Friday, November 22, 2013

If You Still Think Both Parties Are The Same, Read This

Today I had to read one more idiot on here telling everyone that both parties are the same because he says they both lie the same. If that were true then the GOP wouldn't have a 3 percent approval rating right now and they wouldn't be self destructing over everyone having the right to healthcare. I am not even including the Teabillies and Libertarians who took over the GOP because they lacked votes.
They might as well have invited all the mental patients Ronald Reagan threw out the mental institutions and put on the street to save money, to come be part of their party. If they were both the same, people who are afflicted with unlimited greed, like Romney, the Koch brothers, and Sheldon Adelson would give money to both parties equally. Now the GOP of yesteryear that call themselves "establishment Republicans" are whining about the monsters they created.
Several of the Republicans lately, including John McCain, have stated that they wish those other factions would just either STFU or go away. But no, now that they are there, they are so crazy they make the party members who came before them cringe. I don't see that in the Democratic party. There are rich people and some corporations that vote for the Democratic party but they don't use it to commit fraud and politicizing our laws. The main reason for gridlock now is the Republicans in the house of Representatives.
If you are still confused enough to think both parties are the same, look at Sarah Palin and Elizabeth Warren, do they seem the same to you?
How about Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. Do they seem the same to you?
Let's pick an easy one, one of the most extreme Democrats is Senator Bernie Sanders http://www.sanders.senate.gov/ and the most extreme example of Republicans is Paul Ryan http://paulryan.house.gov/ , both of which SAY they want the same things but only one of them actually votes for them. That is NOT the same thing.
With all the gerrymandering of districts, voter suppression, rigged voting machines, etc. the GOP still lost the presidential election in 2008 and 2012. That means the biggest difference is who likes the parties.
One such comparison would be the "Occupy Wall Street" movement, compared to the "Tea Party". One (OWS) is mainly made up of young people who are suffering in the elements to keep the message about Wall Street greed and how it hurts the economy in the public eye. The other is a bunch of old people who are so misguided that one wonders how they survived this long and are supported by the Koch brothers, although the Koch brothers don't admit their connection to the Tea Party and members of the Tea Party keep saying it is a grassroots movement that somehow can afford millions of dollars worth of food, refreshments, gas, lodging, and transportation for all of them through their own donations, although when asked individually how much they contributed, they all admitted that they gave NOTHING. Public records of PACs and Republican "think tanks" that the Koch's are the sole contributors to - fund the Tea Party.
The TP is full of people who are on Social Security and Medicare screaming "Leave your government hands off my SSI and Medicare", while they are publicly endorsing the same people who want to take away their Medicare and SSI, and state so on the news. The Tea Party is supposed to stand for "Taxed Enough Already" even though their taxes are lower than under George Bush while the rich guys who fund their movement pay only a tiny percent of their taxes compared to the rates someone who works construction has to pay. Who are they actually protesting for, since it isn't their own best interests?
Who created the huge problem by deregulating the banks? That isn't the same tune in both parties. And the way people treat the two protest movements can be summed up for me like this:
I didn't see anyone pepper spraying the Tea Party members, does that seem the same to you? I don't see the Tea Party members sleeping in the street or parks in order to stay with the group and carry the message.
I am going to stop this rant before I get so angry I can't sleep, but remember. Both parties are NOT the same, quit lying to yourself in order to act like you know better than anyone else. Independents are what started the Tea Party (with help from Fox News) and independents definitely started the Libertarian movement. Saying you are independent to me means you too chickenshit to take a stand and decide, through logical step by step elimination and research to derive at an answer suitable to you.
So, the next time you decide to look down on someone else who actually knows the issues instead of  NOT researching the topic and learning something, and instead acting like you are confident and know everything, stop and really look and listen because you and I are NOT the same.

Friday, November 15, 2013

Intentionally Misleading Is Lying

Recently Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation executives were involved in a lawsuit and ended up, after being found guilty of purposely misleading the public and manipulating some of society and therefore creating a situation that was in their own selfish interest and was in conflict with the interests of society as a whole. Their only defense in court ended up being that the first amendment (which is ludicrous considering Murdoch is Australian, but he was in an American court) gives everyone of it's citizens (Murdoch?) freedom of speech. We have the right to say "anything we want". In most cases that isn't harmful because most people hear some individual say something that sounds ridiculous, and they immediately assume that individual is a crackpot.
But, as was used in news corporation's defense in appellate court, there is NO AMERICAN LAW that says any person or person can not willfully lie to the public, intentionally misleading them, and that is correct. The court had to admit that is true. The law assumes that news organizations are going to report news, actual facts and information that is useful to the general public, since that is what ethical journalism is about. The danger is when a group of supposed news affiliates and seemingly unrelated news organizations all say the same thing, then, some people believe them, despite obvious evidence. And when one guy owns more than one news organization, that can be a problem because he can influence some in the general public by lying on all of his news organizations. This is what, according the Wikipedia report, Murdoch, and therefore News Corporation, owns (In order to appear less like a monopoly of news organizations, Murdoch put some of his holdings in other company names, as U.S. law is moving towards limiting how many news media holdings one source can have. These are now conglomerations (sub-companies) of what was listed before. If you click on the link for each, you can see they are all multifacted:
"...

Plans for the split were originally announced by Rupert Murdoch on June 28, 2012, while additional details were unveiled on December 3, 2012.News Corp's board approved the split on May 24, 2013, while shareholders approved the split on June 11; the splitting process began on June 19, 2013 with the listing of News Corp on the Australian Securities Exchange, but the new companies formally began trading on July 1, 2013. Robert James Thomson, the editor of The Wall Street Journal, serves as chief operating officer for the company; while Murdoch is no longer CEO (he instead remains CEO of 21st Century Fox), he remains chairman and a shareholder for both companies. During the stock splitting process, one share of the new News Corporation was given to shareholders for every four shares they own in the current News Corp.

Murdoch stated that performing this split would "unlock the true value of both companies and their distinct assets, enabling investors to benefit from the separate strategic opportunities resulting from more focused management of each division." The move also came in the wake of a series of scandals that had damaged the reputation of multiple News Corporation-owned properties. CEO Robert James Thomson promised that the new company would "cultivate a start-up sensibility even though we already work for the world’s most established and prestigious diversified media and information services company", and would emphasize building new business models around its properties and content. The logo of the new News Corporation was unveiled at an investor presentation on May 28, 2013; the handwritten logo uses script based on Murdoch's own handwriting.

Preliminary trading on the Australian Securities Exchange of the new News Corp's class B stock began on June 19, 2013 at around $15 per share; a value slightly lower than expected by some analysts. The shares fell in price by 3% to $14.55 per share, valuing the new company at around $7.9 billion US. The corporate split was officially finalized on June 28, 2013; both New News Corp and 21st Century Fox formally began trading on the NASDAQ on July 1, 2013.

On September 4, 2013, News Corp announced that it would sell the Dow Jones Local Media Group, a group of 33 local newspapers, to Newcastle Investment Corp.—an affiliate of Fortress Investment Group, for $87 million. The newspapers will be operated by GateHouse Media, a newspaper group owned by Fortress. Robert Thomson indicated that the newspapers "were not strategically consistent with the emerging portfolio" of the company.


List of assets owned by News Corp.
The company consists primarily of the former News Corp's newspaper and book publishing assets; including:
Dow Jones & Company, a New York City-based financial publisher, and owners of the Wall Street Journal
News Corp Australia, an Australian newspaper and magazine publisher, and owners of Fox Sports Australia and a stake in pay-TV provider Foxtel
News UK, a British newspaper publisher
New York Post, a daily newspaper in New York City first acquired by Rupert Murdoch in 1976.
HarperCollins, a major book publisher
News America Marketing, a distributor of advertising and coupon promotions
Amplify Education, a digital education company
..."
No matter what anyone says, there will always be some who think they are doing things for the good of mankind, the good of the people, or the good of society and they are lying, not only to others for their own personal gain, but to themselves -because they are not admitting that their ego is the real problem in this situation. Case in point, this is NOT A CHRISTIAN NATION, if it was, all of the Christian ministers and all of their parishioners would be dressed in 'second hand' comfortable clothing and spending all their time and money helping others, not amassing great fortunes, building huge buildings full of expensive windows and ornaments, and especially not building huge alters (an ancient symbol of sacrifice), placing the collection plates, full of money they just collected, in between two candles (An ancient Jewish religious tradition, symbolic of where one must place "sacred" things that the new testament tells us was condemned by Christ.), and completing this sacrilege with a picture of JESUS over it. (Jesus hated money collecting in a temple.) This IS the anti-Christ according to biblical teachings.
The founding fathers were mostly DEISTS, who had escaped the Church of England's tyrannical puritanical imbecile leaders who were "taxing" people and trying to revert to the days of the inquisitions previous to the crusades.
One has to remember that some rulers in Europe, not the middle eastern countries that Christianity was attributed to, 1500 years after the supposed 'founding of' the religion. Another is the thousands (or at least to many to try to repeat here) of quotes and sayings that I hear on a daily basis from well meaning ignorant and ill informed people, are parts of different other religions and ancient mythology. Let's be honest. Religion is organized and well funded mythology condoned and supported by government because we have "freedom of religion" here, which also means we have freedom to believe or not, but some people will never get that point because they have been brainwashed. If you don't believe that religious employees believe that anyone who believes them is a stupid person who really NEEDS being lied to, in order (this is what they tell themselves) to feel greater hope, as if they were all living in ancient Europe and starving sharecroppers, then you are just as misinformed.
Case in point: "God helps those who help themselves!"  This quote is bandied about in church after church. I have even heard Christian ministers say that it is from the bible. I looked, and after reading the entire bible and not finding it, I was dismayed. I looked to see maybe it was in the writings of Shakespeare, since so many misquoted supposed biblical sayings were found to actually be his quotes. It was not in any of his quotes either. At around 40 years old, I finally found the origin of that saying. It was the war cry of the Crusades. The (as the song says) Christian soldiers (knights) would walk up to a crowd of innocent townspeople and take anything that was made of metal or glass and consider it their spoils of war, since they were on a quest from God, leaving in their wake a legion of people (especially monks and priests) who would hit their knees and beg God to help them, and scream at the people who accused them of being thieves and asking how they could call themselves men of God, "God helps those who help themselves!"
I have heard many an 'old wive's tale' from misguided religious bible thumpers including, "Do you remember the Golden Rule? You have to live by that because it is directly from the bible, the word of God." Don't say that shit to your children because when they grow up they will realize you are an idiot.
Here is the actual expression. It is not from the bible or attributed to ANYTHING CLOSELY RELATED TO religion of any kind.
It was a quote, although that was before people wrote anything down, which means like so many supposed ancient texts, it was actually written from supposed quotes people had memorized and passed down over centuries and in some cases, thousands of years, so we can never know the accuracy of the exact wording but supposedly really close. The actual quote was NOT "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." It IS "Do not do to others what you do not want done to yourself". And it was by this guy,
Yes, it is from the ancient quotes of Confucius, who was no where near a Christian or anything in the way of a religious leader, he was a scholar, a council to rulers, and a philosopher whose quotes came to be regarded as the civilized way to think in a modern society, at the time. 
Religion was necessary at a time when most people were what we consider now to be 'barbarians' (and I am not quoting Marcus Bachmann for the meaning of that). American society as a whole has to realize that religions and the government are trying to absorb the wealth of the masses and not for the benefit of the people, anymore. If one watches shows like "Jerry Springer" they might doubt it, but we are no longer barbarian sharecroppers (at least most of us) and don't need that type of "flock tending" that ancient mythology "shepherds" tell themselves that they are leading, when in reality they are only lining their pockets.
If you refuse to be a sheep, act like it!

Wednesday, November 13, 2013

My Op Ed Post to the Washington Post

"...I am submitting a copy of my blog piece on my Facebook Page. I write/blog under the pseudonym Arizona Mildman. I am writing today because of Richard Cohen needing a change of pace. Maybe, perhaps spending a couple decades standing in the unemployment line so he can really understand the "black experience" or having a social stigma (racist non-evolved neanderthal) ON HIM for a change.
My blog post:
" There is a reason that racism is still alive and strong in America. People in the media and politicians keep telling people, despite the fact that most of society (82 percent) have decided that it is wrong and made it illegal, that it is OK to continue, that it is socially acceptable and right. They do this for votes and they do it for acceptance. As this national archives article describes, these things were put into law by people who were progressively trying to evolve past their own inadequacies and character defects for the purpose of being fair to the WHOLE PUBLIC, not just a few, as was the case before.
http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/civil-rights-act/
Some people would love for that era to return. When they say they want to "take back" America, any citizen of the U.S. that says that, needs to be closely scrutinized for those same character defects of resentment, hate, and discrimination that were so adamantly protected by "Old School" angry old white men.
This week, a man named Richard Cohen of the Washington Post, another "opinion writer" (the same handle Fox News hides behind), wrote a fluff piece about Chris Christie and stuck his racist comments in between the lines for the social conservatives like himself that still want to live in "leave it to beaver" land that never was, in the 1950s.

Please join me today in writing his bosses and either getting an apology or having his job removed and his being removed from telling social neanderthals that acting like a "troglodyte" is no longer legal or socially acceptable, which he does on a regular basis. "   I am sure the Washington Post can either bring Mr. Cohen into the 21st Century to let him know his veiled racism is NOT ACCEPTABLE or we can quit using the products of any of their sponsors that advertise through them. This is not  personal issue, this is a social and public issue, which perpetuates the ideology that racism is acceptable. Up to you.
Have a wonderful day,
Steve Walker (The Arizona Mildman)"

The kind of people who lost the civil war and still don't want to admit it to themselves are alive and strong in the U.S., mainly because some people keep telling them that no matter how many laws we pass and how many speeches we write or how many hours we spend explaining it to them, they won't allow themselves to change. What kind of people are they?
They call themselves "conservatives" [1](disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.) , but actually they are "regressives" [2](tending to regress, logic obtained from or characterized by backward reasoning.).
This is the link to the Washington Post "Letters to the Editor": http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ask-the-post/post/how-to-send-a-letter-to-the-editor/2011/11/17/gIQAoi7IlN_blog.html
And here is the link to write your own op-ed piece and submit your opinion on keeping racism alive and well despite the majority of us making it illegal in the last century: http://projects.washingtonpost.com/opeds/submit/
And please, when you are expressing your passion and empathy, enjoy yourself and remember, every voice that is heard eventually makes a change.
Have a nice day,
Arizona Mildman

Tuesday, November 12, 2013

My latest email to Senator John McCain

I find it unfortunate that another foreign "reporter" turns out to be a hoax after people like you and Lindsey Graham spent so much time attacking the White House on national television over an uninformed idiot who made up a story to sell a news company. Just like the guy Screwball, who gave the British Intel people the story on WMDs in Iraq, that anyone who would have checked, could see was a liar, and the media lied and makes you look foolish for continuing to rattle your sabers as if you are Don Quixote tilting at windmills, hoping they were giants. Now that the story has been discredited as a hoax, you and your "We demand to see the truth" based on the news report written by a liar, calls to question a real issue for the American public. You don't have a topic in your pulldown menu for "Lying News Reports" and that must be because you don't care about facts or logic in your attacks. http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/the-effects-discredited-benghazi-report
Please realize I hope you change this but until you create legislation that demands that the public quits being "purposely misled" by news media, then you will continue losing credibility until the United States looks like a laughing stock and no one believes anything we say, since we believe every hoax that comes down the road, invented by people who make a good living and become wealthy by lying to the public. I know you probably will never want "truth in journalism" reported by anyone who calls themselves a NEWS company, because if you do that, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and the rest of the Republican propaganda machine will have to stop lying for you, and then you will lose all your voters.
So, you can keep rattling your sabers everytime something that sounds negative towards the president or other Democrats comes out unverified, until you all look like bigger fools than you already do.
Have a wonderful day.

When Did Mainstream Media Become Hoax Central?

There is a big problem arising in mainstream media. It is about credibility. Other countries would like to be taken seriously but instead are ignored, so, they have started inventing "news stories" that are hoaxes and reporting it to the Associated Press, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, and anyone else who is supposed to be part of the "American Mainstream Media" brand. I liked what Jon Stewart said about Mainstream Media, not that they are liars intentionally, but that they are like a dog each time another squirrel runs by. Another news story is like a squirrel to them and checking sources, researching the story for bias or slant, etc. quit being a priority. If everyone can use Fox News as an excuse to not be accurate then we eventually will have to, as some already do, use BBC or Al Jazeera English as a empirical source to find out what is going on in the U.S.
John McCain and Lindsey Graham, both U.S. senators, have been intent on demanding to know "what really happened in Benghazi" and I hope they are both now equally embarrassed to know that the contractor's report that both of them have been going by, what people have already written books (which had to be retracted) on, and have created such a stir that there are websites and Facebook pages entitled "Never forget Benghazi" comparing the Benghazi attack, where 4 people died to an attack from outside sources (Arab and Pakastani) that killed around 2,977 in the twin towers alone, but remember, there were four planes used and including the first responders who were killed trying to rescue people, the death toll later amounted to around 6,000 people.
Anyone who can even slowly do the math to consider one digit to four, realizes that is an, at best, ignorant statement, designed to discredit the state department and especially Hillary Clinton, despite the fact that the same people in congress screaming the loudest (Republicans who think they finally found a solid excuse for the asinine things they voted for under Bush.) are the same ones who "defunded" the embassy security funding by several million dollars and created the whole insecure situation.
The ironic thing is that the main reason they think they have a justified excuse to act like '2 yr. olds' that just had their favorite toy ripped from their hands, is based on a lie. They all are asking a question that they think that they already know the answer to. "When are you going to tell the American people what really happened in Benghazi?  We have a right to know."  They are doing this based on a news story published on the air by CBS, who is now making them all look like idiots, for believing the hoax. In a desperate attempt to make the White House and Hillary look foolish and discredit them, they made themselves look like the childish idiots that they are.
When columnists for the Washington Post say things like, "Today's GOP is not racist..." trying desperately to not accuse anyone of anything that to all of us is so glaringly obvious, including fellow Republicans, then you realize he is an opinionated, old, out of touch moron. Which I stated in my comment when I said, "

...walkerazcarpenter wrote:
10:58 AM MST


Unfortunately, as usual, a so called "journalist" giving his misguided opinion. Conventional to him means racist white supremacist mainstream establishment like in the fifties that will no longer be in control, since the sixties but they are like a zombie. They died a long time ago, we unfortunately have to watch their rotting putrid ideologies fall away from the still animated corpse, while motivate towards something the rest of of already possess, brains. This supposed "liberal" writer is like the word liberal itself implies, biased in another direction. His, unfortunately, like most of us who, get called "liberal" for believing in facts and reality, are tired of being labeled in the same category with. His is opinion, which has nothing to do with reality, and therefore, everything that isn't right wing crazy is NOT "liberal". His article about "The country is doing better than you think" must be aimed at those who live in the conservative bubble ideologically and don't face reality because, as was proven in the last two presidential elections, we ALREADY KNOW THIS. The idea that conventional means "white establishment" shows me he is a loony toon. I would suggest he catch up before he starts preaching to the choir about more "liberal notions" which most of us already know to be true. Saying things like The Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party, sounds like he thinks he judges for us what is democratic instead of the constitution. In a word, Idiot! OLD ANTIQUATED MORON. Laterbye".

Sunday, November 10, 2013

Republican Hypocrisy and ENDA

I have been reading up on the ENDA bill about ending discrimination for gay people in the work place. The Democrats and Harry Reid are for it and John Boehner and the Republicans are against it. The GOP will protect the rights of rapists and pedophile priests but gay people are 8th class citizens to them. This is wrong and should be a matter of what our constitution says, "Inalienable Rights, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness..." and discrimination in any form against anyone makes that impossible and is wrong. Workplace discrimination should end against women, gays, people of color, etc. TODAY.
When you hear people like Ron Paul and any of the other GOP talking about "State's Rights", that is what they mean. They mean the right in each state to get around Federal law that demands that discrimination is illegal and should end. States' Representatives should be told that since they are Americans, then, they have to act like it. If they can discriminate against anyone's right to work, then they can squash their livelihood, making people intimidated and incapable of fighting back. This is WRONG.
In the same way that anyone who says that they are Christian and doesn't believe in helping others is lying to themselves or self deluded, then, people who say that they believe in discrimination ONLY FOR THE RIGHT KIND OF PEOPLE, are full of shit and hypocrites.
Have a nice Sunday,
Arizona Mildman

Saturday, November 9, 2013

The True Definition of Humility

We have all had a passing familiarity with that word, humility. I assumed for years, after hearing about the religious connotation that I understood what it meant. I was supposed to feel less than, as in "Having humility before God". As I grew older, I heard the word over and over and it seems that most people have the same definition in their mind. I had it explained to me that was wrong because humility means no better or worse than anyone else. Some people use the word "humble" or "humbled" in the same manner. Those definitions don't describe humility, they describe being humiliated.
Let me see if my diagram speech will be a better example. I used to think low self esteem was on the bottom of the scale, grandiosity at the top of the scale, and humility was in the middle like this:
But then I had it explained in a way that changed my whole life. I now look at people in a whole different way, just knowing this one simple idea. The above humility scale is correct. The correct way to look at it is as in the diagram below:
Humility is on one end of the scale with grandiosity and low self esteem on the other end because both of those are parts of EGO. I was taught that EGO stands for Edging God Out. My higher power would never want me to feel superior to the other creatures on earth, especially not other people.
I hope this sheds as much light on the word for you as it did for me.

Thursday, November 7, 2013

Are You Still Being Stupid?

The same 26 states that have Republican governors and are considered "red states" also have the lowest employment rates and education levels, while having the highest poverty rates and seem to like being considered stupid.
All of my relatives who live in the states that are on this map, listed as the ones denying thousands of people per state access to affordable health care, for them only, are being put on notice today. And if any of you still vote GOP, then you need to read this. 
The people in the South are ruled by a mob rule mentality, known as "bandwagon thinking", which is not so dangerous to govern high school class elections but we are supposed to have grown up since then, more than physically. Those people in the South let people tell them that some people (people of color) are not really human or equal to a real human, a white man. 
A really appropriate quote from someone who was a Texan and an expert on the South, President Lyndon Baines Johnson: "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." ~
LYNDON B. JOHNSON, 1960, remark to Bill Moyers, "What a Real President Was Like," Washington Post, 13 November 1988  
They are racially prejudiced which is STUPID. I will tell you why. People who go to college or any progressive form of education in lower levels, realize after working with all races of people that there are smart and capable people in every race. Most people can learn the same lesson serving in the military. So, racism is a way to get you to vote against your own interests. That is what is so STUPID. The Party of STUPID are leading the nation away from the Affordable Care Act medicaid expansion which will save people who are working poor Hundreds of Thousands of dollars each, in a lifetime. So, Insurance company lobbies (which are the real reason people think the A.C.A. is there to regulate people while it is there to regulate insurance companies) have come up with propaganda campaigns to tell people that it is everything including a biblical plague to save money. The insurance companies themselves have canceled policies in states that are embracing the A.C.A. because they can't continue screwing the public like they used to in those states. The Republican Governors in 26 states have said that it isn't working. It hasn't been implemented yet completely and it is already working for many Americans. The news trolls have been going ON AND ON about how terrible it is and how it will destroy you. Rick Perry (a monument to STUPID) said it would be like loading patients onto the Titanic. All the News Trolls and Political Trolls say it is going to lead to everything from socialism to you name it, because they get paid to LIE TO YOU. 
Some people who are misinformed are actually saying that they prefer getting ripped off by "MY" insurance company. The insurance companies didn't get richer than the banks by caring about YOUR INTERESTS. When I am in my anger mode moods, then, as far as I am concerned, if you are that STUPID, then you deserve to get screwed. But then in my calmer moments. I don't think anyone should, but you can't argue with "opinion".
So, I hope you aren't one of the people who want to keep their health insurance rates and plans at status quo, because that really IS STUPID:
That is STUPID and if you want to quit being the Party of STUPID, you need to quit following the STUPID in your party and rise above that bunch of sold out liars who are nothing more than an extention of the corporate lobbies, especially the STUPID racist South where they are uneducated, uninformed, and do things to spite the people of color, even if it hurts their own interests, which is what makes them look ESPECIALLY STUPID.

Sunday, November 3, 2013

The Affordable Care Act As It Is In "Reality Central"



(I posted this on my Facebook page and then realized this was a worthy post so I am re-posting it here:)

When the government (the law stated in the Affordable Care Act) says that they (the insurance companies) can't legally screw you and make a profit from NOT providing you healthcare, while continuing to collect monthly payments for ages while you were well, then, canceling on you for a B.S. reason (e.g., pre-existing conditions which they called non-covered diseases), a bunch of the phonies bailed on people who have been paying premiums for over 20 years and they don't understand what happened. They were going to burn you anyway, but when they realized they could fined or shut down (not allowed to sell insurance scams anymore) they ran for the hills and dumped most of their insureds. A lot of people are still believing all the FOX NEWS lies about "Obamacare" (death panels, you go to jail for not buying "Obamacare", being "Obamacized" which means forced to buy this instead of your employers health plan, etc. - when the actual fact is that the Affordable Care Act actually regulates INSURANCE COMPANIES, not their clients. So, when they (The insurance companies) realized that they were not going to make huge profits from giving you service once a year and only paying for a few services at that time, while leaving you to pay the rest, then they bailed. 
They are now required by law to spend 80 percent of what you give them on your health care and they have to give you a rebate for extended well times (long periods when you haven't been sick). That is why the GOP (bought and paid for by the healthcare insurance lobbies) have been screaming about the ACA, not because it is socialism. 
These same Healthcare Insurance Lobbies have been around A LONG TIME, and are the same people who don't want to pay for healthcare for those damned people called "females" because those pesky creatures have more things in their bodies that can go wrong than you would believe (especially in the baby factory area). 
So, that sound terrible and they would never tell you that in public or in the local media, so what you hear instead, is how it's "The Bible" that says you aren't supposed to use contraception or get an abortion (so they don't have to pay for them) but if you ask any of those politicians or pundits (some preachers, too) to show you where it says that in the bible, then, they get that "deer in the headlights" look for a minute and then change the subject and start ranting about sin and how it's murder and how you will go to hell because it's against "God's Will". They are paid by the lobbies to lie to you. (Not that some people haven't drunk the Kool-aid and started acting indignant about the subject because they think they are supposed to be a good "sheep" like the rest of their "flock" goes along with.