Obama

[HisDaughter]

Wikipedia says Obama born in Kenya
Online encyclopedia can't make up its mind on president's birthplace


Posted: July 12, 2009

By Joe Kovacs
© 2009 WorldNetDaily


Wikipedia just can't seem to make up its mind about where President Barack Obama was born.

The free, online encyclopedia written and edited entirely by its users this weekend displayed at least two countries the commander in chief may have been born in – the United States and Kenya.

WND documented how the entry for the "Early life and career of Barack Obama" changed numerous times.

This afternoon at 4:45 p.m. Eastern, Wikipedia said:

"Barack Obama, the current President of the United States, was born on August 4, 1961 in either Honolulu, in the state of Hawaii[1], or Mombasa, Kenya, to Barack Obama, Sr. (1936–1982) (born in Nyang’oma Kogelo, Siaya District, Nyanza Province,[2] Kenya Colony, British Empire), and Ann Dunham (1942–1995) (born in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas).[3][4] On his mother's side he has a half-sister; on his father's side, Obama has two half-sisters and five surviving half-brothers.[5]"

[HisDaughter]

Eligibility arguments to get court hearing
'For 1st time, we have a judge who's listening'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: July 13, 2009
9:52 pm Eastern


By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily


In what ultimately could prove to be a turning point in the legal challenges to Barack Obama's eligibility to be president, a federal judge in California has planned a hearing on the merits of a federal court case raising those questions.

According to attorney Orly Taitz, who is working on multiple cases alleging Obama is a "usurper" because he doesn't meet the constitutional requirement that only a "natural born citizen" can be president, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter ruled in a hearing today that her case will move forward.

The hearing was on her motion for a default order against Obama, because although Taitz said she notified him of the action, Obama's attorneys did not make an appearance.

Her complaint was filed against the president on Jan. 20, the day of his inauguration, over his actions before he became president.

Taitz has told WND if her motion for default is granted she immediately would request access to Obama's birth records and other documentation that could determine his eligibility to occupy the Oval Office.

You can read the rest of the story on WND.

[Soldier4Christ]

Bombshell: Orders revoked
for soldier challenging prez
Major victory for Army warrior
questioning Obama's birthplace

A U.S. Army Reserve major from Florida scheduled to report for deployment to Afghanistan within days has had his military orders revoked after arguing he should not be required to serve under a president who has not proven his eligibility for office.

His attorney, Orly Taitz, confirmed to WND the military has rescinded his impending deployment orders.

"We won! We won before we even arrived," she said with excitement. "It means that the military has nothing to show for Obama. It means that the military has directly responded by saying Obama is illegitimate – and they cannot fight it. Therefore, they are revoking the order!"

She continued, "They just said, 'Order revoked.' No explanation. No reasons – just revoked."

A hearing on the questions raised by Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook, an engineer who told WND he wants to serve his country in Afghanistan, was scheduled for July 16 at 9:30 a.m.

"As an officer in the armed forces of the United States, it is [my] duty to gain clarification on any order we may believe illegal. With that said, if President Obama is found not to be a 'natural-born citizen,' he is not eligible to be commander-in-chief," he told WND only hours after the case was filed.

"[Then] any order coming out of the presidency or his chain of command is illegal. Should I deploy, I would essentially be following an illegal [order]. If I happened to be captured by the enemy in a foreign land, I would not be privy to the Geneva Convention protections," he said.

The order for the hearing in the federal court for the Middle District of Georgia from U.S. District Judge Clay D. Land said the hearing on the request for a temporary restraining order would be held Thursday.

Cook said without a legitimate president as commander-in-chief, members of the U.S. military in overseas actions could be determined to be "war criminals and subject to prosecution."

He said the vast array of information about Obama that is not available to the public confirms to him "something is amiss."

"That and the fact the individual who is occupying the White House has not been entirely truthful with anybody," he said. "Every time anyone has made an inquiry, it has been either cast aside, it has been maligned, it has been laughed at or just dismissed summarily without further investigation.

"You know what. It would be so simple to solve. Just produce the long-form document, certificate of live birth," he said.

Cook said he was scheduled to report for duty tomorrow, on July 15, to deploy to Afghanistan as part of President Obama's plan to increase pressure of insurgent forces there.

He told WND he would be prepared for a backlash against him as a military officer, since members of the military swear to uphold and follow their orders. However, he noted that following an illegal order would be just as bad as failing to follow a legal order.

Before news of the orders being revoked were reported, MSNBC anchor Keith Olbermann tonight called Cook a "jackass" and Taitz a "conwoman," as he labeled both of them the "worst persons in the world." He flayed the soldier as "an embarrassment to all those who have served without cowardice."

Named as defendants in the case are Col. Wanda Good, Col. Thomas Macdonald, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Obama, described as "de facto president of the United States."

See the following link for the rest of this article:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104009

[Soldier4Christ]

I don't see this as a major victory. Although it has set up precedent for others in the Military o follow suit if they so choose to do so it does nothing in the courts otherwise. It does not get obama removed from office nor does it get any charges against him to stick. That is the nature of basically declaring the 5th.

[nChrist]

I don't see this as a major victory. Although it has set up precedent for others in the Military o follow suit if they so choose to do so it does nothing in the courts otherwise. It does not get obama removed from office nor does it get any charges against him to stick. That is the nature of basically declaring the 5th.

It's at least a start, and there's more to come - MUCH MORE! Some of the general public is at least waking up now and starting to question things. The answers ARE going to be revealed sooner or later BECAUSE EVERYONE HAS A RIGHT TO KNOW!

[Soldier4Christ]

Can we expect anything less from a communistic dictator.

Pentagon orders soldier fired for challenging prez
Army warrior terminated from job after questioning Obama eligibility

The Department of Defense has compelled a private employer to fire a U.S. Army Reserve major from his civilian job after he had his military deployment orders revoked for arguing he should not be required to serve under a president who has not proven his eligibility for office.

According to the CEO of Simtech Inc., a private company contracted by the Defense Security Services, an agency of the Department of Defense, the federal government has compelled the termination of Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook.

Cook's attorney, Orly Taitz, wrote in her blog that Simtech CEO Larry Grice said he would try to find another position within the company for Cook, but nothing is currently available.

The Department of Defense does contracting in the general field of information technology/systems integration, at which Cook, a senior systems engineer and architect, was employed until taking a military leave of absence on July 10 in preparation for his deployment to Afghanistan.

"Grice told plaintiff, in essence, that the situation had become 'nutty and crazy,' and that plaintiff would no longer be able to work at his old position," Taitz wrote.

Grice made clear that it was Defense Security Services that had compelled Simtech to fire Cook, Taitz wrote.

According to the report, Grice told Cook "there was some gossip that 'people were disappointed in' the plaintiff because they thought he was manipulating his deployment orders to create a platform for political purposes."

The Simtech CEO then discussed Cook's expectation of final paychecks, without any severance pay, and wished the soldier well.

Messages left with Grice's office had not been returned at the time of this report.

"A federal agency (such as the Department of Defense, acting through the Defense Security Services Agency) clearly violates the Whistleblower Protection Act if it takes or fails to take (or threatens to take or fail to take) a personnel action with respect to any employee or applicant because of any disclosure of information by the employee or applicant that he or she reasonably believes evidences a violation of a law, rule or regulation; gross mismanagement; gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety," Taitz wrote.

"What has happened in the present case of Stefan Frederick Cook is that a federal agency appears to have taken action against Stefan Frederick Cook's private employer, Simtech, Inc., which is a closely held corporation owned and operated by members of a single family, who are as much victims of the Department of Defense's heavy-handed interference with plaintiff Cook's private-sector employment as is plaintiff Cook himself."

As WND reported, Taitz confirmed to WND the military rescinded Maj. Cook's impending deployment orders.

"We won! We won before we even arrived," she said with excitement. "It means that the military has nothing to show for Obama. It means that the military has directly responded by saying Obama is illegitimate – and they cannot fight it. Therefore, they are revoking the order!"

She continued, "They just said, 'Order revoked.' No explanation. No reasons – just revoked."

A hearing on the questions raised by Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook, an engineer who told WND he wants to serve his country in Afghanistan, is still scheduled for July 16 at 9:30 a.m.

(snip)

[nChrist]

The above is all illegal and Unconstitutional. The actions taken against a private employer and a private employee to arm-twist his firing WOULD MAKE STALIN PROUD! I would hope this case moves forward with ADDITIONAL ACTIONS.

[nChrist]

By Email:  Please note that the link given may be swamped with people trying to get a copy.

General Information Forwarded:
For anyone interested in reading the healthcare bill, I have provided the link to the pdf version that you can read online.  Please see the pages cited in red.  For those, you must make your own interpretation.  Please read for yourself and see what you think.  I believe that it is the duty of all of our elected officials to read this bill thoroughly before they vote on anything and for the American people to have every opportunity to question any and everything contained herein.  Please get involved, ask questions, demand representation and know what is in this bill.  It is the only way to preserve our freedoms.  If we allow things to be ramrodded through without any question or any protest, we will be forced to live with all consequences of that non action.  Please distribute this message so that as many citizens as possible have the opportunity to read this. This is nothing short of tyranny.
 
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.pdf
 
Excerpt Information:
But to the truth of this massive 1,107 page new series of US laws, it is to the other purposes that should chill these American people to their very core as these other purposes include:
 
All American citizens being ordered to have a National ID Card (page 58)

US government to have immediate access to every American citizens bank accounts (page 59)

All property owned by Doctors in the US to be determined by government (page 317)

All American citizens ordered to give the US government power of attorney over their living wills (page 425)

The US government given a new power to determine who and how their citizens die (page 427)

End of Life plan for each American citizen ordered by the government (page 429)

US government to decide on who, and who can't be married (page 489)"

[nChrist]

If you want the Healthcare Bill in plain text, use this link:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.txt

You will get this quicker if the servers are swamped.

I will provide copies of selected text in just a few minutes, but you really need to confirm this for yourself.

[nChrist]

Concerning

All American citizens being ordered to have a National ID Card (page 58)

US government to have immediate access to every American citizens bank accounts (page 59):

SEC. 163. ADMINISTRATIVE SIMPLIFICATION.

    (a) Standardizing Electronic Administrative Transactions.--
            (1) In general.--Part C of title XI of the Social Security
        Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d et seq.) is amended by inserting after
        section 1173 the following new section:

``SEC. 1173A. STANDARDIZE ELECTRONIC ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSACTIONS.

    ``(a) Standards for Financial and Administrative Transactions.--
            ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall adopt and regularly
        update standards consistent with the goals described in
        paragraph (2).
            ``(2) Goals for financial and administrative
        transactions.--The goals for standards under paragraph (1) are
        that such standards shall--
                    ``(A) be unique with no conflicting or redundant
                standards;
                    ``(B) be authoritative, permitting no additions or
                constraints for electronic transactions, including
                companion guides;
                    ``(C) be comprehensive, efficient and robust,
                requiring minimal augmentation by paper transactions or
                clarification by further communications;
                    ``(D) enable the real-time (or near real-time)
                determination of an individual's financial
                responsibility at the point of service and, to the
                extent possible, prior to service, including whether
                the individual is eligible for a specific service with
                a specific physician at a specific facility, which may
                include utilization of a machine-readable health plan
                beneficiary identification card;
                    ``(E) enable, where feasible, near real-time
                adjudication of claims;
                    ``(F) provide for timely acknowledgment, response,
                and status reporting applicable to any electronic
                transaction deemed appropriate by the Secretary;
                    ``(G) describe all data elements (such as reason
                and remark codes) in unambiguous terms, not permit
                optional fields, require that data elements be either
                required or conditioned upon set values in other
                fields, and prohibit additional conditions; and
                    ``(H) harmonize all common data elements across
                administrative and clinical transaction standards.
            ``(3) Time for adoption.--Not later than 2 years after the
        date of implementation of the X12 Version 5010 transaction
        standards implemented under this part, the Secretary shall
        adopt standards under this section.
            ``(4) Requirements for specific standards.--The standards
        under this section shall be developed, adopted and enforced so
        as to--
                    ``(A) clarify, refine, complete, and expand, as
                needed, the standards required under section 1173;
                    ``(B) require paper versions of standardized
                transactions to comply with the same standards as to
                data content such that a fully compliant, equivalent
                electronic transaction can be populated from the data
                from a paper version;
                    ``(C) enable electronic funds transfers, in order
                to allow automated reconciliation with the related
                health care payment and remittance advice;
                    ``(D) require timely and transparent claim and
                denial management processes, including tracking,
                adjudication, and appeal processing;
                    ``(E) require the use of a standard electronic
                transaction with which health care providers may
                quickly and efficiently enroll with a health plan to
                conduct the other electronic transactions provided for
                in this part; and
                    ``(F) provide for other requirements relating to
                administrative simplification as identified by the
                Secretary, in consultation with stakeholders.
            ``(5) Building on existing standards.--In developing the
        standards under this section, the Secretary shall build upon
        existing and planned standards.
            ``(6) Implementation and enforcement.--Not later than 6
        months after the date of the enactment of this section, the
        Secretary shall submit to the appropriate committees of
        Congress a plan for the implementation and enforcement, by not
        later than 5 years after such date of enactment, of the
        standards under this section. Such plan shall include--
                    ``(A) a process and timeframe with milestones for
                developing the complete set of standards;
                    ``(B) an expedited upgrade program for continually
                developing and approving additions and modifications to
                the standards as often as annually to improve their
                quality and extend their functionality to meet evolving
                requirements in health care;
                    ``(C) programs to provide incentives for, and ease
                the burden of, implementation for certain health care
                providers, with special consideration given to such
                providers serving rural or underserved areas and ensure
                coordination with standards, implementation
                specifications, and certification criteria being
                adopted under the HITECH Act;
                    ``(D) programs to provide incentives for, and ease
                the burden of, health care providers who volunteer to
                participate in the process of setting standards for
                electronic transactions;
                    ``(E) an estimate of total funds needed to ensure
                timely completion of the implementation plan; and
                    ``(F) an enforcement process that includes timely
                investigation of complaints, random audits to ensure
                compliance, civil monetary and programmatic penalties
                for non-compliance consistent with existing laws and
                regulations, and a fair and reasonable appeals process
                building off of enforcement provisions under this part.

[nChrist]

Concerning

All property owned by Doctors in the US to be determined by government (page 317)

            ``(1) Requirements described.--For purposes of subsection
        (d)(3)(D), the requirements described in this paragraph are as
        follows:
                    ``(A) Provider agreement.--The hospital had--
                            ``(i) physician ownership or investment on
                        January 1, 2009; and
                            ``(ii) a provider agreement under section
                        1866 in effect on such date.
                    ``(B) Prohibition on physician ownership or
                investment.--The percentage of the total value of the
                ownership or investment interests held in the hospital,
                or in an entity whose assets include the hospital, by
                physician owners or investors in the aggregate does not
                exceed such percentage as of the date of enactment of
                this subsection.
                    ``(C) Prohibition on expansion of facility
                capacity.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
                number of operating rooms, procedure rooms, or beds of
                the hospital at any time on or after the date of the
                enactment of this subsection are no greater than the
                number of operating rooms, procedure rooms, or beds,
                respectively, as of such date.
                    ``(D) Ensuring bona fide ownership and
                investment.--
                            ``(i) Any ownership or investment interests
                        that the hospital offers to a physician are not
                        offered on more favorable terms than the terms
                        offered to a person who is not in a position to
                        refer patients or otherwise generate business
                        for the hospital.
                            ``(ii) The hospital (or any investors in
                        the hospital) does not directly or indirectly
                        provide loans or financing for any physician
                        owner or investor in the hospital.
                            ``(iii) The hospital (or any investors in
                        the hospital) does not directly or indirectly
                        guarantee a loan, make a payment toward a loan,
                        or otherwise subsidize a loan, for any
                        physician owner or investor or group of
                        physician owners or investors that is related
                        to acquiring any ownership or investment
                        interest in the hospital.
                            ``(iv) Ownership or investment returns are
                        distributed to each owner or investor in the
                        hospital in an amount that is directly
                        proportional to the ownership or investment
                        interest of such owner or investor in the
                        hospital.
                            ``(v) The investment interest of the owner
                        or investor is directly proportional to the
                        owner's or investor's capital contributions
                        made at the time the ownership or investment
                        interest is obtained.
                            ``(vi) Physician owners and investors do
                        not receive, directly or indirectly, any
                        guaranteed receipt of or right to purchase
                        other business interests related to the
                        hospital, including the purchase or lease of
                        any property under the control of other owners
                        or investors in the hospital or located near
                        the premises of the hospital.
                            ``(vii) The hospital does not offer a
                        physician owner or investor the opportunity to
                        purchase or lease any property under the
                        control of the hospital or any other owner or
                        investor in the hospital on more favorable
                        terms than the terms offered to a person that
                        is not a physician owner or investor.
                            ``(viii) The hospital does not condition
                        any physician ownership or investment interests
                        either directly or indirectly on the physician
                        owner or investor making or influencing
                        referrals to the hospital or otherwise
                        generating business for the hospital.

[Soldier4Christ]

This is definitely not a health care bill. THIS IS A BILL THAT ATTEMPTS TO DO AWAY WITH THE CONSTITUTIONAL, TAKING ANY POWER OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE PEOPLE AND GIVING IT ALL TO THE GOVERNMENT! IT IS COMPLETELY ILLEGAL AND ALL SHOULD BE DONE TO PREVENT IT FROM BEING PASSED!

[nChrist]

Concerning End of Life Tyrannical Conditions:

All American citizens ordered to give the US government power of attorney over their living wills (page 425)

The US government given a new power to determine who and how their citizens die (page 427)

End of Life plan for each American citizen ordered by the government (page 429)

SEC. 1233. ADVANCE CARE PLANNING CONSULTATION.

    (a) Medicare.--
            (1) In general.--Section 1861 of the Social Security Act
        (42 U.S.C. 1395x) is amended--
                    (A) in subsection (s)(2)--
                            (i) by striking ``and'' at the end of
                        subparagraph (DD);
                            (ii) by adding ``and'' at the end of
                        subparagraph (EE); and
                            (iii) by adding at the end the following
                        new subparagraph:
            ``(FF) advance care planning consultation (as defined in
        subsection (hhh)(1));''; and
                    (B) by adding at the end the following new
                subsection:

                  ``Advance Care Planning Consultation

    ``(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term `advance
care planning consultation' means a consultation between the individual
and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care
planning, if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has not
had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such consultation
shall include the following:
            ``(A) An explanation by the practitioner of advance care
        planning, including key questions and considerations, important
        steps, and suggested people to talk to.
            ``(B) An explanation by the practitioner of advance
        directives, including living wills and durable powers of
        attorney, and their uses.
            ``(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the role and
        responsibilities of a health care proxy.
            ``(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list of
        national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and
        their families with advance care planning, including the
        national toll-free hotline, the advance care planning
        clearinghouses, and State legal service organizations
        (including those funded through the Older Americans Act of
        1965).
            ``(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum
        of end-of-life services and supports available, including
        palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and
        supports that are available under this title.
            ``(F)(i) Subject to clause (ii), an explanation of orders
        regarding life sustaining treatment or similar orders, which
        shall include--
                    ``(I) the reasons why the development of such an
                order is beneficial to the individual and the
                individual's family and the reasons why such an order
                should be updated periodically as the health of the
                individual changes;
                    ``(II) the information needed for an individual or
                legal surrogate to make informed decisions regarding
                the completion of such an order; and
                    ``(III) the identification of resources that an
                individual may use to determine the requirements of the
                State in which such individual resides so that the
                treatment wishes of that individual will be carried out
                if the individual is unable to communicate those
                wishes, including requirements regarding the
                designation of a surrogate decisionmaker (also known as
                a health care proxy).
            ``(ii) The Secretary shall limit the requirement for
        explanations under clause (i) to consultations furnished in a
        State--
                    ``(I) in which all legal barriers have been
                addressed for enabling orders for life sustaining
                treatment to constitute a set of medical orders
                respected across all care settings; and
                    ``(II) that has in effect a program for orders for
                life sustaining treatment described in clause (iii).
            ``(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining treatment
        for a States described in this clause is a program that--
                    ``(I) ensures such orders are standardized and
                uniquely identifiable throughout the State;
                    ``(II) distributes or makes accessible such orders
                to physicians and other health professionals that
                (acting within the scope of the professional's
                authority under State law) may sign orders for life
                sustaining treatment;
                    ``(III) provides training for health care
                professionals across the continuum of care about the
                goals and use of orders for life sustaining treatment;
                and
                    ``(IV) is guided by a coalition of stakeholders
                includes representatives from emergency medical
                services, emergency department physicians or nurses,
                state long-term care association, state medical
                association, state surveyors, agency responsible for
                senior services, state department of health, state
                hospital association, home health association, state
                bar association, and state hospice association.
    ``(2) A practitioner described in this paragraph is--
            ``(A) a physician (as defined in subsection (r)(1)); and
            ``(B) a nurse practitioner or physician's assistant who has
        the authority under State law to sign orders for life
        sustaining treatments.
    ``(3)(A) An initial preventive physical examination under
subsection (WW), including any related discussion during such
examination, shall not be considered an advance care planning
consultation for purposes of applying the 5-year limitation under
paragraph (1).
    ``(B) An advance care planning consultation with respect to an
individual may be conducted more frequently than provided under
paragraph (1) if there is a significant change in the health condition
of the individual, including diagnosis of a chronic, progressive, life-
limiting disease, a life-threatening or terminal diagnosis or life-
threatening injury, or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a
long-term care facility (as defined by the Secretary), or a hospice
program.
    ``(4) A consultation under this subsection may include the
formulation of an order regarding life sustaining treatment or a
similar order.
    ``(5)(A) For purposes of this section, the term `order regarding
life sustaining treatment' means, with respect to an individual, an
actionable medical order relating to the treatment of that individual
that--
            ``(i) is signed and dated by a physician (as defined in
        subsection (r)(1)) or another health care professional (as
        specified by the Secretary and who is acting within the scope
        of the professional's authority under State law in signing such
        an order, including a nurse practitioner or physician
        assistant) and is in a form that permits it to stay with the
        individual and be followed by health care professionals and
        providers across the continuum of care;
            ``(ii) effectively communicates the individual's
        preferences regarding life sustaining treatment, including an
        indication of the treatment and care desired by the individual;
            ``(iii) is uniquely identifiable and standardized within a
        given locality, region, or State (as identified by the
        Secretary); and
            ``(iv) may incorporate any advance directive (as defined in
        section 1866(f)(3)) if executed by the individual.
    ``(B) The level of treatment indicated under subparagraph (A)(ii)
may range from an indication for full treatment to an indication to
limit some or all or specified interventions. Such indicated levels of
treatment may include indications respecting, among other items--
            ``(i) the intensity of medical intervention if the patient
        is pulse less, apneic, or has serious cardiac or pulmonary
        problems;
            ``(ii) the individual's desire regarding transfer to a
        hospital or remaining at the current care setting;
            ``(iii) the use of antibiotics; and
            ``(iv) the use of artificially administered nutrition and
        hydration.''.

[nChrist]

Concerning

US government to decide on who, and who can't be married (page 489)"

This is long, confusing, and it refers to other documents and laws. You'll have to read it for yourself and see if you want to put forth the effort and time to find out what is really being said.

[nChrist]

This is definitely not a health care bill. THIS IS A BILL THAT ATTEMPTS TO DO AWAY WITH THE CONSTITUTIONAL, TAKING ANY POWER OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE PEOPLE AND GIVING IT ALL TO THE GOVERNMENT! IT IS COMPLETELY ILLEGAL AND ALL SHOULD BE DONE TO PREVENT IT FROM BEING PASSED!

You're right. Brother, all I can say is that from what I've read, Stalin would be proud of this legislation. Trying to read the entire bill is a trip into FASCIST COMMUNISM/SOCIALISM. NO AMERICAN AND CERTAINLY NO REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PEOPLE SHOULD TOLERATE ANY OF THIS GARBAGE! THIS WOULD BE A MAJOR STEP IN TURNING THE ENTIRE COUNTRY INTO A CONCENTRATION CAMP!