We can't afford the US House health care bill.

The House of Representatives was reviewed by the Heritage Foundation which in turn had an independent health care group research firm, The Lewin Group, research the impact of the plan. What did they find? A foretaste of government run health care. According to Heritage Foundation:

There are many interesting findings from the Lewin study, including that 83 million Americans will LOSE their current health insurance and move on to the government-run system while early 17 million Americans will still be uninsured. And all of this at a cost of at least $1 trillion in the first 10 years. This does not even begin to address the fact that in every country that has moved to a government-run system, health outcomes for those who fall ill are dramatically worse than in the United States.

More government, millions uninsured while costing us a trillion dollars over the next 10 years and a massive transfer of people to the federal government health care plan.

What is the answer? Restoring market forces to the current health care system and encourage people to provide their own health care through Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). And a plan to help the truly needy and less fortunate. Health care costs will never get controlled unless the market is restored or government rationing is implemented which raises the specter of all sorts of other problems. Remember, many of the problems inherent in our current health care system are due to the government.

Proposed online homosexual high school uses students as "guinea pigs".

There was a story in the Pioneer Press today about the first proposed online homosexual high school, called "GLBTQ Online High School." It will be based in Maplewood, cost $5,900 a year. So far 24 kids have applied and 100 people have applied for staff positions.

What's one to make of it? First, it strikes me as a bit unusual, even bizarre that the school is organized around a person's sexual preferences, e.g. who one desires to have sex with. What would one think of a school which advertised itself as a "Heterosexual school catering to students who were sexually attracted to persons of the opposite sex." Yet that's exactly what the proposed school is doing in terms of homosexuality.

Second, parents should be very leery of the school. It smacks of indoctrination rather than education. The curriculum of the school is supposed to differ from traditional school by being more "'GLBTQ-friendly.' That involves abolishing negative messages and highlighting gay, bisexual and transgender people in history." There's clearly a social agenda in place, promoting acceptance of homosexuality rather than educating which would supposedly include various perspectives on homosexuality.

One alleged "advantage" of the school is "It also removes gay students from potentially hostile school environments and places them in what he touts as a 'safe and welcoming educational community.' Instead of facing bullies every day, students would be learning with other students who understand their concerns." The question is why does it have to be an overtly homosexual environment? Can't avoidance of a "hostile school environment" be achieved through a non-homosexual online program. Again, more evidence that the goal is indoctrination and a social agenda rather than education.

Finally, the school will aggressively promote acceptance of unhealthy sexual behaviors and lifestyle among impressible and often confused adolescents . Homosexual behavior is demonstrably unhealthy yet in the school it will be actively affirmed throughout the curriculum. On top of the curriculum, the program does so by isolating kids so they won't be exposed anything but pro-homosexuality, bisexuality, and transgender messages. This will certainly be detrimental to the kids involved with the school.

The organizer says no other school has done this. He says, "people ask us, what's the research behind this? We are the research." Sounds like an admission that the students are being used as guinea pigs.

The bottom line is more kids will be put at risk, emotionally and physically because of the school and it's aggressive promotion of homosexuality.

Obama's end game for health care? Government run, universal, single payer health care.

There's never been any doubt in my mind where President Obama wants to go with health care in the United States. Government run single payer, universal health care system.

In this cut from a 2003 speech to the AFL-CIO, Obama is very explicit about that. He also says "everybody in and nobody out."

What are the implications of such a plan? Rising health care costs. Rationing. Declining quality of health care. Government payment of abortion. Euthanasia. Not a pretty picture.

Again this is a worldview issue. In Obama's worldview, our trust is in government not in God. A denial of how God designed and created our economic and social systems to actually work in the real world. Government will again meet our needs and solve our problems. The result? The abysmal failure of government control of health care in socialist models. From the USSR which takeover everything, including health care, to our neighbors to the north, Canada and European countries such as the UK where rationing and massive waiting periods are the order of the day.

Support for Homosexual marriage drops significantly in major polls. Is the public understanding now what's at stake?

It's interesting that since the Left's social agenda is now the agenda in Washington, DC, the public is turning against homosexual marriage. At least that's what several major public opinion polls show.

According to the Pew Research poll,

...the issue of same-sex marriage has occupied center stage politically for the past several years. Maine recently became the fifth state to legalize same-sex marriage, and legislative efforts to pass similar laws are underway in other states as well. But a majority of the public (54%) remains opposed to same-sex marriage, reflecting a small but significant increase in opposition since November 2007, when 49% opposed it. Just 35% favor it.

In a CBS/New York Times poll finds,

The poll found 33 percent favor marriage for same-sex couples, down somewhat from a high of 42 percent in April, and another 30 percent support civil unions. A third of Americans think there should be no legal recognition of a same-sex couple’s relationship. Views in this poll are similar to those found back in March of this year.

In a May Gallup poll, support didn't change from 40% while opposition grew from 56% to 57%.

Polls go up and down but in this time when liberalism is on the ascendancy, the support for homosexual marriage is actually going down, not up. I find it also interesting how some of these pollsters analyze the results. One can find liberal bias again. CBS says support for same sex couples is "down somewhat" from 42% to 33%. That doesn't sound like a "somewhat" to me. That sounds like "a lot" to me.

Government health care may be toxic to the elderly

While Obama chides Doctors who abuse the health care system by removing tonsils to make more money, he endorses a plan that pays Doctors to improve ROI by counseling the elderly and terminally ill about what medical care they will receive in their final days.

This article, "Time To Go, Grandpa" by Pat Buchanan sheds some insight into this possibility with Obamacare.

Time To Go, Grandpa
Pat Buchanan
Townhall.com

"With "controlling costs" a primary goal of Obamacare, and half of all medical costs coming in the last six months of life, "rationed care" takes on a new meaning for us all.

London's Telegraph reported Sunday that the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence, known by its Orwellian acronym NICE, intends to slash by 95 percent the number of steroid injections, such as cortisone, given to people who suffer severe and chronic back pain. "

"Specialists fear," said the Telegraph, "tens of thousands of people, mainly the elderly and frail, will be left to suffer excruciating levels of pain or pay as much as 500 pounds each for private treatment."

Now, twin this story with the weekend Washington Post story about Obamacare's "proposal to pay physicians who counsel elderly or terminally ill patients about what medical treatment they would prefer near the end of life and how to prepare instructions such as living wills," and there is little doubt as to what is coming."

Read More