Who is exempt from obamacare Videos

+Mark Konior And based on everything we know about politicians with their lying, stealing, and mass murder, you actually believe there won't be loopholes or special treatment for them?

+magentawave No, because it's not true. Congress is NOT excempt, they HAVE to use the insurance exchanges

+acorn sucks I only wish the "young" part were true.  I do remember that.  I wasn't as much into the political scene then as I am now that I am a bit older.  It's something that is likely going to take a Convention of States to rectify.  They could actually put term limits into the Constitution if they held a Convention of States, then no liberal judge could say it was unconstitutional.  ;)  With Obama planning new executive action on gun control this week,  we may yet see that happen.  Term limits are the only way to clean up DC.  Well,  that and getting rid of the lobby.  That's why I have always been a fan of Andrew Jackson.  Kicking the bankers in the teeth was one of his favorite hobbies. 

+FarmerMiyagi you are likely very young. Term limits were passed in several states back in the early 90's, but liberal judges ruled them unconstitutional.

+FarmerMiyagi - Applauds I've always had the belief that "laws are for people, not lawmakers."

Exactly.

troll blocked

Labour! ;)

+tangerinestorm​ I can lead you to water but I can't make you drink it. Enjoy paying taxes to your queen and living off of the fruits of other people's labor.

I agree we are very much indoctrinated to embrace our tyranny after all Marx firmly believed that Britain was where a revolution should begin. We are very much a Socialist country and though I may have been brainwashed into paying relatively little tax, enjoying a social safety net, relatively low crime, accessible local and national government and good education I still wouldn't choose to live in the US.

+tangerinestorm​​​​​ As I memtioned before, our system is plagued by liability costs and is nothing like a free market system. The courts, an arm of our government, have built a massive tort system where healthcare providers are sued for every mistake. The courts award millions of dollars to the patients. O.B. providers and anesthesiologists pay nearly 60% of claim dollars to pay for their liability coverage because of our government's tort system. Courts (government) award so much money to patients that at one point in time, every American producer of flu vaccines was sued out of business (Thanks to lawyers/politicians like John Edwards). Yeah, that sounds like a cartel. You are so smart and definately not delusional.Brits are so indoctrinated to embrace their own government's tyranny, they revere the very shackles that oppress them. Poor idiots.

+Wax Pragmatic No we can't but we can't opt out of paying for the army or schools or the emergency services. If you earn less than about $16000 a year you don't pay tax but still get health care. If you want to pay to receive the services privately you can get insurance or just pay out of pocket. Private health insurance is significantly cheaper than in the US and even paying out of pocket is cheaper than the US. We don't bankrupt people just because they happen to get ill. Americans are really overcharged for healthcare despite the free market system seems more like a cartel that exploit sick people.

+John Salter Did mom and dad teach you that it was okay to steal Johnny's stuff when you're wearing a blue costume and a shiny badge? No, they told you theft is always wrong and a costume won't change the fact that theft is wrong. Do you know that when they were discussing abolishing slavery that many said "But who will pick the cotton?!" But see, we don't give a fuck who will pick the cotton when we know it is IMMORAL to own and control another human being. Same goes for taxation in that it is immoral to steal at gunpoint so there is no reason for us to concern ourselves with how entrepreneurs and millions of people in a free and stateless society will choose to organize. Get it?

+John Salter​​ There's the spirit we're looking for!Re-read +magentawave​​​'s comments. There was some great reading material offered that explains it way better than I can with my limited diction.//www.mises.org is the best place to start.

Also, I have gone through periods where I've thought taxes are bad. They are the only payments we are forced to make, this is true, but I have benefitted from them, so I should pay them. Honestly, I am still unsure about them, but you can clearly see my position before I began this conversation. I don't love them, I view them as a necessary evil. If there is a better way, then I am all for it, but as of this moment, I am not sure there is, nor am I sure there is evidence or any practical results out there to show us if another option works.

+Wax PragmaticYes, I fail to see how these things can be provided without government. Enlighten me. I am not delusional, I merely do not know what you know, so instead of insulting me, tell me what it is you think I should aready understand. And while you're at it, can you answer my question, what do you think the government should do. You've spent enough time telling me what they shouldn't, but you say you're not an anarchist so you believe it should exist, and if it should exist, then it should do something. So what should they do?

+John Salter "Voluntary taxation" is an oxymoron. The word "taxation" is a euphemism for theft and therefore there is no such thing as voluntary taxation. If the money given to an entity is voluntary then it's either a donation or it's payment to a business for the purchase of goods and/or services. I understand that you don't know these things YET, because you, like all of us, has been subjected to state indoctrination your entire life. The reason the word "anarchy" (which literally means NO RULERS) has been bastardized to mean something bad is because the biggest fear the state has is that we the people grow the fuck up and realize we don't need a gang of psychopaths to rule over us. They are terrified of this awakening which is why they spend 24/7 telling us how much we NEED them while they bomb the shit out of multiple countries and have the unmitigated balls to call them the "terrorists." This is all Orwellian style manipulation. You know... war is peace, etc. Anyway, PLEASE go listen to or start reading "Anatomy of the State" and subscribe to the Tom Woods show. Tom Woods is not only a wonderful individual, but he's an extremely intelligent guy with lots of great books he's written. He gets it too because he used to be a neocon.

+John Salter​ I've never met a statist who wasn't delusional. I enjoy calling statists delusional and will continue to do so. It pleases me.You're obsessed with being protected by your government. You fail to see that most of these protections you desire can be provided without government force and/or redistribution of wealth. They can be provided with less waste and with greater efficiency; all without infringing upon your fellow man.The protections that I or anyone else wants in life are not relevant. What is relevant is that you prefer not to make any effort to secure your precious protections. Instead, you support a government that takes wealth and resources from others, without their consent, and redistributes it to you. That's tyranny. Believing otherwise is... delusional.#micdrop

+magentawaveI have considered an idea where taxation is optional, but I haven't got very far with it, because I'm not sure if it could even work. The biggest problem I have with it is would there be enough people to volunteer to pay tax (or some other private individual/company) to continue to do the things we have today and continue our current quality of life? I don't know.

So, apart from magentawave, who seems to want no government, I presume the rest of you are okay with one, but as someone said earlier, you only want one to have a limited set of responsibilities. What are these? In my opinion, they should be protection from outside forces and other civilians, as well as a certain amount towards scientific knowledge. Are these too far, or are there any others I have missed?

+John Salter Yes, but to be more specific, I consider myself a voluntaryist. //voluntaryist.com/fundamentals/introduction.html#.VZ17jkWrPDM

+magentawaveSo you are an anarchist then?

+Wax PragmaticThat is not where my logic leads. The hypothetical conclusion you have come to assumes that physical harm is the same as verbal harm, that harm from outside is equal to harm from self. This is not the case. I oppose laws that restrict freedom of speech because it, in general, does not physically harm anyone. I oppose laws that restrict harm to oneself, because it is my body and I can fuck it up with drugs if I want to.Your second paragraph was informative. Thank you. However, I'm sure America is not the only country where medics can be sued for malpractice.As for your third paragraph, I'm clueless as to what that analogy is supposed to even be. Also, please stop saying I am delusional. I think I have admitted and demonstrated that I am not very knowledgable in some of these areas. To be delusional requires that knowledge and that I ignore it.Also, you didn't answer my question. Do you think the police and military should be funded by the government? And if so, why does it not follow that other forms of protection should be as well?

+John Salter I said here yesterday that a government that ceases to initiate violence ceases to be a government which is why a government that doesn't tax ceases to be a government --- and NO STATE is exactly what we want. Go to www.mises.org and you'll find tons of ebooks and audiobooks that will answer all of your questions and everything at Mises is FREE. I recommend you start with "The Anatomy of The State" by Murray Rothbard (The audio is on Youtube). I also recommend you read or listen to Rothbards "For a New Liberty" at Mises for free and subscribe immediately to the Tom Woods Show on iTunes and listen to that stuff while driving or whatever. You have some good questions so it's time to edumacate yourself. Do that and 90 days from now you'll be a Voluntaryist.

+Wax Pragmatic Thumbs up to what you said.

+John Salter Roads are your concern? Seriously? Toll roads or roads sponsored by businesses and in return the businesses put up a billboard to advertise. If toll roads, they would automatically debit your card as you drive through so there's no need to stop or slow down to drop coins. I don't know where you live but this technology for toll roads is already being used now so it's no big deal. The bottom line is that NO ONE should have the right to initiate violence against you which is why government should not exist. Let the people decide how to organize.

+John Salter All a government needs to rule over people is force ie the military and police. I guarantee you most of the tax payer money goes to enforcing useless laws and regulations that only limit our individual liberties and ultimately cause harm to everyone as a whole.If you spent less money trying to micromanage the country you could perhaps have a better funded police force and a better justice system.

+John Salter Many firefighters in my area are volunteer firefighters.

+John Salter​​ Under your logic, government has no end. You accept government policing so now you want government firefighting and healthcare as another form of protection. Once you have that, what other protection do you want? Let's scrap freedom of speech to protect your feelings. Let's protect everyone from drugs and put a huge percentage of society in prison. Your ideals are exactly how tyranical government starts. People with your ideals think you act on everyone's best interest but you don't. Your ilk are a cancer to society.Also, you know nothing of our system. If you think the only difference between our systems is the payee of claims, you are delusional. The biggest problem facing American healthcare is liability costs. For most non-primary providers, more than half of the money they receive from claims goes to paying for liability coverage. When an American provider makes a mistake, they get sued and courts (government) award plaintiffs millions. This government created cost increases exponentially.Further, your logic is based on fallacy. I hold in my hand a Samsung Galaxy. The room I'm sitting in is not on fire. Under your logic, my phone prevents fire. Based on that conclusion and your ideals, the government should create a tax to buy everyone a Samsung Galaxy and protect us all from fire.

+Wax PragmaticThank you for clearing that up. While it is true that no one said the government shouldn't tax, it seemed to be implied. I'm sorry if I got that impression.So what do you think of other forms of protection, the police (protection from civilians), and the armed forces (protection from outside forces). Should they be funded by the government? I feel that if that kind of protection is accepted, then so should protection from fires and disease.Also, I didn't mention in my last comment when I replied to you about privatisation, but I feel it may be necessary to point out that America has one of the most expensive medical services in the world (if I recall correctly, it's about three times that of most other countries). Sure, they can be one of the best, but it's not much different than ours. The only difference being, yours is private, whereas ours is funded by the government. This seems to suggest that a government funded operation can be cheaper than private ones.

+John Salter Fine, we'll compromise. You're misinformed AND delusional.Re-read every comment above. You are the only person in this thread declaring our position to be that government should have no revenue. All libertarians agree that governments should be limited to a very tiny set of core responsibilities. Libertarians often disagree on which few responsibilities a government should have. Julie has a great video on this topic. Other than you, everyone in this thread agrees on the following:1. Healthcare, firefighting, and other services are great. However, they should never be financed through force.2. Government has no right to engage in commerce.3. No person should be forced to engage in commerce.4. You're a statist.

+Wax PragmaticNot delusional. Misinformed maybe.How would a government function without taxes? And how is what you describe different from anarchy?

+John Salter​ Private enterprise costs more than government? You're dillusional. Only 20% of every tax dollar makes it to the intended cause. The rest is lost to excessive overhead, bureaucratic waste, and fraud. Private enterprise in a free market is always cheaper than govermment.You miss every point. If a community desires professional firefighters, they can voluntarily combine their resourses to pay for it. The government is not needed to be an expensive middle man.Like any true statist, you so blindly worship government that you can't tell the difference between libertarians and anarchists.Have fun paying taxes to your queen and her family.

+magentawaveI was replying to everybody.As to the road thing, no, I don't believe we'll be helpless, but roads cost money to make, and with the exception of tolled roads, I'm not sure where this money would come from if not from taxation.+Wax Pragmatic Private enterprises are usually for-profit businesses, and as such would likely charge more, while volunteers are not professionals. Firefighters are highly trained and are (in general) much better at their jobs than any volunteer can hope to be.Without taxes, the government has zero power over a large population (small groups of people, however, is a different matter eg. many tribal societies had leaders and had no need of money). They cannot pay people to enforce any laws they make. It would be like me proclaiming myself King of England. Sure I could do it, but no one would follow me if I didn't pay them for it. So what you are suggesting is anarchy, rather than libertarianism. I have no problem with anarchy, but I feel a governing body is required for us to have the quality of life we do now, either for our protection from other citizens or outside forces, or for the advancement of human knowledge and science. We could treat every aspect like a business or charity, but they would receive far less money. NASA wouldn't exist, we would be vulnerable from an invading force, and justice for a battered woman could turn into murder.Sure, these are extremes, and you've probably heard the arguments before, but I'm genuinely interested in what you believe should be done instead of saying taxation is the problem.

+John Salter Taxation is the problem. If people weren't taxed so heavily they would have more money. If government didn't restrict the health industry there would be more competition hence cheaper prices. Why involve government when the free market does a much better job?

+Wax Pragmatic With regards to #1 it can't be said too frequently that there's historical precedence for the market and volunteerism to do these things. It's not wishful thinking by ancaps, it's historical reality.

+John Salter Ah, yes, the "But, but, Who will pay for our roads?!" fallacy.

+John Salter You suffer from statist dillusions.1. Statists like to point to roads and firefighting and say, 'If the government won't do it, who will?' Private enterprise, free markets, and VOLUNTARY agreements between citizens can solve all these problems and do so without expensive bureaucracies and other fiscal waste. These problems can be solved without coersion or force.2. Statists perceive a quality of life that they want. They also decide it's best for everyone else. They expect the government to force everyone else to pay for this perceived quality of life. Who says everyone else agrees with your ideals and wants your version of a desired quality of life? Statists don't care because they're selfish. In a free society, people who agree with your ideals can freely come together and combine resources to provide services you deem necessary in a way all parties deem fair. Instead of playing an active role in improving your quality of life, statists sit back and expect their government to take resources from others and provide for your desires.3. Like I already said: you come from a country that embraces government coersion. Your people are conditioned from birth to expect the government to solve their problems and blindly accept the consequences.There is no good thing in Earth that a government can do better than a free market.

+John Salter You didn't click the "Reply" button so who are you asking? My two cents... Stealing is immoral and doesn't magically become moral depending on who the thief is. You don't want a little bit of cancer. You want NO cancer. Limited government (minarchism) is a myth because the very nature of the state is to grow like a cancer.Who builds roads now? People build roads. Do you really believe that without the state forcing us at gunpoint that humans would become helpless little nothings incapable of building the roads that they already build now?Like anything, medical care shouldn't be paid for at gunpoint. If the state stopped meddling in medical care immediately then the price of medical care would drop dramatically. Proof is that hospital in Nebraska that accepts no government payments and clearly advertises the exact cost of every medical procedure on their website. Their procedures are not only far cheaper than other hospitals, but the quality is extremely high because not accepting government money (i.e. stolen money) means they MUST be accountable just like any other business out there involved in the sale of goods and/or services. If it can't happen peacefully and voluntarily in a TRUE free market then it shouldn't exist.

So would you be against taxation in general then? I like the idea of a limited government (though I don't know whether I'd be considered full libertarian), but taxation is pretty much required to live the quality of life we do. Without taxes we wouldn't have someone to build our roads, or on call to rescue us from a fire. Medical aid is, I believe, an essential thing for everyone, and should be lumped in with those.+Carlos Davarre Salazar Should you force your neighbour to pay for the firefighters to save you from a burning building? Bcause I'm fairly certain (correct me if I'm wrong), the American fire services are funded by taxation, and so essentially that is what you are doing. Okay, I presume you pay tax too, but if you haven't been in a fire, and are never in a fire, then you've been paying for other people's protection. Why should medical care be any different?Sure, there can be many abuses of taxation, but that doesn't change the benefits we receive.

+Wax Pragmatic I don't either.

+magentawave I don't see any problem with that.

+Wax Pragmatic If government stopped using coercion then they would stop being government.

+John Salter Should you force your neighbor to pay for your broken leg?My answer: You shouldn't.

+John Salter​ Government coersion is wrong. If any people don't have an option to opt out of participating in and paying for any program, it is tyranny. You come from a country where government coersion is embraced. You're speaking to people who detest government coersion.Try to realize that while a program may work for you, it might not work for others. Further, it doesn't matter if you understand why someone doesn't want to pay for or participate. That's none of your business AND it isn't their obligation to explain it to anyone. Coersion by government is wrong.

+Wax PragmaticNo, but it is not required for those earning under a certain amount. Income Tax is only charged for those earning over £10 000/yr, and National Insurance (which covers your pension, but might contribute to healthcare, I'm not sure) is for those earning over £80/wk. Last time I checked Income Tax was 15-20% of the taxable income, and NI was 12% of the taxable income. This is a system which I feel is fairly reasonable, and I have no problems with paying for healthcare (though I am curently under the £10k tax free threshold, so technically I DON'T pay, though I am over the threshold for NI), nor do I have any problems with paying for other emergency srvices such as the fire department, or police, which I see as similar things.While I now understand what Obamacare is (thank you to all who answered), and why it may not be all that great, I don't understand why people are upset about being 'forced' to pay for healthcare unless it's an unreasonable cost. Though being forced to use private insurers and getting a government granted discount is a bit off. These are for-profit companies and would still want to make money, and therefore drive the price up. But I am 'forced' to pay for healthcare, as well as other taxes, but there are many other things about where my money is going that I'd be more upset about (David Cameron's holidays, the military, etc.).

+todd Brewer No, Germany now. To the best of my knowledge the German government requires everyone under a certain income to purchase insurance. They don't have nationalized health care like other European countries do.

+John Salter Obamacare is a nickname for the ACA (Affordable Care Act).

+PissedFechtmeister  Germany of the hitler era.

It is not free health care funded by taxation. It is just laws that force everyone to buy health insurance and force insurers to cover certain things. It mandates prices for certain things. Not surprisingly health insurance prices doubled for most people. Except the dependent class that gets huge subsidies and pays almost nothing. It is the most inefficient and expensive way to provide health care in the world. America already spent the highest percent of GDP on health care, and Obama care doubled that amount.

+John Salter The name Obamacare is a bit misleading, aside from the fact that Obama doesn't care. The name makes it sound like it's some kind of insurance plan. What it does is require people to purchase health insurance from private companies. It provides subsidies to some people. There are also minimum requirements needed to be met before insurance can be considered sufficient coverage to avoid the fines associated with not having insurance. Insurance companies are barred from refusing to insure anyone due to pre-existing conditions. High end policies are actually taxed in order to pay for subsidies, and there are other taxes as well. If I'm not mistaken it's similar to the system in Germany.

+John Salter While I can't speak to exactly what Obamacare is beyond being a mandatory cost imposed by the US government, I will speak a little about what it's doing to private insurance. First, I would very much like for America to adopt Single-Payer Insurance much as Britain has, and still retain the option of private insurance as Britain does.  Second, the problem is that Obamacare isn't anywhere close to Single-Payer. It merely forces people to buy insurance. And for those who can't quite afford it, subsidies are provided to offset the cost. This is nonsensical to me seeing as a single-payer system would avoid this run around in the first place. And we already had medicare and medicaid in place that were similar programs for the elderly and the poor.  Third, Obamacare is insidious about attempting to corrupt private insurance. Obamacare stated that insurance could remain the same as long as nothing in the policy changed, but Obamacare had a requirement that forced the private insurance to change. Thus, they had to adopt Obamacare's prerequisites. This is going to put private insurance into an awkward place because their policies aren't meant to sustain the mandates.  So, the major problem with Obamacare is that it's not really helping people; it's putting pressure on the private insurance companies in order to gain control over healthcare as a whole. I'm not saying this isn't being done with good intentions, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions. If they want to provide affordable healthcare to everyone regardless of class and financial ability, fine. But don't go affecting the private insurance that we've been using.

Can Brits opt out of your national socialized healthcare system and not pay the tax?

No entiendo...

LMAO! All three looked like hipsters. 

+ibotibo No. I was speculating. I don't know for sure. 

+ReeseMac ;-) So she's officially a MILF ;-)

Either she's pregnant (which I doubt), she a mom, or that's just how she's built. She could be a mommy.

+ibotibo  By Mr.Jones !

SHES PREGNANT!!!!

yeah, me too.

LOL! I thought he was gonna forget to answer her question!

i kept looking to see if maybe it was the camera angle

this is honestly the worst (ugliest) I've ever seen her, not so excited about the calendar anymore LOL

lol!

thats what i thought

I also want to say this to you paul , I bet if jesus was walking the earth he would be preaching the good news to all mankind including the muslims he died for them too to have a chance at everlasting life they are trapped in their way of life, much like christians where under the roman catholic church , .Same with the jews they are in the wrong stop trying to fight their unholy wars both sides need jesus ,And we christians need to help them find thier way to the LORD not kill or arm them AMEN

Do not take the RFID Cjip in any form! I think the Bible means just what it says Rev. 13:16-17)And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to recieve a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads; And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. I refuse to take this mark even if for health reasons, I'll rely on Jesus to make me well, I've done before and I'll do it again. To me this is the word!

It states in the Bible,the rich and the poor,small and the great,this is talking about the mark,such as a barcode,as in rich and poor countries,great and small countries,when a country buys manifest,from other countries they have a code or UCC.Jordan Maxwell explains this for people who don't understand.The Roman Catholic Church Pope,knows what the mark of the beast is.It is the thoughts and actions,in the forehead and hands,DO YOU WORSHIP ON SATANS DAY? SUN-day.Don't be fooled,it does matter.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution PROHIBITS THE MAKING OF ANY LAW RESPECTING ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for gvmntal redress of grievances. The "government" has NO RIGHT to decide what is, or is not an established religion. I don't have to belong to ANY "recognized church system" to be against

Mennonites, Amish and Christian Scientists aren't Christians? Is not this the exact opposite argument which the Religious Right has been railing about when it comes to Businesses paying the Insurance? It's a personal scope and not a abridging scope, but the point is that if you hold a belief system which is anti-Healthcare/insurance you have the option of getting a personal exemption , just not a business one to effect others. Is this not what is rationally fair?

People the Bible clearly says that when the person of the antichrist is revealed than they will create a system where the 666 will be their mark. but the church is taken out of here. one thing that really worries me is isaias 17 because in all there is a coming of satan as if Jesus is coming in the clouds but satan touches the floor where Jesus doenst. so be careful. Jesus said when they say He is here or there do not go. so wake up and be careful. God bless.

It's not needed for people. The Obama bill states that it's only for quality control of implantable devices...NOT in people. Besides, finger print scans and retinal scans can accomplish the exact same thing without the "ewwwww" factor. Think of all the countries that have socialized medicine out there (basically ALL westernized countries EXCEPT for us unless you count the piddly Obama care). Not ONE of them has people chipped. Ain't gonna happen.

Paul you say you are not political yet you bash Obama and speak fair of Romney. From what Ive seen in your videos I think you support that white devil. Im a college student if he wins all government aid will taken away from us and will make a living hell for the Latin people. I dont care for nobody Obama or Romney Im just a Democrat since it was the Republican who ruin this country anyways the only presidents I ever liked was JFK and Clinton.

I agree the chip is not the Mark of the Beast, but the micro-chip is the technology that can be used for the implementation of the Mark of the Beast. I also realize that the Beast has not risen yet (NWO) but the Anti-Christ and the False Prophet are getting into position to start the process of moving into power. I respect your point of view and I agree with you to some degree, but I must warn them to flee from the wrath to come. God Bless

I'm against the chip but still, Y'all making me laugh. World population = 7 billion inhabitants / USA population = 311 millions -> so basically obamacare would affect roughly ONLY 4 percent of the World population !! Stop thinking that the US is the whole world. God loves Americans, but so does He love people from Bangladesh, Papua New Guinea, Yemen, and Macedonia, to cite a few, which are FAR from implementing this kind of technology.

the chip is gonna happen no matter what the government says. why would u trust the government to not lie? and anyways if they do "only" put it in pacemakers they will still use an excuse to put it everyone eventually. like david icke says: "problem-reaction-solution". they will cause a catastrophe in order for the people to clamor for a "solution". ex. 9/11 and the "solution" to that was the Patriot Act which took away some privacy

Mr. Paul Begley all this month in Phoenix, Az there is a huge haunted house named "The Nest" well this production is using the RFID chip for the first time this year to "personalize" the experience of visitors going to through the haunted house. Though this was very creepy and if you go to the web page you will see this info. on the main page and how this micro chip has all your info. like facebook, name, and etc. God Bless!

/0Oc5D6Mm4eM I have to laugh this is not a UFO... it is a Cruise Missile.. USA i bet sent it to cause the volcano to erupt.. The new world order remember goal is taking over the world.. their motto is "Order out of Chaos" What are those nasty banker elites up to now sending a Missile to that volcano. Rockerfeller and his buddies are Mad i say Mad God Help Humanity because this world seems to be spinning out of control.

As we all know governments are represented in the bible as beasts ,understanding daniel is key by the time you open revelations ,and its the governments pushing for this r.f.i.d,sometimes you cant see the forest from the trees the the beast is here and dont we wonder after it?does it not mislead the people? The hedge of protection has been lifted its a time of testing will you run to government the beast or Jesus ?

i see ur point of view...however dont u think that this micro-chip is already getting people used to the real deal when it comes,theyll take it like " oh yeah we have chips in phones, credit cards etc." its conditioning people for it and this is what they want. is that a good thing? if u take a micro-chip what makes u think u wont take the real deal mark? as a christian, do u think its wise?

Personally, I would not take the thing! It would be too simple to change it without you knowing! It would be so simple for the Great Deceiver into beguiling people to thinking it is nothing to be alarmed at, only to have people accepting it, and then changing its mechanism electronically through the chip to mean the Mark. Better not to even think of going down that path to begin w2ith.

Pastor Paul, all of these things I have been hearing recently are almost too much to bare. It is almost to the point of unbelievable. I realize that these things are going to happen, but you have to be honest in saying that IT SCARES THE LIVING CRAP OUT OF ME. How can someone not be weary? I keep praying about it, but then I see more that is happening. HELP.......

The cruise missile is on you tub found if you look at trends.. it is a mexican volcano and a long tubed object enters the erupting volcano. Got to be a cruise missile not a UFO from space as the mexican media think it is.. Mexican have a lot of sightings of UFO's so they would not even think of the possibility it is a Cruise Missile. Good Grief Mexico.

HELP!!! MY HEAD'S BLEEDING FROM BASHING IT AGAINST THE WALL!!! The "chip" WILL ONLY BE PUT INTO MEDICAL DEVICES LIKE PACEMAKERS...but I've explained that FACT a million times...the exemptions make sense....the Secretary of Health and Human services is just going to make sure that people aren't lying about being a member of one of those faiths.

People all over the world have micros in them for health reasons machine parts: the mark is not a chip : revelation tells you :anyone thinking the chip is the mark is decieved and reading into scripture their private interpetation: and preaching mens opinion instead of the word : and i tell you this in love :

Waw, I'm astonished at how much people do NOT want to hear the truth : World population = 7 billion inhabitants / USA population = 311 millions -> so basically obamacare would affect roughly ONLY 4 percent of the World population !! -> doesn't really match the "All" the scripture is talking about!!

I feel this way, and it is SIMPLY MY OPINION. Defiling your body (ie. tatoos, embedded micro chips INSIDE the body etc.) are ALL a sin. This may or may not be the 'mark' but it is STILL A SIN. I REFUSE TO TAKE A CHIP! So what I mean is this: taking a chip INSIDE your body IS DEFILING your body.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. As a Christian I am excused of murdering the deceased as she identified herself as a witch.

Sure I set that woman on fire but arresting me would just be imposing your religion on me which is a violation of the first amendment...you can't violate my rights because of my freedom to be a christian....suffer not a witch to live!

Laws do have exemptions.

+Kathleen RedmanSo you're going to ignore the existing laws against that as well as the parts of the aca that repeat the existing law multiple times?You're an idiot.

Anyone except for Christians that is.  The Catholics can't either.  The Muslims have complete protection from Obamacare.  Go figure...Obama is a Muslim and a terrorist- and he wants for the destruction of America.  Watch his actions.  As for health care and Christians, take out the abortion mandate!  I believe the lawsuits are up to 90 now- can't they get a clue?  Christians will lose their business rather than pay for murdering the unborn in their health care packages.

+cobinizerWell thats good ^_^I understand compensating doctors/nurses etc....but not the fucking middle managers.Insurance companies are the real death panels.  If you don't make them money then your life is fucking forfeit.

+dffykvn I completely agree. Profit-driven healthcare is evil.

+shuree681The only proper solution is single payer.For profit insurance is just fucking immoral.That money should be spent on treating patients not used to buy golden toilets and 5000 dollar orange skin facials.Oh that patient doesn't fit into our profit formula so they aren't worth keeping aliv....around...let's drop them...oh sorry noone will insure you?  Tough shit you fucking plebe!

I agree that one should pay their own insurance, but for those whom cannot, I think there should be a type of sliding scale based on income. Obamacare is really messed up and should not be pushed upon people, especially those already covered.

+cobinizerWithout health insurance minor problems don't get treated until they're major problems that require expensive treatment in the er and then taxpayers cover the cost.We need single payer because taxpayers already pay for the uninsured....single payer would just be more efficient.

+shuree681Well car insurance is mandated if you drive....also you're right, it can't compare because car insurance isn't a matter of life and death.

+cobinizerOne can't survive without healthcare...unless you're fine with them not being able to pay their bills....then taxpayers cover it.

+dffykvn Really, I've lived four decades without car insurance. You seem to think that one cannot survive without a car. Weird.

I mentioned auto insurance bc Odrama made a speech in which he compared health insurance to auto insurance. It cannot be compared IMHO

+cobinizerYea you do.The only states that don't have mandated car insurance have alternate methods of payment like fees.

+dffykvn You don't have to have car insurance. It's not the same.

The bible never mentioned the morality of car insurance so naturally it's satanic.

Yeah, forced auto insurance, though I understand it, still pisses me off. 

The ultimate truth in life is summed up with " la illaha il Allah, Muhammad ar Rasul Allah " There is only one God and he has sent his final Revelation to Mankind, last chance folks ! Don't miss the bus. The elite know the truth and they have declared War on Islam for their own Devilish, selfish gain.

Can you just lie and say you converted from Christian to muslim? Obama converted from muslim to Christianity to get votes.

R U talking about money of exchange or monies of account? Cheers

I hate throwing my hard earned monies to the drain!