weren't beaten for not complying with owners demands. That is not to say they were well fed and well clothed. They got the shaft. But mainly, they were not abused. Replacing slaves was way too expensive to abuse them wantonly.
not just Britain either though they cam close to coming in and if they had the south might have won as that blockade would have been lifted so Lincoln need that reason to keep them out and it worked plus france and most of Europe was close to seeing the south as a country , free from the north
good post
If it weren’t for the strong women in the GOP, we’d be in a huge mess now. Bachman, Palin, Brewer, Malking, etc. The GOP men are wimps, generally speaking.
We ARE in a "huge mess now." Not speaking for the GOP necessarily but I'm afraid you are exactly the problem, a victim of the MEDIA.
Ever hear a Newt Gingrich speech?
Did you know Sarah Palin can't seem to tell John McCain to call it quits?
You are a VICTIM of the MEDIA.
maybe but Britain and Europe was getting cotton from the south so maybe it was in their best interest.
i went to school in England and we were never taught all this revisionist history my kids get now,’’thankfully I love history as my kids do and I sit them down and tell them to stand up if they hear any crapo but do it in a polite way to the teacher.
One teacher said he freed the slaves and my back then 10 year old said he never did and it was a political ploy to keep the UK out of the war and he needed a moral issue.
He then went on and told her about slavery up north in the border states.
She looked confused and surprised that he knew more than her and this is what she did.
walked away and said well it doesn’;t matter we won and you lot lost
you can be sure I went right down there and got intouch with everyone at the top about this plus faced her and she had no clue about history so I have no idea what they learn up in NY.
To think she comes down here wantiing to be a teacher and meets kids who know more than her
less than 5% did and over 3000 blacks were slave owners according to the census back then
anthony johnson a black man got slavery legal in VA because one of this slaves ran off to a white man and the white man would not give the slave back
blacks did sell blacks for slavery and made money out of it.
it;s a shame that many teachers do not teach kids today the facts of the war
sadly true
I don't. I don't believe New England would fight. I don't believe Ohio would be on the side of socialists. The illegal aliens won't let Ill fight and Michigan can't afford to fight. Hell, they can't even afford to cut the grass in Detroit. They would have the coastal states with large liberal cities. We would have everything else. I just don't see an 1861 redo.
“Replacing slaves was way too expensive to abuse them wantonly.”
Yea, to keep from doing damage to them..they would just beat the Irish white slave twice./s ..(you know i had to throw that in)
I disagree in one regard, when you say “nearly everyone” will see Obama for what he is.
We are fractured.
We are polarized.
I have seen this since GW Bush’s first election.
I do not know the raw numbers, but there is a large group of us freedom-loving conservatives, with all the trimmings. We could be from 25% to 40%. We distrust the government and want it small enough to not pose a threat when tempted.
Our size and number is countered by a similarly sized block of socialists, even if they don’t use the word. The call themselves liberals, mostly, but they love big government, high taxes, lots of regulations, lots of government interference. They honestly do. Many are on entitlements. Many are successful middle-class professionals with a misplaced compassion. They are as large a spectrum as we are.
They too run some 25% to 40% of the nation.
As a result, there is a large block on one side or other of 1/3 of the nation who sees Obama and loves what they see and support him to the hilt.
So when you said you think everyone will soon see Obama for what he is, I say, no — we are only talking about a small portion of the nation — some independent, or casual or apathetic, or wishy washy middle of the country who hasn’t or can’t take sides, for whatever reason.
We the conservatives see Obama and hate that he is implementing George Soros’s plan for France-style socilism as an interim to outright communism.
The liberal/socialists do see Obama pushing Socialism AND THEY LIKE IT, even as they don’t know it by name or where it will lead, in their profound ignorance.
It is only the 10% or 20% or 30% of the wishy washy middle independent voters we need to awaken to the damage the socialists will cause America. They are our potential allies. That 1/3 liberal/socialist portion of Americans are out sworn, mortal enemies and we will go to our graves fighting each other for the soul of the nation — free or communist slaves.
I had one and ONLY one mild HOPE for waking the idiot liberal/socialists, and that was, if the current Depression got severe enough, the working class among these idiots might see the damage the massive government redistribution of wealth was doing to harm their families, and might open their eyes to eventual Conservatism.
The freeloaders love getting their “Obama money” so the voters among them are going to pull the “D” lever for life.
I had hoped that Depression era suffering would awaken some of the working class liberal idiots in San Francisco, Seattle, Manhattan, Chicago, Atlanta, etc. to the cultural death that socialism brings.
Well, I guess that I would rather win people over to our
way of thinking (ideology) that kill them. But, the way
I see it, the Leftist have such a toe hold in our federal
government now and that they have every intention to
take our representative republic and turn into an oligarchy
of socialists, then we will have no choice but to resist
with every means “NECESSARY” to keep our freedom and
our Constitution intact. Remembering in wars, some good guys
die too.
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.