District of Columbia

 We have all had a little giggle over the stories of the fraudulent voter registration application filed in the name of Mickey Mouse in Florida, or the the applications being filed in the names of individuals, who some have been deceased for 10 years. The reality of the situation is that with the utter imbecility of these cases there are just as many of them  that we never hear about,and that is were one of the most sacred, and honored institution in America is being tarnished.  If the American political electoral system becomes a free for all where fictitious characters, and even the deceased are able to cast votes then essential any election can be bought for the right price.      

 In Texas' Harris County the King Street Patriots Tea Party headed by Catherine Engelbrecht, has rolled out the True to Vote initiative which provides Tea Parties not only in Harris County, but nation wide the resources to ward off the widely known flaws in America's electoral process. In March of this year King Street Patriots held the True to Vote Summit, were activist from 27 states attend to hear of the trials Kings Street faced in the 2010 elections, and how instrumental it was to maintain voter integrity not only in Texas, but throughout the entire nation. With the unveiling of tactics used by the left to sully the American election system, and the proven efforts used by Tea Parties to seal the cracks, the movement is spreading throughout the country. On Saturday April, 30th The Wisconsin campaign for Liberty Annual Conference is being held in Rothschild, Wisconsin. Where activist training will be held on voter fraud, and voter registration. The training will provide information on voter laws, and GOTV efforts that can be implemented to close the ever widening voter fraud gaps in the system.

In comparison to the Lefts' GOTV efforts, the right has become the grandmother that refuses to let go of her rotary phone because using a cordless phone just seemed wrong. With the George Soros, Ford Foundations, and Herb & Marion Sandlers of the world throwing seemingly endless amounts of cash at the left, It begs the question who is burden with the brunt of the rights' GOTV activities. As of late its has been the grassroot Tea Parties who have taken it upon themselves to implement the GOTV measures. Private blue collar citizens' find ways to volunteer there time, to either register voters or even be poll watchers.

The god giving liberties that we as American have a right to, also come with the responsibility to fight, and safeguard those liberties when others will devalue and corrode them until they are rendered useless.  For some the responsibilty of this fight is an honor an privilege to have.

.

-By Warner Todd Huston

In a few days the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is expected to release its final decision on whether or not 17,000 women across the country will have the same access to the breast cancer drug Avastin that they now have. Several congressmen, thousands of doctors and patients, and many small government activists stand against this perceived example of Obamacare-like rationing.

As reported last week, with this Avastin situation five Congressmen have become alerted to the threat that government is instituting cost-based rationing of healthcare and have become alarmed at the effects that will have on the sick. It seems that this FDA decision will set the table for the rationing war to come under Obamacare unless that legislation is repealed or inhibited.

Avastin is, admittedly, an expensive drug. But are we ready for government to decide if your lifesaving medicines are “too expensive” to be allowed for use? Is that the cost-based road down which we wish to travel? And how far down that road do we go? How much cost-cutting do we want government to indulge where it concerns our health? And should government even have that role in the first place?

These are questions that the Avastin decision evokes.

Aside from the letter mentioned above written by the five congressmen, Representative Jack Kingtson also sent a letter to Chairman Rosa DeLauro of the House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Dev., FDA, and Related Agencies. Rep. Kingston asked the chair to schedule an oversight hearing on Avastin.

Because of the implications of removing the breast cancer indication from the Avastin label on women currently undergoing treatment, I believe it is imperative that we hold a hearing on Avastin during the upcoming lame duck session.

Mr. Kingston is worried that the FDA is moving hastily and so are many doctors and patients. Sadly, Rep. DeLauro has ignored Mr. Kingston's request. She is a great supporter of rationing and Obamacare after all.

The son of one such patient recently wrote an op ed in The Hill pleading with the FDA not to end support for the drug with which his mother is finding success. Josh Turnage ended his piece saying, "The FDA can still change course and preserve the right of breast cancer patients to make an informed choice. If someone you loved were diagnosed with breast cancer, wouldn't you want the right to choose this drug?"

Now, many of the critics of the drug's supporters say that it is fearmongering to worry about the FDA delisting the drug for breast cancer. The say that the limitation to just breast cancer will not impact the availability of the drug all that much. But this ignores the great impact that government action has on a thing.

Already several insurance companies are moving away from supporting the drug with just the threat of government action.

• Regence Blue Shield, the large regional plan in the Pacific Northwest recently published an Avastin policy listing the breast cancer treatment as “medically unnecessary.”
• Utah Public Employee Health Plan a small regional payer in Utah has begun to deny all Avastin claims but has not yet bothered to publish a written policy.
• Health Care Service Corporation the parent company of Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Illinois, New Mexico and Oklahoma recently published an Avastin policy that restricts use of Avastin.

Because of the government's actions -- even as limited as those actions are thus far -- thousands of patients are finding the availability of their drug being limited.

This is a perfect example of what will happen to the medical field if these sort of government actions increase under Obamacre. Please do call your representatives and senators on this issue before the Dec. 17 deadline and let them know how you feel.

(Here is a Roche Company update sent to investors on where they stand on the matter)

-By Warner Todd Huston

So you have Avastin, a drug used to treat breast cancer that has a record of extending the lives of sufferers for at least five and a half months, and it's October, the month declared Breast Cancer Awareness Month. If you are the Obama Federal Drug Administration, what do you do? Apparently you look to delist the drug.

This October the FDA is trying to decide to delist Avastin because in keeping with its new Obamacare rationing impulses it has decided Avastin costs too much.

In September the FDA announced that it was going to delay its final decision perhaps until December on whether or not to take Avastin off the market for breast cancer patients. There was no clear indication of just when the decision would be made, but conveniently the decision certainly will be delayed until after the coming elections. As a result President Obama won't have to worry about taking a drug away from breast cancer patients in the midst of an election cycle.

The calculation of skipping past the elections is hard to ignore.

Senator David Vitter (R, LA) has pointed out the "rationing" aspect of the whole Avastin debate. In a letter to the FDA Senator Vitter said, “Taking Avastin off-label for breast cancer treatment is essentially government rationing."

Avastin has many fans. One young man even made a video in support of Avastin saying that the drug has helped improve the life of his mother who has been diagnosed as stage 4 metastatic breast cancer.

Christi Turnage has also started a FaceBook page and launched a petition to stay the FDA's rationing hand.

Opponents of the drug say that its track record is not successful enough to justify the costs of the drug and the FDA has citied costs as being one of the reasons that Avastin is about to be delisted.

But in this month of breast cancer awareness month the specter of delisting looms for those that feel the drug works for them. The biggest question here is one of propriety. Is it a good idea that we give government the power to take away drugs that are successful for some people just because its costs too much? Should we give government the power to decide how much is too much to save lives?

As statistically indicated, the Democratic Party WILL lose seats in the upcoming midterms.  No one questions this - not now and not in any midterm election.  Cases where the majority gained seats in a midterm are aberrant.  But the picture improved for the Democratic Party given the results of the primaries, primarily because the Right elected a handful of candidates that, like them or not, have thrown a number of races that were a slam dunk for Republicans back into the "leaning Democratic" category. 

There are several other variations on this theme, but the bottom line is that in yesterday's Senate Rankings at fivethrityeight.com, the meta-polling picture improved for the Democratic Party, who now is more likely than not to hold onto 55 seats.  The Republican Party's chances to take the Senate remains at about 6%.  And a lot depends on which party Charlie Crist caucuses with should he win the FL seat (which looks increasingly likely). 

Here's the goods from the dean of polling data:  http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/06/senate-forecast-after-primaries-picture.html

Try to be  a good senator and good leader like barrack obamathanks.

engr.dr.samuel.adeniyi.ajanaku  (activist)

president

saagerino  consulting engineering company  limited

421 seward sq se  dc 200032024769622email;

ajanakusamuel@yahoo.com===========================================================

 Flag this messageThe Most Important JobSunday, June 20, 2010 11:13 AMFrom: "President Barack Obama" <president@messages.whitehouse.gov>View contact detailsTo: ajanakusamuel@yahoo.com    Good afternoon,

As the father of two young daughters, I know that being a father is one of the most important jobs any man can have.

My own father left my family when I was two years old. I was raised by a heroic mother and wonderful grandparents who provided the support, discipline and love that helped me get to where I am today, but I still felt the weight of that absence throughout my childhood. It's something that leaves a hole no government can fill. Studies show that children who grow up without their fathers around are more likely to drop out of high school, go to jail, or become teen fathers themselves.

And while no government program can fill the role that fathers play for our children, what we can do is try to support fathers who are willing to step up and fulfill their responsibilities as parents, partners and providers. That's why last year I started a nationwide dialogue on fatherhood to tackle the challenge of father absence head on.

In Chicago, the Department of Health and Human Services held a forum with community leaders, fatherhood experts and everyday dads to discuss the importance of responsible fatherhood support programs. In New Hampshire, Secretary of Education Duncan explored the linkages between father absence and educational attainment in children. In Atlanta, Attorney General Holder spoke with fathers in the criminal justice system about ways local reentry organizations, domestic violence groups and fatherhood programs can join together to support ex-offenders and incarcerated individuals who want to be closer to their families and children.

Now we're taking this to the next level. Tomorrow, I'll make an announcement about the next phase of our efforts to help fathers fulfill their responsibilities as parents -- The President's Fatherhood and Mentoring Initiative. You can learn more at www.fatherhood.gov.

This Father's Day -- I'm thankful for the opportunity to be a dad to two wonderful daughters. And I'm thankful for all the wonderful fathers, grandfathers, uncles, brothers and friends who are doing their best to make a difference in the lives of a child.

Happy Father's Day.

Sincerely, President Barack Obama

   This email was sent to ajanakusamuel@yahoo.com. Unsubscribe ajanakusamuel@yahoo.com | Privacy Policy Please do not reply to this email. Contact the White House

The White House • 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20500 • 202-456-1111 ===========================================================

Fatherhood.gov - National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse Jump to main content ProgramsInformación en EspañolHelpGrantees    Home PageAbout UsContact UsPress ReleasesEmail UpdatesNRFC ResourcesNews & AnnouncementsEvents CalendarFAQPrivacy PolicyDadsBeing A DadMy SituationGet InvolvedDad2DadPractitionersProgram ImplementationFor Your FathersResourcesLibraryPolicy & ResearchPolicyResearchStatisticsMedia GalleryLibraryHome Page Fatherhood ProgramThe Fortune SocietyThe fortune Society believes in a world where all who are at-risk, incarcerated or formerly incarcerated can become positive, contributing members of society. Read More >> President Obama Fatherhood MessageFatherhood InvolvementSmallest MomentsTo be a great dad is the most important job in a man’s life, but it doesn’t have to be hard. All it takes is a few minutes of your time. Because the smallest moments can have the biggest impact on a child’s life. Take time to be a dad today. Read More >> Dad StoriesA Father's LaughterSharing the Fun and Joy of ChildhoodYou know the terrific feeling you get from laughing when you hear a funny joke, read a humorous story, or watch a hilarious comedy. Even remembering it later can put a smile on your face. Children feel great too when laughter is part of their lives.Read More >> CheerleaderTake Time to be a Dad todayA grandmother watches as a father is rehearsing cheerleading routines with his daughter.Length: 30 seconds, closed captionedRead More >> Fatherhood ProgramThe Fortune SocietyThe fortune Society believes in a world where all who are at-risk, incarcerated or formerly incarcerated can become positive, contributing members of society. Read More >> President Obama Fatherhood MessageFatherhood InvolvementSmallest MomentsTo be a great dad is the most important job in a man’s life, but it doesn’t have to be hard. All it takes is a few minutes of your time. Because the smallest moments can have the biggest impact on a child’s life. Take time to be a dad today. Read More >>1234 Información en españolJoin The President's Fatherhood and Mentoring Initiative!Información en españolIn response to President Obama's call for a national conversation on responsible fatherhood and healthy familiesLearn More

Información en españolEn respuesta al llamado del presidente Obama para una conversación nacional sobre la paternidad responsable y las familias saludables.Learn MoreProgram SpotlightBe There for Your Kids! The CO State Fatherhood Initiative's ultimate goal is to improve the well-being of children by building community access across Colorado to fatherhood programs and services..All Programs>>NewsStudy Finds Dads Suffer Postpartum Depression Wednesday, May 19, 2010 - 2:01am | NPR, Joanne Silberner While it's been widely known that some mothers suffer from postpartum depression, a series of studies over the years have suggested... SubscribeAll News>>Call another dad And wish him a Happy Father’s Day. Help your children become comfortable speaking to adults and others on the phone.More Activities>>

Get InvolvedFind a Fatherhood program near you.

Find a ProgramActivity of the WeekQuick TipsHealth & Safety Children need involved fathers in every aspect of their lives, including health and safety. From knowing how to properly handle a cut or... Quick TipsHomework Help Each school is a little bit different. Each grade has its own challenges and benefits. From pre-k to college being involved with your child... Quick TipsGames & Activities There are a lot of ways to spend time being involved in your child’s life. Even spending a few minutes playing an age-appropriate game... Quick TipsTips for Parents Taking time to spend with your children always pays off. Get involved in even the smallest ways. Each section of the NRFC Dads site has... HealthSchoolFunGo GreenMedia HighlightsPerrito: 30 Segundos A new puppy becomes a new friend. Perrito: 60 Segundos A new puppy becomes a new friend. Héroe: 30 Segundos A father’s good example leads to a life lesson. Media HighlightsManicure A special moment shared between a father and daughter when she gives her dad a manicure.  Message from President Obama The smallest moments can have the biggest impact on a child's life. Take time to be a dad today.  Cheerleader A grandmother watches as a father is rehearsing cheerleading routines with his daughter.  VideoAudio...About UsContact UsPress ReleasesEmail UpdatesNRFC ResourcesNews & AnnouncementsEvents CalendarFAQPrivacy PolicyDadsBeing A DadMy SituationGet InvolvedDad2DadEspañolPractionersProgram ImplementationFor your FathersResourcesGranteesPolicy & ResearchPolicyResearchStatisticsMedia GalleryLibraryBrowse the LibraryShare This PageRSS FeedsEmail UpdatesFull Site Map This is an official U.S. Government Web site managed by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services The White HousePromoting Responsible Fatherhood and Strong Communities

I'll admit from the start that I tend to be more libertarian than conservative, but to be perfectly honest I see the libertarian wing as one of the more intellectually consistent and honest components of the conservative movements.  That being said, I also think the foundation of the conservative movement that began in the 60s borrowed heavily from libertarian ideology, specifically when it comes to the power of the private sector, lower taxes, less government spending, and free trade.

The conservative movement today is a far cry from the conservative movement of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan that made its national debut in Reagan’s speech at the Republican National Convention in 1964.  That movement united socially conservative, small government types who steadfastly opposed the intrusion of government into all aspects of people's lives, or wallets I should say.  They were ideologically consistent between their claims and their policies (again, I'm speaking of the economic policies).  But rather than glorify the conservatives of yore, many of whose social policies I personally disagree with, I'll comment more on the GOP of today.  They claim to adhere to free-market and federalist principles, but they have also been responsible for a massive expansion of the federal government in the past decade.  I personally disagree with this.  So do many true and proper conservatives.  This phenomenon is what makes the GOP so difficult to defend these days.

However, If you can separate Republicans from conservatives, it becomes abundantly clear that it is unfair to claim that there remain no intellectual stalwarts among conservatives. (I'm not attacking all Republicans, but I am suggesting that many of them would prefer to pander to the extremists than partake in the intellectual debate.  I wouldn't necessarily include Joe Wilson in this camp, either.  To be fair to him, his concerns over illegal immigrants seemed vindicated when you examine the change and scope of language on illegal immigrants in the Baucus bill versus its predecessors.  Clearly, there was something missing in those previous versions.)  I hear the claim that, as it was mentioned a few posts ago, the intellectual conservative simply does not exist.  This is, of course, a false, arrogant, and not at all shocking piece of “misinformation,” so I thought I would offer a suggestion for the proponents of this claim and perhaps any skeptics who may be having a hard time identifying a counter-example. 

I see George Will as one of the most thoughtful and thought-provoking leaders in any intellectual arena.  Whether or not you agree with his assertions, I challenge any serious thinker to read some of his more intriguing articles and not admit that he is, indeed, an extremely intelligent, ideologically consistent political commentator.  Unlike some of his counterparts on the Left, like Paul Krugman – who in 2004 (note the party affiliation of the commander-in-chief that year) proclaimed that the federal deficit should be one of our biggest concerns and could eventually lead to an economic collapse, while in 2009 (likewise) assuaged his readers that the deficit really is not that big of a deal – Will is willing to either challenge or simply rise above and ignore many of the mainstream reactionaries on the Right who can turn any modest event into a nationwide cause for outrage (I have in mind those who claimed that Obama speaking to children, urging them to stay in school and avoid drugs, would somehow lead to a form of Socialist indoctrination). 

Set aside social issues, and I think the right and center – a group that is largely composed of fiscally conservative, socially liberal, partisan independents – would have a much easier time identifying conservatives whose arguments could be defended on an intellectual rather than rhetorical level.  The reason, in my opinion, that George Will has remained a respected political commentator for so many years is precisely because he chooses not to focus on social issues, knowing not only that they are more difficult to defend logically but also that they should, ideally, not have a place in politics in the first place.  As a constitutionalist (or at least I would imagine he would describe himself as such), he understands that a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages would move well beyond the powers granted to the federal government.  As a result, he instead focuses on economic policy, foreign affairs, clear instances of encroachment on civil liberties, Supreme Court decisions, and the like. 

Perhaps my perspective of Mr. Will is distorted by my relatively limited time following him – I am, after all, barely 22 years old – but I have followed him for a number of years, read hundreds of articles and op-eds that he has authored, seen him countless times on Sunday morning shows, and every time reaffirm my faith that intelligent conservatives are in fact out there.  

The right has lost its way and a lot of people are starting to recognize this.  Books are being written (The Death of Conservatism, Republican Gomorrah: Inside the Movement that Shattered the Party, etc.)  Here are my thougths on what is wrong and what needs to be done about it.

Discredit those who are not helpful

Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, etc. have said a lot of downright crazy and dumb things (people with AIDS should be quarantined, etc.)  and are far too tied to Christianity.  They should be called out for that and pushed to the side so that true leaders on the right can rise to the top and give the right a real chance at regaining credibility and the minds of those who are undecided or in the center.  Those who espose hate, and anger should also be discredited and pushed to the side (Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc.).  It is long past time for Conservative talk radio to become more academic, constructive, and hopeful sounding, and cater to the best in us (love, hope, unity, civics, etc.), rather than the worst (fear, anger, race, etc.).

Stop catering to the Christian right

Christianity has nothing to do with conservative ideas and theory on money, foreign policy, etc.  There is also supposed to be a strong seperation of church and state.  Our country was formed partially for freedom of religion, and if our government is run by someone who wants to impose their religion through laws and perspective, then we lose that.  In addition, America is not a Christian nation; though nearly 80% are Christian, there is still another 20% that are not.

Stop simply opposing every idea President Obama has and propose alternative solutions

The right has really been a thorn in our Presidents side instead of working with him to solve the problems in America.  The way to gain credibility and get some conservative ideas into law is to honestly work with the left to create good policy, and also proactively propose laws to solve some of our problems before the left takes up the problem.

Stop supporting causes that have nothing to do with Conservative ideology

The right should disassociate itself with such issues as abortion, and other things that are outside of the ideas of conservatism.  Abortion is an issue thats argument against it is primarily based in religion.  The same applies to marriage equality for gays; the argument against it can only be made from a religious standpoint.  Because of this, and because no party should be tied to any religion, just as our government should not be tied to any religion, the right as a whole and Republicans as a party should disassociate theirselves with abortion and start supporting equal rights for gays.  These two issues alone keep some of those in the center and on the left from ever supporting a Republican candidate.  It might cause a lot of those on the Christian right to be upset, but then they can choose the party that best conforms to what their idea of government should do on all other issues, or form a new 3rd party that is tightly tied to Christianity.

Stop being inconsistent

Right now many on the right are opposing government run health care on the idea that even though it may save a lot of lives, it isn't proper for the government or taxpayers to help others.  Yet, many of those same people are in support of the war in Iraq to give people in another country freedom and save their lives.  Why should we spend taxpayer dollars to police the world yet not spend taxpayer dollars to save those within our own borders?  Either we shouldn't spend money to help others, or we should and if we should then we should definitely want to help those within our own borders before those who are not within our borders.

Stop being hawks

The right has become a group of hawks and this is contrary to conservative ideas on foreign policy.  Conservative ideas on foreign policy are as spelled out by the Cato Institute:

Cato's foreign policy vision is guided by the idea of our national defense and security strategy being appropriate for a constitutional republic, not an empire. Cato's foreign policy scholars question the presumption that an interventionist foreign policy enhances the security of Americans in the post-Cold War world, and maintain instead that interventionism has consequences, including the formation of countervailing alliances, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and even terrorism. The use of U.S. military force should be limited to those occasions when the territorial integrity, national sovereignty, or liberty of the United States is at risk.

Conservatives need to re-embrace those ideas.  They are the ideas that our nations founders had in mind, and they are the ideas that are the most ethical and that might also allow some on the left to consider the rest of our ideas.

Have a well thought out income tax policy

There either should not be an income tax as Libertarians would like, or there should be an income tax that works to support Conservative values.  A tax that is progressive helps strengthen families at the lower incomes and therefore helps literacy rates, etc. which helps to preserve conservative values of strong families, an educated populace, etc.  Right now the government has taken on far too much responsibility and therefore spends too much and our national debt is growing because of it.  It is time to start cutting back on spending, but at the same time increasing revenue and the only realistic way to increase revenue is through a progressive income tax because those in the middle and lower class cannot support any higher tax burden.

Start supporting alternative energy and embrace that global warming is real and might be caused by us

The science is in, global warming is real and it is probably caused by our actions (and can we afford to gamble that it is not?).  Most of the oil that is easily available is in countries with citizens that do not like us.  Because of these two things, it is long past time to start looking into energy sources that do not emit CO2, and that do not require us to work with countries that are not friendly to us.

Stop catering to Israel

We give far too much money and support to Israel and it hurts our credibilty around the world and doesn't help to reduce the hatred towards us in the Muslim world.  It is time to treat Israel as we would any other country that is a friend and ally of ours.  We should work with them, and be friends with them, but we should point out when they are doing something that works against peace in the middle east and use our monetary aid as a tool to help control their actions rather than blindly supporting them at all times.

Start rethinking drug policy

The war on drugs does not work, and will never work so long as it is punitive rather than based in medicine.  It only makes organized crime stronger, and leads to a larger role of government and often leads to violations of our constitutional rights.  The punitive war on drugs was originally based on racism, and is now based in morality that is derived from religion.  For these reasons, it is time for the federal government to take a non punitive role and start considering policy that would put organized crime out of business, make drug use safer and less damaging to society, and help those who are ready to reform their lives through cessation of drug abuse.

Medical malpractice insurance has skyrocketed in the last 5-6 years, hitting certain specialties extremely hard. As a result, many health care providers feel they have been forced to raise prices to compensate for the increase in insurance premiums. This may well be the case, but a simple solution based on free-market principles has not received much attention and would alleviate much of the price inflation. Not only would doctors benefit, but the vast majority of patients – and insurance companies – would be left paying reduced prices and lowering the cost of care for those willing to participate.

Currently, only a small percentage of cases involving perceived malpractice are brought to court and plaintiffs awarded hefty sums for their suffering. But that small handful – who are largely responsible for raising liability insurance premiums over the past half-decade – are charged the same as the vast majority who avoid using the legal system as a means of redress.

One possible solution is the following: at the time of purchasing an insurance plan, individuals would determine their own cap for non-economic damages in the case of malpractice on the part of their provider. Poorer people might be willing to forego more expensive plans in exchange for a promise not to bring lawsuits against doctors and hospitals except in extreme cases of negligence. As a result, healthcare providers will know their personal level of liability ahead of time and price their services accordingly. Patients less inclined to seek damages in the case of something going wrong will likely be charged less, while those more inclined to do so could be charged more.

When punitive damages are either unlimited or capped at one global rate, many in need of care are still priced out of the market. On the other hand, if that limit is adjusted on the basis of one’s willingness to avoid litigation, price discrimination may just do a better job matching what the doctor is willing to charge with what the patient is willing to pay.

In turn, liability insurance will decrease as a result of insurance providers being able to more accurately predict what a policy will cost them based on the category of patients (those more willing to seek damages versus those who are not) a doctor is treating.

Ultimately, poorer patients benefit from reduced prices for the same services, doctors benefit from peace-of-mind as well as lower liability insurance, and insurance companies benefit from improved mechanisms of gathering information on what patients and doctors will cost if they choose to offer them a policy.

From the Times-Union:

For Mike Wortenberger, an area small-business owner, this is not his first tea party. Wortenberger has been to two in Indianapolis and one in Warsaw. This week he attended one in Mishawaka.

Wortenberger said it's not an issue of being anti-Democrat or Obama or pro-Republican.

"Basically, I feel the government is out of control," said Wortenberger. "It's not just the Democrats, it's Republicans, too. I don't blame Obama. The system is broken."

Wortenberger said he believes government is ignoring the will of the Founding Fathers. "The Founding Fathers were a lot more intelligent than we are," said Wortenberger. "They used God as guidance and I don't think that's the case anymore."

Wortenberger said he knows of several people making the trip and is traveling with a couple of people. Having been to several tea parties previously, Wortenberger admitted that for some people attending it's "strictly political," but for the majority of those in attendance they feel like Wortenberger in that both sides have let down the American people.

"Our Republicans have ignored us as much as the Democrats," said Wortenberger.