I so agree with you. It is funny, but I do not think that anyone has taken the time to read the contents of this bill. It DOES NOT SINGLE OUT GAY people. In fact, it only broadens and expands a law that is already on the books regarding freedom of religion. In no section does it specify GAY, BLACK, YELLOW, RED....or any other skin tone or sexual preferences. It simply says that to defend your freedom of religion, from law suite a person must meet specific criteria.

I just love some of the other posters that hear or read what the biased media puts out and RUNS their mouth as if they read the bill.

Why are you posting the same topic as new that you posted six topics ago? In case you have multi personality disorder on top of your more obvious afflictions I will humor you and re post my reply.


The ad she was used in is a total lie, take a moment to read the t***h of how the ACA will actually help her and likely save her a bit of money. If the ACA is so bad why arn't the opponents able to actually find someone it harms to put in their commercials? Would they just rather lie even when they get caught every time? Note that the Free Press is owned by Gannett a very concervitive company, and this is not a left wing reference.

The ad featuring Julie Boonstra of Dexter claimed increased health care costs, but that's now under scrutiny.

By Todd Spangler

Detroit Free Press Washington Staff

WASHINGTON — A political ad that features a Dexter woman criticizing U.S. Rep. Gary Peters, a candidate for U.S. Senate in Michigan, for his v**e in favor of the Affordable Care Act is coming under scrutiny from the Washington Post.

In its Fact Checker column, the Post’s Glenn Kessler vets the ad produced by Americans for Prosperity, a conservative group that has spent upwards of $1 million already in targeting Peters, a Bloomfield Township Democrat, who is running to replace the retiring Sen. Carl Levin.

The ad features Julie Boonstra of Dexter, a leukemia patient who says her previous insurance, which she preferred, was canceled under the Affordable Care Act. She says that “the out-of-pocket costs are so high that it’s unaffordable,” and, “if I do not receive my medication, I will die.”

Boonstra was a guest of U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg, a Tipton Republican, at last month’s State of the Union address, representing a citizenwho had lost coverage because of the health care reform bill passed in 2010.

The Post, however, said Americans for Prosperity confirmed that Boonstra was able to find a new Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan plan that allowed her to keep her doctor; and it noted that under the ACA, individual plans have an out-of-pocket maximum cost of $6,350 a year, including medications.

Kessler quoted a report in the Detroit News that said the new plan’s premium was reduced from $1,100 a month to $571 — meaning that over the course of a year, Boonstra would save $6,348, just two dollars less than the out-of-pocket maximum for the plan.

Because pharmaceutical costs are counted in the out-of-pocket maximum, after that amount is paid drugs are covered at 100%.

The Free Press was unable to reach Boonstra in Dexter at phone numbers listed under her name, and Americans for Prosperity spokesman Levi Russell did not return a telephone call for comment. He told the Post that the costs of her coverage “have quickly become unpredictable” and that instead “of knowing exactly what she would have to pay every month, she now is facing a roller coaster of expenses.”

The ad, which has Boonstra saying Peters’ “decision to v**e for Obamacare jeopardized my health” does not mention Peters’ v**e last year to allow insurers to keep selling individual policies that were offered before the ACA went into effect.

In that case, the constitution gives the congress to write laws. In past laws, they have given "executive powers" to help the president, no matter who it is to better implement the laws, which is enumerated in the constitution.

Without executive powers, no changes would be possible without a new law from congress. This type of government sucks and is inefficient. I live in Alabama, where we have a constitution that makes us v**e on every single change. It has resulted in the longest constitution in the world (eight times longer than the next longest anywhere worldwide). It truly is sadly and completely inefficient.

The hard working geniuses of the teapartyconaservative republicans unveil a new tax reform plan, to simplify ad eliminate "loopholes" and "certain deductions"
As part of the plan, they impose a 10% surtax on incomes above $450K.

The talking head fools at faux and fat limburg are really going to love their good buddies on the right.

have you heard from the irs yet they have a tax for you .


http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/26/gop-overhaul-of-tax-code-includes-new-surtax-on-the-wealthy/#!

In early January 2014, Bob Lonsberry, a Rochester talk radio personality on WHAM
1180 AM, said this in response to Obama's "income ine******y speech":

Two Americas

The Democrats are right, there are two Americas.

The America that works, and the America that doesn’t.

The America that contributes, and the America that doesn’t.

It’s not the haves and the have-nots; it’s the do’s and the don’ts.

Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society, and others don’t. That’s the divide in America.

It’s not about income ine******y, it’s about civic irresponsibility.

It’s about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office.

It’s about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country. That’s not invective, that’s t***h, and it’s about time someone said it.

The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting “income ine******y.” He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just.

That is the rationale of thievery. The other guy has it, you want it, Obama will take it for you. V**e Democrat.

That is the philosophy that produced Detroit. It is the e*******l philosophy that is destroying America.

It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but a betrayal.

The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have ens***ed them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victim-hood and anger instead of ability and hope.

The president’s premise – that you reduce income ine******y by debasing the successful – seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices.

Because, by and large, income variations in society is a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibility have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure. Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income.

You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college – and you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education.

You have your children out of wedlock and life is apt to take one course; you have them within a marriage and life is apt to take another course.

Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take.

My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant

income ine******y between us. Our lives have had an ine******y of outcome, but, our lives also have had an in e******y of effort. While my doctor went to college and then dev**ed his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant.

He made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine.

Does that mean he c***ted and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes.

It is not ine******y Barack Obama intends to take away, it is freedom. The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail.

There is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure.

The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy.

Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even if the other guy made a lifetime’s worth of asinine and shortsighted decisions.

Barack Obama and the Democrats preach e******y of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring ine******y of effort.

The simple Law of the Harvest – as ye sow, so shall ye reap – is sometimes applied as, “The harder you work, the more you get." Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society.

Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive to foster e******y through mediocrity.

He and his party speak of two Americas, and their grip on power is based on using the v**es of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our efforts. It is a false philosophy to say one man’s success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man’s victimization.

What Obama offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He fomented division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That’s what socialists offer. Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow.

Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the t***h to Lincoln’s maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.'

We have now discovered something with less intelligence than a moon rock.

And this person is allowed to v**e???? To Understand the mind of this woman be sure to read the whole 'letter to the editor,' including her definition of a natural born citizen!

From the Carteret County News-Times
(Editor's note: The following Letter to the Editor, published in the Jan. 23 edition, has gone v***l on the Web after a reader linked it to a Fox News page. It had received more than 4,000 comments and been shared more than 12,000 times by Tuesday morning.

Many people are so ignorant that they believe unions use dues money to defend working people from politicians who work against their family's , the t***h is that only the small voluntary contributions made by members and their family's to union PAC's can be used to support candidates and b****t issues that support working family's. On the other hand corporations can secretly use share holders money to make campaign contributions and they do at a rate many times that of working family's. Why do you think American workers have taken such a beating with crazy trade deals, loosing insurance, old age pensions and standard of living? oh I forgot it is because of those lazy people of color and the guy next door who is still getting by in a Union job, not the policy's bought and paid for by huge multinational corporations. Please don't keep guzzling the cool aid you are not just digging your own grave with your ignorance you are helping to bury the American middle class.

Wolf, be it two men or two women, the other children know
that have a man and woman for their Father and Mother. I
really don't care what you do, just as long as children are not
hurt by it. Some that even get adopted tell the other kids in
their class that they were chosen, but your parents had to have you. That upsets the children also and maybe that is why they grow up mixed up. I know, I taught religion for
26 years and I had great kids and am proud to say one is in
the House of Rep. and one is a minister. God Bless all you and
don't waste time being on here. sit down and start praying for
our Country which is going to pot.