Sibelius Resigns. When the Going Gets Tough…

SibeliusGo on, take the money and run…

Kathleen Sebelius, the health and human services secretary, is resigning, ending a stormy five-year tenure marred by the disastrous rollout of President Obama’s signature legislative achievement, the Affordable Care Act.

Mr. Obama accepted Ms. Sebelius’s resignation this week, and on Friday morning, he will nominate Sylvia Mathews Burwell, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, to replace her, officials said.

The departure comes as the Obama administration tries to move beyond its early stumbles in carrying out the law, convince a still-skeptical public of its lasting benefits, and help Democratic incumbents, who face blistering attack ads after supporting the legislation, survive the midterm elections this fall.

Sylvia Mathews Burwell has been mired in fiscal fights and has also handled health policy as part of her job as budget director.

Officials said Ms. Sebelius, 65, made the decision to resign and was not forced out. But the frustration at the White House over her performance had become increasingly clear, as administration aides worried that the crippling problems at, the website set up to enroll Americans in insurance exchanges, would result in lasting damage to the president’s legacy.

Even last week, as Mr. Obama triumphantly announced that enrollments in the exchanges had exceeded seven million, she did not appear next to him for the news conference in the Rose Garden.

The president is hoping that Ms. Burwell, 48, a Harvard- and Oxford-educated West Virginia native with a background in economic policy, will bring an intense focus and management acumen to the department. The budget office, which she has overseen since April of last year, is deeply involved in developing and carrying out health care policy.

Let’s take a closer look at the next HHS Secretary, shall we? According to,

Sylvia Mathews Burwell, President, The Walmart Foundation (Jan. 2012 – April, 2013); President, Global Development Program (Apr. 2006 – Dec. 2011). Ms. Burwell joined the Foundation in 2001 as Executive Vice President and served as its Chief Operating Officer from 2002 to April 2006. Prior to joining the Foundation, she served as Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget in Washington, D.C. from 1998. Ms. Burwell served as Deputy Chief of Staff to President Bill Clinton from 1997 to 1998, and was Chief of Staff to Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin from 1995 to 1997. She also served as Staff Director for the National Economic Council from 1993 to 1995. Ms. Burwell was Manager of President Clintons economic transition team. Prior to that, she was an Associate at McKinsey and Company from 1990 through 1992. She is a member of the Board of Directors of the Council on Foreign Relations, a member of the Aspen Strategy Group, the Trilateral Commission and the Nike Foundation Advisory Group, a member of the Board of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa, an Advisory Board member for the Next Generation Initiative and the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, and a member of the Professional Advisory Board for the ALS Evergreen Chapter. Ms. Burwell received a bachelors degree in government, cum laude, from Harvard University in 1987 and a bachelors degree in philosophy, politics and economics from Oxford University, where she was a Rhodes Scholar. Ms. Burwell has been a Director of MetLife and Metropolitan Life Insurance Company since 2004. On April 19, 2013, Ms. Sylvia Mathews Burwell resigned from the Board of Directors of MetLife, Inc., effective as of that date.

One group in Ms. Burwell’s biography jumped out at me. The Aspen Strategy Group is a part of the Aspen Institute.

Who are they? I’m glad you asked.

According to, the main things to remember about the Aspen Institute are that the institute

  • Views the United States as a nation rife with deep-seated “structural racism”

  • Warns that “the circumpolar Arctic region is experiencing significant ecological change due to global climate change” caused by human industrial activity

  • Receives financial support from George Soros’s Open Society Institute

…AI has numerous noteworthy connections to the billionaire philanthropist George Soros. For example, in August 2004 Soros and other wealthy Democrats gathered at the Institute to brainstorm ways in which they could use their fortunes to engineer the defeat of George W. Bush in the upcoming presidential election. That same year, Soros spoke at an AI seminar (which also featured an appearance by Al Gore) titled “America’s Role in the Fight Against Global Poverty.” In 2006 Aspen sponsored a Soros talk where the billionaire promoted his book The Age of Fallibility: Consequences of the War on Terror. Jim Spiegelman, Aspen’s director of communications, formerly worked as a “special assistant” to Soros. And Arjun Gupta, who serves on Aspen’s board of overseers, is a vice president with the Chatterjee Group which advises Soros and the Soros Fund Management Group.

Soros’s Open Society Institute (OSI) has awarded the Aspen Institute numerous large grants over the years, including $50,000 in 2004, another $50,000 in 2005, $195,000 in 2008, and $125,000 in 2009. The latter grant was earmarked for “international human rights and international humanitarian law and their application in American jurisprudence.” In 2011, OSI funded AI’s publication of a report blaming the overrepresentation of blacks and Latinos in U.S. prison populations on “the failure of so many of our society’s institutions.”

Soon after the inauguration of President Barack Obama in 2009, AI developed a close working relationship with the U.S. State Department. Said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that year: “We can’t imagine a better partner than the Aspen Institute.”


So, the White House Door revolves again. A Hardcore Liberal leaves, replaced by another Hardcore Liberal.

Incestuous little bunch, aren’t they?

Of course, Sibelius is “getting while the getting is good”, before the rest of the you-know-what hits the rotary oscillator.

But, as long as OUR MONEY holds out, the Obama Administration will keep on spending it.

I wonder if Uncle George Soros would give us American Taxpayers a grant, too?

Until He Comes,



Obamacare: Covering Some Americans, Some of the Time

obamadoctorOn September 9, 2009, President Barack Hussein Obama spoke before a Joint Session of Congress concerning his marvelous plan for state-run Healthcare in America. He said,

Now, if you’re one of the tens of millions of Americans who don’t currently have health insurance, the second part of this plan will finally offer you quality, affordable choices. (Applause.) If you lose your job or you change your job, you’ll be able to get coverage. If you strike out on your own and start a small business, you’ll be able to get coverage. We’ll do this by creating a new insurance exchange — a marketplace where individuals and small businesses will be able to shop for health insurance at competitive prices. Insurance companies will have an incentive to participate in this exchange because it lets them compete for millions of new customers. As one big group, these customers will have greater leverage to bargain with the insurance companies for better prices and quality coverage. This is how large companies and government employees get affordable insurance. It’s how everyone in this Congress gets affordable insurance. And it’s time to give every American the same opportunity that we give ourselves. (Applause.)

Now, for those individuals and small businesses who still can’t afford the lower-priced insurance available in the exchange, we’ll provide tax credits, the size of which will be based on your need. And all insurance companies that want access to this new marketplace will have to abide by the consumer protections I already mentioned. This exchange will take effect in four years, which will give us time to do it right. In the meantime, for those Americans who can’t get insurance today because they have preexisting medical conditions, we will immediately offer low-cost coverage that will protect you against financial ruin if you become seriously ill. (Applause.) This was a good idea when Senator John McCain proposed it in the campaign, it’s a good idea now, and we should all embrace it. (Applause.)

Now, even if we provide these affordable options, there may be those — especially the young and the healthy — who still want to take the risk and go without coverage. There may still be companies that refuse to do right by their workers by giving them coverage. The problem is, such irresponsible behavior costs all the rest of us money. If there are affordable options and people still don’t sign up for health insurance, it means we pay for these people’s expensive emergency room visits. If some businesses don’t provide workers health care, it forces the rest of us to pick up the tab when their workers get sick, and gives those businesses an unfair advantage over their competitors. And unless everybody does their part, many of the insurance reforms we seek — especially requiring insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions — just can’t be achieved.

And that’s why under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance — just as most states require you to carry auto insurance. (Applause.) Likewise — likewise, businesses will be required to either offer their workers health care, or chip in to help cover the cost of their workers. There will be a hardship waiver for those individuals who still can’t afford coverage, and 95 percent of all small businesses, because of their size and narrow profit margin, would be exempt from these requirements. (Applause.) But we can’t have large businesses and individuals who can afford coverage game the system by avoiding responsibility to themselves or their employees. Improving our health care system only works if everybody does their part.

And while there remain some significant details to be ironed out, I believe — (laughter) — I believe a broad consensus exists for the aspects of the plan I just outlined: consumer protections for those with insurance, an exchange that allows individuals and small businesses to purchase affordable coverage, and a requirement that people who can afford insurance get insurance.

Regarding that whole promise of Universal Healthcare…Obama lied.

Yesterday, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that

A new report released today by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) shows that 56 percent, or nearly six in ten of the people who don’t have health insurance today may be able to get coverage through the Health Insurance Marketplace for less than $100 per month.

Beginning on October 1, individuals and families will have a new way to shop for coverage through the Health Insurance Marketplace. They’ll be able to compare their options using side-by-side information about price, quality and benefits. With one application they’ll be able to see if they qualify for premium tax credits or Medicaid that lower the costs of coverage right away. Coverage through the Marketplace starts as early as January 1, 2014.

“The health care law is making health insurance more affordable,” said HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “With more than half of all uninsured Americans able to get coverage at $100 or less, the health care law is delivering the quality, affordable coverage people are looking for.”

Of the 41.3 million individuals who are uninsured and eligible for coverage, 23.2 million (56 percent) may qualify for Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or tax credits to purchase coverage for $100 or less per month. The amount an individual will save on premiums depends on their family income and size. Today’s report uses data about family income and size from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey to estimate the number of uninsured individuals who will qualify for lower costs on monthly premiums.

Today’s report also shows that if all 50 states took advantage of new options to expand Medicaid coverage, nearly 8 out of every 10 people (78 percent) who currently do not have insurance could be paying less than $100 a month for coverage under the Affordable Care Act. While some states are expanding their Medicaid programs in 2014, other states are not doing so. Under the health care law, states can receive 100 percent federal funding in 2014 to expand their Medicaid programs to cover people with incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level. That’s about $15,800 a year for an individual, or about $32,500 for a family of four.

With less than half a month before Obamacare officially starts making all of our lives miserable on October 1st, Obama’s unwanted socialization of the greatest Healthcare System in the World looks as confused as its creator.

Several states have refused to fund his precious Healthcare Exchanges.

Plus, the nation has found out that Sarah Palin was right all along, as a codicil was found in this monstrous law, which cuts off eligibility for Cancer Treatment at the age of 76. So, if you are an otherwise healthy 77 year old, you are S.O.L….and you know what that means.

And then, there’s the fact that your doctor will be forced to ask you about your sex life, and will record all the lurid details, for Uncle Sugar to read, like an old magazine found in a truck stop men’s room.

Finally, the majority of Americans still want no part of this stupidly conceived and written intrusion into our daily lives.

Nearly 7 out of 10 voters are concerned about their personal health care under the Affordable Care Act and a majority wants to take the health care system back to 2009, according to the latest Fox News national poll.

The poll, released Tuesday, finds that 68 percent of voters are concerned about their health care under the new system. That includes 43 percent “very” concerned and another 25 percent “somewhat” concerned.

The number feeling concerned is more than twice that of those who are unworried (31 percent).

Even a 56-percent majority of Democrats feels concerned (31 percent “very” concerned). By comparison, 72 percent of independents and 77 percent of Republicans feel that way. …

To summarize: On October 1st, Americans will be saddled with a Healthcare System nobody wants, and which is not even ready to be implemented, in the first place.

Heckuva job, Barry!

Until He Comes,


Storm Clouds Surround Sebelius

sebilius kissing obamaHealth and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius finds herself at the center of two controversies today, as the truth about the Obama Administration slowly bubbles to the surface.

On May 13, 2013, posted the following article…

Leaders in Congress are questioning Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’s solicitation of funds from private businesses and charities to help pay for public outreach on Obamacare to get prospective enrollees signed up for health exchanges.

Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, ranking Republican on the Senate Health committee, told the New York Times he plans to ask the Government Accountability Office to check the legality of Sebelius’s actions, done after Congress denied the administration funds for public outreach in the 2014 budget. The Washington Post also said that Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, top Republican on the Finance Committee, questioned the legality of the action.

The Times said Sebelius obtained $10 million from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and $500,000 from H&R Block for the effort. HHS officials said that Sebelius’s efforts would continue, after first denying they were soliciting funds for the effort. But a spokesman for Sebelius said a section of the Public Health Service Act allows her to encourage others to support those working to help carry out public health activities.

Sebelius reportedly has sought donations for Enroll America, a private non-profit group that is working to get the uninsured covered under the 2010 health-care law.

While that issue continues to percolate, Secretary Sebelius finds herself in the middle of another controversy. reports…

The plight of a dying 10-year-old girl in urgent need of a lung transplant has been taken up by some GOP lawmakers, and it’s shining a light on what critics say is a questionable policy that puts children further down the waiting list.

The family of the Pennsylvania girl, Sarah Murnaghan, has garnered the media spotlight, on cable news and in other outlets. And some GOP congressmen have joined the fray, quite literally “begging” HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to intervene and save the girl’s life. Both Pennsylvania senators — a Democrat and a Republican — have also written on the child’s behalf.

“I’m begging you,” Rep. Lou Barletta (R-Pa.) told Sebelius at a House hearing Tuesday morning, asking her to suspend the transplant rules until they can be revisited. “Sarah has three to five weeks to live. Time is running out.” The child has cystic fibrosis.

At the hearing, Sebelius called the situation “agonizing” and said she had talked to the girl’s mother. She has ordered a review of the policy, which she acknowledged would take too long to have any impact on this girl’s situation, but said it wasn’t her place to pick and choose transplant recipients.

“I can’t imagine anything worse than one individual getting to pick who lives and who dies,” she said. Sebelius said putting Sarah next in line would disadvantage other young people who have also been waiting for transplants — including three in the same area. Helping one child could possibly hurt another.

Some experts agree that the lung allocation policy may need to be revisited; it has been for kidney and liver transplants. But they say no snap decisions should be made because of the media glare.

Remember when Sarah Palin warned Americans about the Death Panels that were coming with Obamacare?

As more Americans delve into the disturbing details of the nationalized health care plan that the current administration is rushing through Congress, our collective jaw is dropping, and we’re saying not just no, but hell no!

The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.

Health care by definition involves life and death decisions. Human rights and human dignity must be at the center of any health care discussion.

That was posted on her Facebook Page on August 7, 2009. Yesterday, on her Facebook Page, Former Governor Palin wrote

The government will bend the rules left and right to harass targeted taxpayers, conservative patriots, selected journalists, etc., but it will strictly exercise inconsistent and subjective rules to deny a child a shot at life. And they called us liars when we spoke of “death panels” – faceless bureaucrats coming between you and your doctor to make life and death decisions about a loved one’s survival. It doesn’t sound so far fetched anymore, does it? – Sarah Palin

No, ma’am. It most certainly doesn’t.

Sec. Sebelius once remarked,

A healthy state encourages many voices – and lots of listening.

What she didn’t mention was the cold condescension and callous dismissal that follows “lots of listening”.

The members of this corrupt Administration have forgotten that they serve at our pleasure. It is time to remind them.

And, please…remember Sarah and her family in your prayers.

Until He Comes,


The War Against Christianity: Operation “Women’s Health”

As has been the S.O.P. of the Obama Dictatorship…errr…Presidency, Director of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, under the orders of her boss, President Barack Hussein Obama, (mm mmm mmmm), issued as Friday Night Document Dump, announcing their plans to go forward with making Religious Medical Organizations offer contraceptives and abortiafacients, even if it violates the tenants of their faith.

That’s not all.  Now, the administration of a man who attended a Black Liberation Theology Church, sitting under the teachings of a former Black Muslim  for 20 years, is going to decide what is or is not a “Religion Organization”.

Here is part of the advance PDF of the report:

On February 10, 2012, the Departments also announced their intention to provide an accommodation with respect to non-exempt, non-profit religious organizations with religious objections to contraceptive coverage. The final regulation concerning student health insurance plans, published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, states that this intention extends to student health insurance plans arranged by non-profit religious institutions of higher education with such objections. This accommodation would apply to some or all organizations that qualify for the temporary enforcement safe harbor, and possibly to additional organizations. Thus, a question for purposes of the intended regulations is: What entities should be eligible for the new accommodation (that is, what is a “religious organization”)?

One approach would be to adopt the definition of religious organization used in another statute or regulation. For example, the definition used in one or more State laws to afford a religious exemption from a contraceptive coverage requirement could be adopted. Alternatively, the intended regulations could base their definition on another Federal law, such as section 414(e) the Code and section 3(33) of ERISA, which set forth definitions for purposes of “church plans.”

A definition based on these provisions may include organizations such as hospitals, universities, and charities that are exempt from taxation under section 501 of the Code and that are controlled by or associated with a church or a convention or association of churches. In developing a definition of religious organization, we are cognizant of the important role of ministries of churches and, as such, seek to accommodate their religious objections to contraceptive coverage.

The Departments seek comment on which religious organizations should be eligible for the accommodation and whether, as some religious stakeholders have suggested, for-profit religious employers with such objections should be considered as well.

The Departments underscore, as we did with respect to the definition of religious employer in the final regulations, that whatever definition of religious organization is adopted will not be applied with respect to any other provision of the PHS Act, ERISA, or the Code, nor is it intended to set a precedent for any other purpose. And, while the participants and beneficiaries covered under the health plans offered by a “religious employer” compared to those covered under the health plans offered by a “religious organization” will have differential access to contraceptive coverage, nothing in the final regulations or the forthcoming regulations is intended to differentiate among the religious merits, commitment, mission, or public or private standing of the organizations themselves. 

Regardless of the definition of religious organization that is proposed, the Departments are considering proposing the same or a similar process for self-certification that will be used for the temporary enforcement safe harbor referenced in the final regulations.

Under that process, an individual authorized by the organization certifies that the organization satisfies the eligibility criteria, and the self-certification is made available for examination. The Departments expect that, for purposes of the proposed accommodation, religious organizations would make a similar self-certification, and similarly make the self-certification available for examination. The self-certification would be used to put the independent entity responsible for providing contraceptive coverage on notice that the religious organization has invoked the accommodation. The future rulemaking would require that the independent entity be responsible for providing the contraceptive coverage in this case.

By the way, what sort of “downtrodden” lifestyle was the “Poster Child” for “Women’s Health” doing she appeared before Congress wanting us to pay for her $3,000 worth of contraception expenses per year?

She and her boyfriend Fluke and her boyfriend, Adam “Cutie Pants” Mutterperl recently traveled to Spain and Italy together.

The 30 year old women’s rights activist and her rich socialist boyfriend were photographed while drunk in the streets over there.

Adam is a proud boyfriend. He tweeted the following recently:

Rush Limbaugh just called my girlfriend a “slut” and a “prostitute” on his show! She’s finally made the big time!

Adam’s rich Daddy, Bill, is a huge Democratic Donor and Operative.

So, just like the cause she’s advocating, Fluke’s real agenda is hidden from the American public.

What in the world gives the Obama Administration the right to decide what is a “religious organization”?  Especially, after the President, himself, attended a “church” for 20 years that views Jesus Christ as a revolutionary along the lines of the murderer, Che Guevara.  

This is not about “Women’s Health”.  This is about facilitating the cradle-to-grave control of our lives by “The State”…and the callous stopping of helpless beating hearts.