The American Ruling Class

[rickoff]

Quotable quotes of the day....

“It is time to recall the reprobates and reclaim the power of the people,” Vallely said. “We need to start with the White House and all of Obama’s appointees, especially Eric Holder. … Then on to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi – the architects who shoved Obamacare down our throats. We also cannot forget John Boehner and company who openly castigate the tea-party caucus, which are only doing that which they campaigned upon.” - Major General Paul Vallely, chairman of Stand Up America

Vallely is now calling for a nationwide vote of "no confidence" in the Obama administration, and explains that with such a vote,

“You are not calling anyone names, or labeling others. You are not trying to encapsulate each and every event. Rather, what you are doing is telling the world that ‘I have no confidence in him or his team anymore.’ They cannot take that away from you or attack you for it. A vote of ‘no confidence,’ albeit symbolic, at least focuses the discussion on something you can own. This ownership is in your opinion; one based in fact and close analysis, not in emotion, ‘talking points’ or ulterior motives. If asked or challenged tomorrow by his supporters that my lack of confidence is a political ploy, I will say, ‘No, I own my conclusions, I own my opinions and I have a deep sense of no confidence in Obama.’ The House of Representatives must follow our lead and take up a resolution of no confidence.”

And here are the words of a liberal law professor who agrees that Barry and his administration have far overstepped their bounds as defined by the Constitution:

"The danger is quite severe. The problem with what the president is doing is that he’s not simply posing a danger to the constitutional system. He’s becoming the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid. That is the concentration of power. The Newtonian orbit that the three branches exist in is a delicate one but it is designed to prevent this type of concentration. There are two trends going on which should be of equal concern to all members of Congress. One is that we have had the radical expansion of presidential powers under both President Bush and President Obama. We have what many once called an imperial presidency model of largely unchecked authority." - Liberal law professor Jonathan Turley, addressing a December 4th House Judiciary Committee hearing.

[Danny B]

New plan

Senate bill 828;
California has a New Plan to Fight Back Against the NSA: Cut Off Their Water Supply | The Daily Sheeple

[aljhoa]

0ld plan

A Presidential Executive Order, whether Constitutional or not, becomes law simply by its publication in the Federal Registry. Congress is by-passed. Here are just a few Executive Orders that would suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. These Executive Orders have been on record for nearly 30 years and could be enacted by the stroke of a Presidential pen:

• EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990 allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.
• EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media.
• EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.
• EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 allows the government to take over all food resources and farms.
• EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.
• EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001 allows the government to take over all health, education and welfare functions.
• EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.
• EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.
• EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.
• EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities.
• EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.
• EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

Without Congressional approval, the President now has the power to transfer whole populations to any part of the country, the power to suspend the Press and to force a national registration of all persons. The President, in essence, has dictatorial powers never provided to him under the Constitution. The President has the power to suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in a real or perceived emergency. Unlike Lincoln and Roosevelt, these powers are not derived from a wartime need, but from any crisis, domestic or foreign, hostile or economic. Roosevelt created extraordinary measures during the Great Depression, but any President faced with a similar, or lesser, economic crisis now has extraordinary powers to assume dictatorial status.
THE EXECUTIVE ORDER

Executive order - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Al

[rickoff]

12 COMMON WORDS that could make the NSA think you’re a terrorist...

(Avoid using them in any e-mail if you don’t want to be flagged!)

• Freedom
• Bet
• Chosen
• Fraud
• Codes
• Eavesdropping
• Government
• Maverick
• President
• Propaganda
• Spies
• NSA

[aljhoa]

Here in
SEXPOSED
is shown capillary action of a tree branch.

Al

[rickoff]

A Presidential Executive Order, whether Constitutional or not, becomes law simply by its publication in the Federal Registry..... The President has the power to suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in a real or perceived emergency.

Executive order - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Al

Don't be fooled into thinking that whatever you read in Wikipedia are actual statements of fact. Wikipedia commonly misinforms the public, and attempts by readers to set a Wikipedia article straight are vehemently opposed. If objection to an article is strong enough and continues unabated, Wikipedia then simply shuts down any further discussion and closes the article to any edits.

What is stated above is totally contrary to US Supreme Court case law rulings, as you will clearly understand after reading the decisions in the cases noted below:

US. SUPREME COURT DECISION - "All laws, rules, and practices which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." [Marbury v. Madison]


(While the Marbury v. Madison decision makes it clear that no so-called "law" has any legitimacy if it is contrary to our Constitition, this is further explained in great detail in the case cited below):



US. SUPREME COURT DECISION - "The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose, since its unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment... In legal contemplation, it is as inoperative as if it had never been passed... Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no right, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection and justifies no acts performed under it... A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing law. Indeed insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land (the Constitution), it is superseded thereby. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it." [Bonnet v. Vallier]


(Below you will find another very important SCOTUS decision which trumps anyone's claim that the People can be denied their Constitutional liberties for any reason.):


US. SUPREME COURT DECISION - "The state cannot diminish rights of the people." [Hertado v. California]

(The reason that this decision is so powerful is that it means that any right which the People at one time freely exercised without any restrictions cannot be diminished or done away with by the imposition of any state or federal regulation which states otherwise. This principle of law is further expanded upon in the following SCOTUS decision):

US. SUPREME COURT DECISION - "If the state converts a liberty into a privilege the citizen can engage in the right with impunity." [Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham]


(For example, suppose that federal or state authorities come to your home and present you with an order to cease and desist from growing, harvesting, and selling vegetables from your land unless you agree to purchase an expensive "agricultural license" and pass certain state and/or federal qualifications. You know that you currently, or at least previously, had a right to engage in these activities as a commonly accepted liberty, but now the state and/or federal authorities are telling you, in effect, that you no longer have such a right - that henceforth it is considered a privilege afforded only to those who are willing to pay for the privilege and comply with their rules. As you can see, you have every right to tell those authorities that you will not comply, and that you will continue engaging in these activities because you understand your rights and the laws which secure those rights. You can recite the SCOTUS case law decisions found above, and once these authorities understand that you know your rights and that they are violating them, they will leave you alone. If they choose to persist, you may then file a QUO WARRANTO case against them which will ultimately result in them being fined and removed from their position, as well as likely serving time behind bars. All of the above SCOTUS decisions are extremely powerful and are available to us for our defense against overreaching and tyrannical government abuse if we will simply acknowledge their importance, understand how they protect us, and make use of them in fending off unjust attacks against our God given and Constitutionally guaranteed liberties.

[aljhoa]

A Presidential Executive Order, whether Constitutional or not, becomes law simply by its publication in the Federal Registry..... The President has the power to suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in a real or perceived emergency.

The above is from THE EXECUTIVE ORDER


Executive order
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Executive orders have the full force of law[1] when they take authority from a power granted directly to the Executive by the Constitution, or are made in pursuance of certain Acts of Congress which explicitly delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation). Like statutes or regulations promulgated by government agencies, executive orders are subject to judicial review, and may be struck down if deemed by the courts to be unsupported by statute or the Constitution. Major policy initiatives usually require approval by the legislative branch, but executive orders have significant influence over the internal affairs of government, deciding how and to what degree laws will be enforced, dealing with emergencies, waging war, and in general fine policy choices in the implementation of broad statutes,

Although there is no constitutional provision nor statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 5. Most executive orders use these Constitutional reasonings as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President's sworn duties,[2] the intent being to help direct officers of the U.S. Executive carry out their delegated duties as well as the normal operations of the federal government: the consequence of failing to comply possibly being the removal from office.[3]

An executive order of the President must find support in the Constitution, either in a clause granting the President specific power, or by a delegation of power by Congress to the President. 343 U.S. 579, 585. Antieau, Modern Constitutional Law,§13:24 (1969)
Executive order - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Governor’s Corner

In 1993 we discovered the original jurisdiction State governors’ seats were vacated; because the states had formed corporate entities that provided greater power and control over the people. Thus, I (Eric William Madsen) ran for office in Colorado; and, in 1994, I was elected Governor by Colorado’s Electors. I lawfully accepted the election and was seated in the original jurisdiction Governor’s seat. At that same time, Roy Romer was elected as Governor of the more commonly recognized private corporation known as, “The State of Colorado” (Corp. State). The Corp. State courts then started to subpoena me to come and testify as Governor of the original jurisdiction Republic State “Colorado”. I responded to most those subpoenas and so testified. After finding it next to impossible to beat us in court, the Corp. State’s sub-corporation, for Arapaho County, determined that if they could get funding from the United States Congress they could possibly beat us.

In a separate legal action we secured all of the documents and records (reciepts, etc.) regarding their representatives’ trip to Congress. A review of those records showed, Congress sent the matter to the National Security Council who handed all of the records over to the Military’s Joint Chiefs for review. About two weeks later, the Chief of the Joint Chiefs responded to the the open Council: “What Governor Madsen is doing out their in Colorado is legal, lawful and correct; and, if they accomplish what they have set out to do we will recognize that President of The United States of America as the President of The United States of America, Commander in Chief of the military and give them full military support.” Though the National Security Council is purely an advisory committee, having no legislative or judicial effect, the fact remains—they recognized the truth and responded with it to Congress; who sent the supplicants away without funding. After that, the Corp. State started to leave us alone. The Corp. State (with its Govornor’s Office, Senate, courts and Department of Revenue), the United States 10th District Court, the United States Congress, the United States National Security Council and the Joint Chiefs (of the United States of America’s military) all recognized, reviewed and accepted my election as the original jurisdiction Governor of Colorado.

The main reason you see the problems our nation faces today is the people have forgotten what our actual government is and they instead act as if these private foreign controlled corporations (Corp. U.S. and the Corp. States) are their government. It’s why the States are not using our national money system. It’s why we are caught up in wars and rumors of war. It is why Corp. U.S. is exactly following the pattern set in Adolf Hitler’s Germany, most recently by setting up a national personal identification system and the “Homeland Security Police” system after the pattern of Hitler’s “State Security Police” the dreaded SS! It is why the Corp. U.S. Congress seated Barack Obama as their president even though he is not a natural born Citizen and cannot qulaify for the office.
TL: Governor’s Corner


Al

[dutchdivco]

Sounds to me,...

That an "Executive order" is like a STOP sign, in a parking lot, on private property. It has no legal basis, and you can't be ticketed for 'running' it. But, MOST people 'recognise' it, (and stop), either out of habit, or because they don't know or realise that it has no legal basis.

Seems to me I recall Lincoln suspended Habeous Corpus, and did several other things which are generally recognised as unconstitutional? Was this ever 'heard' and ruled on by the SCOTUS? And Roosevelts internment of Japanese Americans was also obviously Unconsitutional, but I'm pretty sure Scotus never ruled on that. Were these done as 'Executive orders'?

I think most people would see that there has to be SOME provision for the Govt. to have 'emergency powers' that it can draw on, in a genuine emergency. Declaring 'martial law' to stop rioting, or in some kind of 'natural disaster', or man-made for that matter, such as a Nuclear power plant going fuctupashima.

Obvious problems arise, tho. What happens if the Gov't. uses such things as an excuse? Any such action which is unconstitutional is STILL going to be in effect, until such time as it can be challenged before SCOTUS, which can take years. And, if no one challenges such authority, the authority 'stands'.

Much like the meaningless stop sign, on private property. Jim

[dutchdivco]

On the fallacy of 'key words'

Gavin De Becker, in his book "The GIFT of fear" gives this example;

SKIN PEEL RIP WARNING BLOOD KILL MUTILATE BOMB
If these words were used in an e-mail, one might conclude it is a threatening e-mail, but as you'll see, context is everything.

"The whole car trip I was cold rght down to my skin. The wind would rip along so hard I thought it would peel the roof off. And heres a warning; Don't ever travel with relatives. Blood may be thicker than water, but trying to kill time listening to Uncle Harry's mutilated jokes bomb was just too much"

Coversely, look at this list of words and the context in which they appear;
TIDY PRETTY FLOWERS BEAUTIFUL WELCOME

"Tidy up your affairs and buy some pretty flowers, because GODhas ordered me to take you to his beautiful place, where he is anxious to welcome you."

Then he gives this example from his own files;
"As I walked with you ysterday, the sheer grace of your body thrilled me. Your beauty gives me a starting point for appreciating all other beauty,in a flower or a stream. I sometimes cannot tell where you let off and the beauty of nature begins, and all I want to feel is your body and shaee my love with you."

Romantic, and not particularly creepy, until you learn it was written by a 53 y.o. man, to thye 10 y.o. daughter of a neighbor. Its all in the context.

So, if we assume the NSA IS using a 'keyword' program, to screen all e-mails, the thing to do is for EVERYONE to use these words, in ALL their e-mails; the algorythm in the computers would 'flag' the e-mail, and then a person would have to read the e-mail, in order to get the context, and detirmine if it is a 'threat'. Once they find out is is the equivalent of someone talking about a cold car trip with relatives, they would dismiss it, of coarse., but they don't have the manpower to screen millions of e-mails, and so the whole program would be bogged down. So, if you really disapprove of what the NSA is doing, get busy writiing 'harmless' e-mails containing the 'key words', encourage everyone else to do the same, and 'we' can shut the program down. Jim

[dutchdivco]

Rick

Went to the 'STAND UP, AMERICA' site you posted the link to. I didn't see anything about the 13th amendment, and why it is not legitimate, or about this alternative Constitutional Gov't. you are talking about.
Sorry if i've asked this before, but is there a website which clearly lays the whole thing out; why/how the 13th amendment is illegitimate, and why/how the whole Corp. U.S. is also illegitmate, and how patriots are going about electing representatives and govenors, in order to restore a Costitutional Government, both at the state and Federal level?Jim

[rickoff]

So, if we assume the NSA IS using a 'keyword' program, to screen all e-mails, the thing to do is for EVERYONE to use these words, in ALL their e-mails; the algorythm in the computers would 'flag' the e-mail, and then a person would have to read the e-mail, in order to get the context, and detirmine if it is a 'threat'. Once they find out is is the equivalent of someone talking about a cold car trip with relatives, they would dismiss it, of coarse., but they don't have the manpower to screen millions of e-mails, and so the whole program would be bogged down. So, if you really disapprove of what the NSA is doing, get busy writiing 'harmless' e-mails containing the 'key words', encourage everyone else to do the same, and 'we' can shut the program down. Jim

Yes, that's an excellent idea, Jim, and it could easily be accomplished by writing up and distributing a message that everyone could forward to everyone in their e-mail address book, and asking receivers to similarly pass it along. Here are the words once again:

• Freedom
• Bet
• Chosen
• Fraud
• Codes
• Eavesdropping
• Government
• Maverick
• President
• Propaganda
• Spies
• NSA

Now let's see if I can somehow arrange the above words into just a few innocent sounding sentences:

"My wife and I were watching CSPAN on the TV and they were taking calls from concerned viewers on a wide range of topics, such as the NSA eavesdropping on Americans, government gridlock, voting fraud, Putin's clever use of propaganda, comparing Edward Snowden's actions to those of spies such as Alrich Ames, and possible candidates for President in the 2016 elections. While we thought it was rather interesting, our kids said they would rather be watching something else, so we allowed them the freedom to watch TV in another room, where their chosen show was the movie Maverick. I'd consider it a safe bet to assume that our teenagers would prefer to be watching something R-rated, but I took the liberty to enter special parental codes in the remote which prevent them from watching such material."

Three sentences - not bad, huh? Perhaps someone else could pare that down even more, but this should serve as an example. Of course when you send a message like this, which utilizes all 12 red flagged words, the agency computers probably go berserk and you definitely are tagged for further scrutiny. That would no doubt include reading all your past, present, and future e-mails, placing you on a suspected terrorist 'no-fly' list, and other measures. Of course they have probably targeted most of us in this manner already, so it wouldn't come as a surprise.

[rickoff]

Went to the 'STAND UP, AMERICA' site you posted the link to. I didn't see anything about the 13th amendment, and why it is not legitimate, or about this alternative Constitutional Gov't. you are talking about.

That's probably because I never said that you would find anything about those items at the StandUpAmerica website. I gave that link for people interested in participating in the "vote of no confidence" that Major General Vallely is spearheading.

Sorry if I asked this before, but is there a website which clearly lays the whole thing out; why/how the 13th amendment is illegitimate, and why/how the whole Corp. U.S. is also illegitimate, and how patriots are going about electing representatives and governors, in order to restore a Constitutional Government, both at the state and Federal level?Jim

We have in fact talked about all of this herein, and you might go back to posts #2011 and 2012 to refresh your memory. You can also go back to read my in-depth assessment of the 13th Amendment issue, which is found in post #164. That post shows a copy of the revised constitutions of Virginia and the United States which the Virginia legislature voted to have published and sent to the US Department of State, and which is notated at the top of the cover page as "property of the Department of State" and bearing a handwritten date of August 1821. It certainly would seem that the Virginia legislature, at some point prior to this publication, voted to ratify the original 13th Amendment, know as the "Titles of Nobility Act, or TONA." Corrupt elements within the government began scheming, shortly after the Civil War, to obliterate all records of the TONA having been ratified and published as part of the US Constitution, and substituting in its place what is now regarded by historians as being the 13th Amendment, but which should actually be the 14th. It appears that they were nearly successful in doing so, but in more recent times researchers have found several surviving publications showing that the TONA was definitely included in the US Constitution. I believe that the first such record to have surfaced was actually found in Belfast, Maine (about a half hour drive from where I live), and that is an 1825 publication which is seen in the below image:


This is a split image, with the left side showing the cover page and the right side showing what appears to be page 45 of the text, and which clearly shows that "Article XIII," (13th Amendment) had been added to the Constitution. Several other published instances have been found in archives of the states that ratified TONA, as well as the National Archives and archives of the British Museum. Even more telling, in my opinion, is the fact that Connecticut, which had rejected the TONA in 1813, issued two separate editions of their laws with the TONA Amendment included. It wouldn't make any sense for Connecticut to have published a law which they had rejected as being included in the US Constitution without first demanding an unquestionable verification that TONA had been ratified. The fact that all of these publications exist speaks volumes (no pun intended) about the deceit and corruption of those who schemed to bury TONA and replace it. Had TONA remained as the accepted 13th Amendment, it would have practically eliminated any corruption in government, because it imposed very strong penalties upon any government official who would accept gifts, bribes, titles, or an office which was in addition to their government role. It would virtually have eliminated lawyers ("esquires") from holding office, and the penalty for accepting any of the items mentioned would have been both loss of citizenship and being barred from holding any government position. And this is exactly what should have happened to Barry for accepting the office of UN chair, and accepting the foreign monetary "award" which came with the Nobel Peace Prize. More information regarding the original 13th Amendment can be found in the article The Demon of Discord.

About Corporation U.S.: It was not illegitimate for the government to form this corporation for the purpose of carrying out the business interests of the government. What is wrong with Corp. U.S. is that it is no longer under control of a lawful government of the United States of America. To learn more about this, here are some links:

Corporation U.S. Mythology: This link will provide links to information about the top ten myths and misconceptions regarding the formation and operations of Corp. U.S.

Historical Outline: This link will provide you with a chronological timeline of the events in U.S. history which have led to the demise of our nation and caused us to lose our original jurisdiction government.

Governor's Corner: This link will provide information about the success of lawfully electing governors in all 48 original jurisdiction states, and will describe how the plan now focuses on having those governors appoint U.S. senators to fill all the o.j. Senate seats, which are currently vacant. Also explained is how all current members of Congress will be dethroned and ejected, allowing the lawful original jurisdiction government to take over at the reins until such time as a new and fairly held national election can be held. Perhaps the best news of all under this scenario is that all national debt would be immediately canceled, and this is because the original jurisdiction government was not a party to the debt that has been established. That debt was incurred by Corporation U.S., which is solely responsible for repayment of it, as well as for repayment to the American People of the wealth which Corp U.S. has deceitfully pilfered from us.

[aljhoa]

Corporation U.S. Mythology: This link will provide links to information about the top ten myths and misconceptions regarding the formation and operations of Corp. U.S.

Corp. U.S’. Myth 1:
The District of Columbia Act of 1871 incorporated the municipal government of the District of Columbia into a municipal corporation.
We find no legal or lawful problem with the formation of Corp. U.S.; as shown above, the Constitution provided Congress with the authority to pass any law within the ten mile square of the District of Columbia; however, with the creation of such a thing; the people would have to remain more vigilant to make sure that such a corporation was not used to extend authoritarian power beyond bounds of said District to usurp authoritarian styled power over the people of the nation by force.

Corp. U.S’. Myth 7:
The Government of the United States of America went bankrupt in 1933.
Soon, we will flesh out this article with the elements that prove the facts of this myth. Meanwhile, please remember, Team Law is here to help you learn how to learn the Law; so, you can apply it to preserve your freedom and our nation.
Corp. U.S. Mythology



The Bankruptcy of The United States


Al

[aljhoa]

Governor’s Corner

The main reason you see the problems our nation faces today is the people have forgotten what our actual government is and they instead act as if these private foreign controlled corporations (Corp. U.S. and the Corp. States) are their government. It’s why the States are not using our national money system. It’s why we are caught up in wars and rumors of war. It is why Corp. U.S. is exactly following the pattern set in Adolf Hitler’s Germany, most recently by setting up a national personal identification system and the “Homeland Security Police” system after the pattern of Hitler’s “State Security Police” the dreaded SS! It is why the Corp. U.S. Congress seated Barack Obama as their president even though he is not a natural born Citizen and cannot qulaify for the office.
TL: Governor’s Corner

The Transnational Superclass

Even deeper inside the 1 percent of wealthy elites is what David Rothkopf calls the superclass.
David Rothkopf, former managing director of Kissinger Associates and deputy undersecretary of commerce for international trade policies, published his book Superclass: the Global Power Elite and the World They Are Making, in 2008.[xxxii]
According to Rothkopf, the superclass constitutes approximately 0.0001 percent of the world’s population, comprised of 6,000 to 7,000 people—some say 6,660. They are the Davos-attending, Gulfstream/private jet–flying, money-incrusted, megacorporation-interlocked, policy-building elites of the world, people at the absolute peak of the global power pyramid.
They are 94 percent male, predominantly white, and mostly from North America and Europe.
These are the people setting the agendas at the Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg Group, G-8, G-20, NATO, the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization.
https://www.nexusmagazine.com/articl...-class-exposed


Al

[rickoff]

The numbers are in

According to numbers released yesterday by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, only 24 percent – or 489,460 – of the 2.2 million people who signed up for ACA were in the coveted 18-to-34 age range. This shows that ObummerCare registrations have only hit 18 percent of the stated goal of registering 2.7 million adults in the 18-to-34 age range.

Experts have predicted that the ObummerCare program will need roughly 40 percent of enrollees to be in that 18-34 prime demographic in order to be fiscally solvent. As things stand, enrollees aged 55 to 64 make up 33 percent of the total number of Americans who signed up, which is by far the largest group represented in the data.

It is quite obvious that people in the 18-34 age group don't see ObummerCare as a good deal for them. A lot of that may have to do with the fact that young folks can now remain on their parents' health insurance to age 26. Therefore, what incentive would anyone under the age of 27 have to sign up for their own policy? With that in mind, the 18-34 age group actually becomes a 27-34 (8 year) age group, and this small group is being counted upon to shoulder 40% of the healthcare costs of this nation? How absurd!