Forget the Public Option, The Real Lynchpin of Obamacare is the Individual Mandate

The Senate Finance Committee rejected an amendment to Obamacare yesterday that would have prevented taxpayer funded abortions.

The coalition of industry and liberal groups known as the Alliance for Stable Quality Care — that is, PhRMA, the American Medical Association, the Federation of American Hospitals, and FamiliesUSA — have more or less dropped the pretense of being something beyond a checking account for the White House political operation which is spending its money with David Axelrod’s old firm.

An audit of Massachusetts health care system suggests that 40% of employers had violated the state’s health care mandates and owed the state millions of dollars in fines.

If you've been following my blogs for any length of time, then you know how I've been saying that the individual mandate is the really the most important part of the democrat takeover of the health industry, sure they would love to have a public option but in the big picture it's just a lamb they would be willing to sacrifice for now to put a larger frame work in place, In short it's a misdirection play. The revelations that anyone who does not participate could face prison time confirms my suspicions.

Aside from the fact that this provision is blatantly unconstitutional, the mathematics of Obamacare are fuzzy at best, but without the revenue created by the individual mandate they have absolutely no financial leg to stand on. Without the mandate insurance companies will not be able to afford the new regulations imposed on them. Removing the individual mandate will also fracture the behind the scenes alliance Obama has forged with the biggest insurance companies. (If you notice there hasn’t really been much vocal opposition from the insurance providers) Despite the way he demonizes them the individual mandate is a bone thrown to providers, in the next ten years nearly 200 million Americans will turn 65 and put themselves on to the medicare rolls. With an aging population insurance companies will face bankruptcy, due to the fact that many younger citizens forgo insurance for other priorities. This mandate provide th insurers with a new customer base through government coercion.

Call your Senator and Representative and tell them NO on the individual mandate. Tell them that you will not participate in such immoral legislation regardless of the penalty.

Anthony D Dolpies

If you thought the Video With the school kids was disturbing wait till you see this;

The President Who Cried Historic

The President Who Cried Historic



In the run up to President Obama’s address to the United Nations, administration officials began to bill this speech as a historic event. Unfortunetly everything the president does wether it be eating a cheeseburger or killing a fly is billed as historic, and there is definitly nothing historic about this President delivering a speech, and much like the boy who cried wolf the adjective has lost its desired effect. Unless of course you define historic as a bloviating amalgamation of every speech he has given since 2007. I almost expected the President to reassure the U.N. delegates that if they like their current health insurance they could keep it. Like all of the Presidents speeches it was nothing more than a bunch of self serving fluff and meaningless platitudes. The President said;

“I have been in office for just nine months, though some days it seems a lot longer. I am well aware of the expectations that accompany my presidency around the world. These expectations are not about me. Rather, they are rooted — I believe — in a discontent with a status quo that has allowed us to be increasingly defined by our differences, and outpaced by our problems.”

This statement tells me the President is believing to much of the network media press. I also find it interesting that it is the President and politicians of his progressive ilk that seek to define people by their differences, wether it be race, religion, wealth, the entire progressive political strategy seems to be based on separating people into groups and placing them in constant conflict with one another. It is also impossible to not be outpaced by your problems considering you don’t know you have one until the negative effects of it are realized.

“ I took office at a time when many around the world had come to view America with skepticism and distrust. Part of this was due to misperceptions and misinformation about my country. Part of this was due to opposition to specific policies, and a belief that on certain critical issues, America has acted unilaterally, without regard for the interests of others. This has fed an almost reflexive anti-Americanism, which too often has served as an excuse for our collective inaction.”

What misperceptions? What misinformation? What is wrong with acting unilaterally? Since when are we or any nation for that matter expected to sacrifice their own interest for the interest of France or whomever? By this rational, can we ever seriously resolve conflict? Can we ever really make demands of a country like Iran. Who seem to believe very strongly that it is in their interest to develop nuclear weapons. Wouldn’t our interest that they do not be invalidated by not only their desire but that of another country that supports Iran’s nuclear aspirations? Wouldn’t this lead to the “collective inaction” that Obama seeks to eliminate.


“Like all of you, my responsibility is to act in the interest of my nation and my people, and I will never apologize for defending those interests.”

This is a safe bet, being that the President is not real keen on policies that actually favor American interest.

“The religious convictions that we hold in our hearts can forge new bonds among people, or tear us apart. The technology we harness can light the path to peace, or forever darken it. The energy we use can sustain our planet, or destroy it. What happens to the hope of a single child — anywhere — can enrich our world, or impoverish it.”


We can turn on the light, or we can turn it off. We can open the door, or we can close it. And we can decide to have coffee and cake, or tea and cookies. Choices we get it.

“We know the future will be forged by deeds and not simply words. Speeches alone will not solve our problems — it will take persistent action.

This coming from a President who has done nothing but give speeches and has been on a perpetual campaign since he entered the U.S. senate.

“So for those who question the character and cause of my nation, I ask you to look at the concrete actions that we have taken in just nine months.”

Let’s accept Obama’s premise here for a second and say that George W. Bush’s eight years in office was the worst event in American history. Does that somehow disqualify two-hundred and thirty plus years of advancing individual liberty, innovation, technology and global prosperity? Yet somehow his election and subsuquent nine months in office is our sole act of redemption.

“After all, it is easy to walk up to this podium and to point fingers and stoke division. Nothing is easier than blaming others for our troubles, and absolving ourselves of responsibility for our choices and our actions. Anyone can do that.”

The President has shown us how easy this is, considering he repeatedly blames his predecessor, the media, bloggers, his opposition and on and on. This president is an astute finger pointer.

“No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation. No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed. No balance of power among nations will hold.”

It is this world order that has survived since man entered into civil society. To believe human nature would allow anything to the contrary is extremely naive.

“Those nations that refuse to live up to their obligations must face consequences. This is not about singling out individual nations — it is about standing up for the rights of all nations that do live up to their responsibilities. Because a world in which IAEA inspections are avoided and the United Nation’s demands are ignored will leave all people less safe, and all nations less secure.”

Somehow Iraq is exempt from this, being that they repeatedly thumbed their nose at U.N. weapons inspectors for years not to mention their violation of numerous resolutions. Obama objected to the Bush administrations citing these violations as a reason for action. But more recently the revelations of Russia, Iran Venezuela working together to further their nuclear ambitions flies in the face of this rhetoric. Not to mention the actions of North Korea. The Presidents goal of U.S. disarmament will only invite more proliferation; countries that have been protected under our umbrella of nuclear dominance will create their own weapons, or ally with nations that are building them in an effort to protect themselves. Despite the Presidents wishes the nuclear genie is out of the bottle and there is no way to put it back in.

“We will permit no safe-haven for al Qaeda to launch attacks from Afghanistan or any other nation.”

This sounds like a strong statement but curiously there is no mention of the Taliban. Which would make sense being that during the President’s recent Sunday media blitz, he wondered wether fighting the Taliban is necessary. Unless the President has information about some type of fallout between the Taliban and al qaeda, I don’t see how you can fight one and not the other.

“The danger posed by climate change cannot be denied, and our responsibility to meet it must not be deferred. If we continue down our current course, every member of this Assembly will see irreversible changes within their borders.”

I would think this goes without saying, considering if there were some type of global climate catastrophe, it would by definition affect the whole planet. Unless of course Obama was referring to that alternate universe known as the U.N. assembly.

“Development will be devastated by drought and famine. Land that human beings have lived on for millennia will disappear. Future generations will look back and wonder why we refused to act why we failed to pass on intact the environment that was our inheritance.”

The human race has survived for more than two hundred thousand years, we have adapted to a number of real climatic changes, and our society has continued to advance despite this. To imply that we have somehow lost this innate ability is absurd.

“Those wealthy nations that did so much to damage the environment in the 20th century must accept our obligation to lead...
any effort to curb carbon emissions must include the fast-growing carbon emitters who can do more to reduce their air pollution without inhibiting growth...It is hard to change something as fundamental as how we use energy. It’s even harder to do so in the midst of a global recession. Certainly, it will be tempting to sit back and wait for others to move first.”

This is Obama’s attempt at getting tough with Russia, India and China. But it is actually very revealing, Obama is admitting that climate change legislation is a detriment to economic growth, as many critics have charged.

Historical, not so much, this speech was however an excellent example of Obama’s dangerous inexperience when it comes to international affairs.

Anthony D Dolpies

The Presidents Afghan Paralysis

Beeler">

The President is paralyzed by Afghanistan. This administration is practiced in the art of misdirection, telling the public to look at the right, while left hand is moving. Afghanistan is not one those ploys, in fact what was billed by Obama as the good war has him backed into a tight corner. One would think that if the generals in charge believe there is a need for significantly more troops in order to secure a U.S. victory he would give them the benefit of the doubt. Unfortunately Obama doesn't think in term of U.S. victory, he doesn't like dealing with decisions that might not help him politically. Escalating the war will alienate his left-wing base, which doesn't care about an America accomplishing it's goals in Afghanistan, in fact they are inclined to push for just the opposite. This is a problem because the left is Obama's financial base, and even if he does the right thing and gives these troops they support they need, it will not redeem him in conservative circles. Either way you have American troop in harms way and a president that seems all to willing to sacrifice their efforts for his own political ends. It's time to commit to victory or come home, only the President can make the call.

Anthony D Dolpies

And they say we were violent.

Update; Obamacare: Buy insurance or go to jail!

Individuals participating in the Tea Party protests have been painted as dangerous extremist. Our rallies have been described as having a violent, anti-government tone. I wonder how the media will portray the G20 protesters?

Video of 'Accoustic Weapons' Deployed on American Soil...

Health Care update;

Congressional Budget Office Makes a $600 Million Mistake

The Last Straw, children being taught to praise Obama

FCC's Diversity Czar: 'White People' Need to be Forced to 'Step Down' 'So Someone Else Can Have Power'

"It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies." Mark Loyd FCC Diversity Czar

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/seton-motley/2009/09/23/fccs-diversity-czar-white-people-need-be-forced-step-down-so-someone-0

EXPLOSIVE NEW AUDIO Reveals White House Using NEA to Push Partisan Agenda

THE OBAMA/ACORN/NEA CONNECTION

The Pimps of Poverty

Now that societal cancer that is ACORN has been exposed to the light of day, the mainstream media is playing its usual role as progressive apologist, unnerved about how to approach a story so closely tied to their deity, Obama. The media template is to debate the ethics of the two intrepid youth who blew off the proverbial lid and portray ACORN as an anti-poverty group under fire from conservatives, But as usual, the media has gotten it wrong.

This "but look at all the good they have done" argument is really weak. Unless you consider helping pimps & God knows what other kind of miscreants hide from the law and set up brothels, good for civil society, everything else is pretty much negated, kinda like growing up in south Philadelphia in the 80's, a mafia hot bed, their influence was widespread. The thing is many of these guys had legitimate fronts, restaurants, construction companies, grocery stores, coffee houses, laundry mats, bars, you name it. They created jobs and even contributed to various charities, to meet many of these guys you would never know there was anything nefarious going on. When you got past the veneer many of them were stone killers, and criminals on just about every level.

One could argue that the mafia contributed more economically to their communities than ACORN ever could, The legitimate business they owned created wealth, and enabled people to provide for themselves. ACORN only sucks the life out the neighborhoods and the people it claims to advocate, by promoting an existence of government dependency. It is not surprising that ACORN would get caught in such a pickle, prostitution and illegal immigration (which is really just the importation of poverty) promote such societal blight like drug abuse, domestic violence and gang warfare, that only contribute to the sense of hopelessness and spiraling civil deterioration that ACORN exploits.

In the end ACORN is a parasite that hides between the lines of an absurd and immoral progressive tax code and in the gray areas of those thousand page pieces of legislation. It has become an appendage, a tentacle of the ever expanding state, existing for the sole purpose of gathering the liberty that the behemoth will inevitably consume. ACORN is portrayed as an anti-poverty group, in reality it is just the opposite.

Anthony D Dolpies

Even More Acorn

Warning Shot

The network media and the political class tried to laugh off a juggernaut, they believed, no, they hoped, that the tea party movement would just fizzle out. They tried to ridicule and marginalize the American people, who are fed up with the actions of their government. They thought they could suppress this movement by labeling it’s people Nazi’s, racist and extremist, they tried to intimidate the people into silence and coerce them into non-participation, attempting to pack the audiences of town hall meetings with SEIU thugs and miscreants bussed in by criminal organizations like ACORN and Organizing for America, groups who’s only real goal is the corruption of civil society.

The President, instead of embracing this great moment scurried off into the arms of sycophants, like a coward, hiding behind his bully pulpit, he has chosen to pit his will against ours. But the American people will not now nor ever bow to the will or whims of those who seek to steal our liberty.

Despite these attempts The Tea Party movement has only gained momentum, it has gained unstoppable strength, the nearly two million American citizens who marched on Washington D.C. on September 12th 2009 was a mere fraction of our numbers and we have sent a warning shot across the bow of tyranny.

Anthony D Dolpies

Simply Amazing

It's Not very often that I am left with few words, But all I can say is

WOW!!

Anthony D Dolpies

Acorn, Just Trying to get a Nut

One Trick Pony

My Brother made a great observation regarding the Presidents most recent healthcare speech. The president uses a prehistoric sales formula to push his agenda. It’s a technique called problem-agitate-solve. My brother describes it like this; state a problem that the person or group your trying to persuade can identify with. Agitate it a little, pour a little salt on the wound. Solve it, but most importantly, show how what you have will solve the problem and make the pain go away.

My brother is a casual observer to politics, he was just observing the president’s technique, but if you have been following my blog or listening to my talk show, you know I’ve been pointing this out for a while, good sales reps have a variety of tools and techniques in their arsenal, Obama’s problem is that this is his only technique and it's the wrong one for those he really needs to persuade.

The majority of Americans have health insurance, and that same majority is overwhelmingly happy with the coverage they have. Consequently most Americans instinctively know it is impossible to change nothing and change everything at the same time, this is exactly what Obama is selling and why Americans are skeptical.

The president likes to use what I call psycho-semantics, anecdotes designed to get you on board emotionally, like Jimmy Joe Johnson who’s insurance company dropped him in the middle of chemotherapy, but these cases are the exception in this country not the rule, and for every one of these horror stories in the U.S. there are three in countries like the U.K. and Canada, So Although these tactics sound effective but they only really influence the few who have been personally affected by such an event.

Americans are compassionate and generous, The President attempt to exploit this by presenting health insurance as a moral imperative, that it is somehow our righteous duty to provide insurance to those who do not have it. But Americans are not opposed to the uninsured getting insurance, they are opposed to being forced to provide for those who would choose not to provide for themselves and the wealth transfers that would go along with such a policy. They oppose insurance mandates that would force an individual to buy something he feels he does not need. Obama tries to paint anyone who would oppose the absolute immorality of government coercion as somehow being immoral. In this respect he describes the American founding principles as immoral and unjust.

From a policy stand point the President’s speech was much ado about nothing, the setting was more for effect than to convey some new message. The American people have heard this before, this speech is not going to alleviate their doubts because there just where not enough specifics which are what this speech was supposed to be about. So who exactly was the President trying to sell? The answer is that the President used this elaborate forum to try to sure up support in his own party. The president also failed to offer any concrete solutions but that’s just Obama’s nature, he’s not a problem solver he’s a problem seeker. He is not so much concerned with solutions as he is with creating a critical mass against something he sees as an injustice, he then passes it along for someone else to solve, this is why he allows Pelosi and Reid to spearhead all of his legislative initiatives. In the end Obama is just a one trick pony and not a very good salesman.

Anthony D Dolpies

A Redress Of Grievance

To the Congress of The United States


Two-hundred and thirty-three years ago the founding fathers of this nation established a framework for civil society unprecedented in human history, a government based on self evident truth, the unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, A representative republic which derives its authority not by coercion but consent, a government justified in one role, its only function, protecting the individual natural rights of man.

It is upon this foundation, that this petition has been laid and garners its legitimacy. Our representative system has been overtaken by the unelected overgrowth of an administrative state. The government as it operates today has become destructive to the liberty of the citizen.

You have ceded your constitutionally assigned legislative authority, allowing a bloated administrative bureaucracy to dictate policy and levy taxes under the guise of administrative fees outside of normal public input or consent.

You have, through convoluted interpretations of various clauses, ignored and perverted the intent of our constitution, radically expanding the power of the federal government.

You have infringed on our natural right of free speech and assembly by establishing "free speech zones" as a way of containing dissent.

You have infringed on our right of self defense, using the commerce clause to levy federal taxes and regulations on ammunition and arms

You have trampled the Tenth amendment, undercutting the sovereignty of the individual states, co-opting their budgets with burdensome federally mandated entitlements and passing legislation that allows local lawmakers to disregard the authority of their governors.

You have threatened the civil society by assembling congress like some third world politburo with show trials of private citizens, and by employing unions and community organizations that strong arm certain businesses and institutions into endorsing a political agenda.

You have contributed to the balkenization of this society with a reckless immigration policy that promotes chaos over assimilation.

You have allowed the executive and the Treasury, to confer on themselves the power to seize private property and dictate the affairs of private enterprise.

You have allowed the executive to usurp the power of the citizen and the citizens representative, by appointing commissioners outside of the constitutional process.

You have sought to weaken our system of checks, by confirming justices who incorporate foreign law into their constitutional interpretations.

You have sought to fatigue and discourage the concerned citizen, by hiding insidious law and cronyism among a thousand or more pages of legislation.

You have stifled debate on damaging legislation, limiting debate not on constitutional grounds but the parliamentary games of whoever controls congress.

You have embraced a government eager to limit economic freedom and prosperity, through progressive taxation and draconian mandate. ignoring the fact that individual freedom and economic freedom are inseparable.

You have sought under the guise of security, to concentrate prosperity into the hands of a few chosen bidders, meanwhile sowing the seeds of fascism.

You have been a reckless steward of our currency, outsourcing your authority to coin and regulate the currency to a private institution, without the constitutional authority to do so, saddling future generations with massive debt, jeopardizing their opportunity for prosperity.

You have cast a shadow of illegitimacy on the work and bravery of our military by engaging in prolonged extensive combat operations, without a formal declaration of war.

These abuses are irrefutable. It is also irrefutable that the expansion of government beyond its constitutional function is only conducive to the recession of liberty. A government in a state of constant expansion, must eventually resort to oppression to sustain itself. In the hopes of avoiding this inevitable tyranny, in an effort to reform our republic to its constitutional boundaries, we the people of the United States hereby enter this redress of grievances.

Anthony D Dolpies
Philadelphia, PA

You can sign this petition @ http://www.petition.fm/petitions/redress/

The Reality of Van Jones

Van Jones is a footnote to a footnote to a footnote, none will remember him in the long run, what this does do is force Obama to be more careful with who he chooses as a replacement, which could well drag on for a longtime being that people like this are the rule for Obama's associations and not the exception. It also shines a lite on who Obama really is and adds to the publics growing suspicions. It also further hurts the mainstream media credibility, they are so quick to discredit any argument that Obama is a Marxist yet the advisor to Obama on one of his highest domestic priorities, green jobs, turns out to be on the record as an admitted communist. Bottom line is that Van Jones is only the open sore of much deeper infection. One down.

Anthony D Dolpies

OBAMA’S CZARS September update

No.10 turns on Obama and Clinton for criticising decision to release Lockerbie bomber

A senior Whitehall aide said Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton's reaction to the release of Abdelbaset Al Megrahi was 'disingenuous'.

You People and The Constitution

At a recent town hall meeting Congressman Chaka Fattah routinely prefaced his answers to difficult questions with remarks like “You people and the constitution” or “you weren’t talking about the constitution when we were passing other types of legislation.” He also claimed it was contradictory to embrace the constitution, then push the federal government for tort reform.

The congressman may have a point about tort reform, I don’t see how the federal government could claim authority to set limitations on settlements within the several states, however they do set procedures and guidelines for all the courts, so tort reform on a federal level is very debatable. The tenth amendment however is not. The states would be well within their rights to initiate their own tort reform. Besides, independent studies show that the unholy alliance of congress and the AMA is just as culpable if not more for rising medical costs than congress’ relationship with the trial lawyers. The Bottom line, government’s willingness to meddle on the part of these lobbies is the real culprit.

What I really found illuminating were Fattah’s condescending comments toward those who reference the constitution in their opposition to Obamacare. To insinuate that defending the constitution is somehow hypocritical just because you did not do it before is absurd. It also shows a glaring ignorance of human nature and the current political climate. History has shown that a people will suffer many abuses before being moved to action. This is the case today, many of these folks have never been politically active nor have they ever before immersed themselves so deeply in our founding documents and principles. Quite simply, they have only recently become aware of congress’ transgressions. To follow Fattahs logic one would have no grounds to prosecute their longtime accountant for embezzlement simply because he was unaware of the crime. Ignorance of the Law is no defense, nor does it exempt you from protection under it.

Anthony D Dolpies

China's national flag to go up in White House on Sept 20...

Check out the show

Listen to Dobbs on Blog Talk Radio
listen live Wedensday 3pm, let your voice be heard

***ALERT***

http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/09/white_house_floating_snowe_trigger.php

What Castro Has Put in Place

It is appaling that this Marxist currently infests the house of representatives, the sad truth is that she is not the only one. You will notice that she describes Castro as "one of the brightest leaders she has ever met," this is not saying much considering she claimed that she had returned from allover the far east Visiting "China, Beijing, Honk Kong, China, Taiwan and Guam." The last I checked China, Beijing, Hong Kong and China are all the same country.

Congresswoman Watson also speaks so glowingly of how the Cuban revolution has kicked out all the wealthy. It would seem to me that without the wealthy there are only the poor, sort of like how it is in Cuba where the average salary is about 333 pesos a month or about $16.70, but what do I know I'm not a Marxist. This hipocracy spues from the mouth of a woman who's personal salary is $177,000, who's staff expenses and Cuban vacations have burdened the American Tax payer for more than $1 million is 2009 alone. Which by the way is payed for the top 10% of wage earners.

Let's take a look at "what Castro has put in place" when it comes to healthcare, As far as I can tell Cuba practices a sort of medical segregation. The stories of magnificent medical centers told by advocates of socialist medacine are true to some extent, However places like La PraderaInternational which boast a resort type of atmosphere, large clean rooms, and high end treatment are only the public face of Cubas system.

Facilities such as this cater to the political class, tourist, and other persons of privilege who pay hard currency for services, Health care for the average Cuban is much different. According to many Cuban Refugees & dissidents Health care centers for most Cuban citizens lack important resources are extremely unsanitary and in some case medical equipment predate the communist revolution.

This Photo was taken at the Ancianos Marina Azcuy facility in Pinar Del Rio province

Lab equipment like this has not been seen in an American hospital for at least 50 years.

But this is not all that "Castro has Put in place," Representative Watson's socialist utopia offers,

a food distribution system know as libreta abustecimiento, (supplies booklet) this rationing book entitles the families of Cuba with their monthly stipend of basic food items.

This is an individuals ration for a single month

(Source: http://cubamigo.org/merengue123/alimentacion.html)

Rice6 pounds (2.7 kg) 0.70 / lb

Beans 20 ounces (570 g) 0.32 / lb

White (refined) sugar 3 pounds (1.4 kg) 0.15 / lb

Dark (unrefined) sugar 3 pounds (1.4 kg) 0.10 / lb

Milk (only children under 7 years) 1 lt / day 0.25 / each

Eggs (*) 12/0.15 each

Potatoes/bananas15 pounds (6.8 kg) 0.40 / lb

(*) Only from September through December. (In other words eggs are rationed during this period)

A couple of things you might notice here, First meats are not included, that's because meats are rationed separately, one person is allowed 1 lb of beef or 2lbs of chicken every month, The beef is usually distributed in a ground mixture of soybeans & beef. Second you might notice the subsidized price for example, eggs 15 cents each, this is cheap, but keep in mind Cubans must go outside the rationing system to actually fulfill their nutritional needs, food items purchased on the open market or black market are 20 times more expensive, so outside of the government bodegas a dozen eggs would cost $36.

But if your thinking you can just go into you government subsidized neighborhood bodega and grab what you need, think deliveries of various supplies are often late, which leads to long lines when the products actually show up. Sure makes you appreciate a country where anyone can go into any buffet and grab an 8 0z sirloin.

Advocates for socialism will blame the U.S embargo for Cuba's woes, but not so fast, most of the imported food which is rationed in Cuba was grown in ample supply before the revolution. (Cuba is the 33rd leading importer of American agriculture products.) And the international medical supplies manufacturer Combiomed is based in eastern Havana.

Seems to me what Castro has put in place is a State where Cubans are second class citizens in their own country.

Anthony D Dolpies

So, You Want the Government to Run Health Care Huh?