I've been thinking about the subject of Words again recently, and the notion that they can’t hurt us – what a friggin crock o’ crap that is! The manipulation and redefinition of reality through words, has nearly destroyed the system of the most powerful nation on earth. A Nation founded upon Liberty and Freedom, founded through the ideas of Classical Liberalism, merely by the shaving and spinning of words by dishonest people who wish to bury reality and all that is good and beautiful and true.
Our Founding Fathers were THE Classical Liberals, devoted to the free and independent soul of Man, and the belief that a free and virtuous people would be a prosperous light unto themselves and to the world.
They, and we, are now routinely smeared, reviled and apologized for by an un… no… Anti-American President of the United States of America, belittling our history and our principles, and abandoning our allies, to an audience of thugs, murderers and dictators at the U.N..
We’ve allowed our message of freedom and liberty to be stolen, STOLEN, by a bunch of God Damned ignorant fools and/or demagogues, intent on swindling the American people, and by extension the world, of their Individual Rights, in exchange for trinkets and pittances tossed at their needs.
How in the hell have we allowed this to happen?
How did we allow the focus to be taken off of what was truly important, taken off of the core of our message, and put instead upon an incidental by-product, ‘capital’? We now confine ourselves to talk about political parties, talk about business practices and policies, we talk about money and it's management- and in the process freedom and liberty are lost in the shuffle.
Karl Marx tagged us with the name "Capitalism", and we took it, and they ran(t) with it.
This has been bugging me for awhile, and it came to a head recently in some discussions on One Cosmos and The Gunslinger, last night especially after skimming back through Jean Baptiste Say's A Catechism of Political Economy and his "A Treatise on Political Economy", which focuses as it does on the decisions and choices of free people, such as this:
"No one, however, has ever denied that the writings of the economists have uniformly been favourable to the strictest morality, and to the liberty which every human being ought to possess, of disposing of his person, fortune, and talents, according to the bent of his inclination; without which, indeed, individual happiness and national prosperity are but empty and unmeaning sounds. These opinions alone entitle their authors to universal gratitude and esteem. I do not, moreover, believe that a dishonest man or bad citizen can be found among their number...
and,
...The best mode of retaining and attracting mankind is, to treat them with justice and benevolence; to protect every one in the enjoyment of the rights he regards with the highest reverence; to allow the free disposition of person and property, the liberty of continuing or changing his residence, of speaking, reading, and writing in perfect security."
This, our world changing movement, from the very beginning, was the argument from and for our side, the side of mankind, and it seems to me that if we ever want to regain our rightful position in the argument between freedom and tyranny, our argument needs to come again from where it began - standing shoulder to shoulder with people like Jean Baptiste Say, Frederic Bastiat, Richard Cobden, John Bright, Frederick Douglass... these were people who passionately fought for liberty, people devoted to freedom, activists for Individual Rights and against the arbitrary, dehumanizing power of illiberal govt ... that is the true heart and soul of 'Capitalism'... Classical Liberalism was highly focused upon liberty and morality and the prosperity and happiness they could and would foster - how stupid are we to allow not only the name, but the issue of true freedom to get redefined out from under our intellectual feet.
Leftists at root, as I have argued over and again in the past, from its modern roots in Descartes, is a philosophy of assertions, attempts to redefine reality as they wishes it were. They have NO arguments that are rooted in reality, the closest, and last honest attempt (though completely in error) was Hume's, whose argument was that we could not know reality!
THIS IS THE PITIFUL QUALITY OF OUR ENEMIES! AND YET WE CEDE THE ARGUMENT... TO THEM!?
WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I for one am damn sick of it, and not the least reason why, is that they are unable and unworthy to win any reasoned argument with us!
You will not find a single leftist who will argue their positions back down to that issues roots in reality. They will first attempt to equivocate on terms such as ‘freedom’, ‘equality’, ‘a hungry man is not free’ and the like. As you call them on that, they will come back by with further attempts at conflating ‘Needs’ with ‘Rights’, as FDR attempted to overshadow our Bill of Rights, with his warm bowl of crap ‘economic bill of rights’ - nothing but slavery all dolled up in a pretence of manners. And that is just about the end of their possible zigs and zags, because when you ask them to define what Rights are, they are fully self disarmed - they have nothing, no Reasoning whatsoever with which they can answer.
Supplying sound Reasons for Individual Rights, requires a sound basis in and reference to Reality and the nature of Man, and a firm disallowing of the arbitrary; Americanism - Classical Liberalism - is firmly rooted in the concept that reality is real, and that we can know it, and that Truth is discovered through our knowledge and understanding of what is real, and it will always end up with Political Rights rooted in Property Rights.
The only possible way to propose ‘Needs’ as being equal to or superior to Individual Rights, is through a series of bald faced, arbitrary assertions and equivocations, and a denial of our ever being able to know reality… and forcing that admission out of them will not come easy.
Before you ever hear them admit their intellectual and moral bankruptcy, you will first receive a full ration of belittling insults and slurs. You will be called an idiot, a fool, a pawn of the rich, racist, a bigot, a cold hearted meanie who just hates the poor and the minorities.
For the moderns, Reality isn't knowable and 'truth' is negotiable (Kant gave this position respectability... nothing true in his tomes, but he gave explanations so long and convoluted that everyone agreed to agree on what he said they meant, so that other people wouldn't think you were too stupid to understand him).
Any pressing argument with a leftist (democrat or republican (yeah, John McCain, Teddy Roosevelt, Mit Romney (B.S. he's a conservative), etc) must end in assertions and insults on their part, because they have no way to tie their arguments back to reality - Reality was not their starting point!
Their starting point is what they thought sounded pretty, and your challenging them on it sounds no different to them than calling them ugly (which their thoughts are, but that's beside the point) - their opinions are noting but opinion. They have no reasoning behind them, and when cornered by Reason they respond as does any unreasoning creature - by attacking.
It is the source of our modern plague of xspurts - the Proregressives version of an aristocracy -, people who think their conclusions are so purty, they just must be true, and true everywhere, regardless of silly considerations such as the context of a situation. Rather than discover and apply principles, which enable each person to consistently determine the best course of action in each situation, and be free to choose it, they prefer to force everyone to apply their prefabricated conclusions to every conceivable situation.
A prime example from the above comments at The Gunslingers, "Guns are dangerous? Well... then... only experts and professionals should be allowed to have or use them! Yep, I 'very clearly and distinctly conceive that must be true, so it MUST be! ", and another proregressive platform is born.
The proregressive leftist will always assert Conclusions over Principles - top down enforced stupidity, it is the leftist way.
The Ugly Truth
Our meekly having gone along with Marx's stamping of Liberalism as "Capitalism", and the proregressives later absconding of the name 'liberalism' after the embarrassment of Woodrow Wilson's proregressive distopia... enabled them to dehumanize us right off the bat. It took the emphasis off of living a full and prosperous life, and allowed it to be set on the material. On money, on business practices, mgmt policies... we gave up the fight before it was even engaged.
We deserve to be slapped... and worse... WE have let Freedom and Liberty down.
It is high time to fight back, and start with not allowing words to be misused, treat political correctness as the assault on reality, on truth and beauty, that it is. If you are a janitor, and some metrosexual calls you a 'Sanitation Engineer', slap them for the insult it was, and for the violence they did to reality.
When a leftist thug asserts that they are for more freedom through schemes such as healthcontrol, remind them of Calvin Coolidge's speech on the meaning of the Declaration of Independence, during his efforts at cleaning up Wilson's mess,
"About the Declaration there is a finality that is exceedingly restful. It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning can not be applied to this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction can not lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient, than those of the Revolutionary fathers."
Words must not be allowed to be misused, Words must not be allowed to distort reality, for they can most definitely hurt you – forbid it in your presence!
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Nothing but FCC approved Nuts on the NET?!!!
As they say, the leftist hand you see is only the one they are distracting you with. What the UN, global warming, even Cap & Trade, etc, does is insignificant compared to this, from the American Spectator
"SO LONG, FREEDOM
Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski will announce today his intent to put in place rules that would allow the federal government to regulate the Internet. In a coordinated move to highlight the decision, and to take credit with the left-wing supporters of the policy, known as "net neutrality," FCC sources say, President Obama will make remarks after Genachowski's remarks, endorsing the FCC chairman's decision.
"We couldn't give them a Guantanamo shut down, or ending the Patriot Act, so this is the immediate payoff to MoveOn and Free Press and the those guys who worked so hard for us during the campaign," says a White House source. "Getting 'net neutrality' codified and under out control was at the top of their list of things for us to do." "
Net 'Nutrality' Must be stopped! Where does anyone think the Tea Party movement would be, let alone Gateway Pundit or any of the other Blogs with freedom badges,with Govt deciding what sites warranted bandwidth, and which sites didn't?!
IMHO the "Fairness Doctrine" or any mutation of it, pales in comparison to this. AM radio is mostly one way info, it doesn't enable people to communicate and organize - only the Internet could make possible the Tea Party movements and their effects DC is so furious at.
THIS is war, and they know it!
As the Spectator article goes on to say,
""For them to say that this isn't government regulation, that this is just about fairness and giving everyone the same thing, is just not true," says a Republican Energy and Commerce staffer, who has been working on the issue of "net neutrality" for several years. "Someone has to be monitoring all those networks, all that activity to make sure the networks remain 'neutral.' Who is that going to be? Free Press? George Soros?"
In fact, a representative of the left-wing organization known as Free Press will be present at the Genachowski speech. Free Press, which continues to stand by former White House Obama adviser Van Jones, who served its board, shares its roots with the MoveOn organization, and has received funds from George Soros and funds from senior Google executives, actually wrote large portions of the Markey-Eshoo net neutrality bill, which was introduced in Congress just before the summer recess in August. "
Seriously, we lose this and... if we don't lose it all soon after, it'll be pure luck.
I was shocked that neither our local Tea Party coalition, nor Gateway Pundit has anything up on this... IT IS HUGE!!!
Call your congressmen & senators, call the radio shows, raise a ruckus!
"SO LONG, FREEDOM
Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski will announce today his intent to put in place rules that would allow the federal government to regulate the Internet. In a coordinated move to highlight the decision, and to take credit with the left-wing supporters of the policy, known as "net neutrality," FCC sources say, President Obama will make remarks after Genachowski's remarks, endorsing the FCC chairman's decision.
"We couldn't give them a Guantanamo shut down, or ending the Patriot Act, so this is the immediate payoff to MoveOn and Free Press and the those guys who worked so hard for us during the campaign," says a White House source. "Getting 'net neutrality' codified and under out control was at the top of their list of things for us to do." "
Net 'Nutrality' Must be stopped! Where does anyone think the Tea Party movement would be, let alone Gateway Pundit or any of the other Blogs with freedom badges,with Govt deciding what sites warranted bandwidth, and which sites didn't?!
IMHO the "Fairness Doctrine" or any mutation of it, pales in comparison to this. AM radio is mostly one way info, it doesn't enable people to communicate and organize - only the Internet could make possible the Tea Party movements and their effects DC is so furious at.
THIS is war, and they know it!
As the Spectator article goes on to say,
""For them to say that this isn't government regulation, that this is just about fairness and giving everyone the same thing, is just not true," says a Republican Energy and Commerce staffer, who has been working on the issue of "net neutrality" for several years. "Someone has to be monitoring all those networks, all that activity to make sure the networks remain 'neutral.' Who is that going to be? Free Press? George Soros?"
In fact, a representative of the left-wing organization known as Free Press will be present at the Genachowski speech. Free Press, which continues to stand by former White House Obama adviser Van Jones, who served its board, shares its roots with the MoveOn organization, and has received funds from George Soros and funds from senior Google executives, actually wrote large portions of the Markey-Eshoo net neutrality bill, which was introduced in Congress just before the summer recess in August. "
Seriously, we lose this and... if we don't lose it all soon after, it'll be pure luck.
I was shocked that neither our local Tea Party coalition, nor Gateway Pundit has anything up on this... IT IS HUGE!!!
Call your congressmen & senators, call the radio shows, raise a ruckus!
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Net Neutrality: Internet Control to InterNet Loss
"...The U.S. government plans to propose broad new rules Monday that would force Internet providers to treat all Web traffic equally..." (Hat Tip to "The Gunslinger")
The proposals for 'Net Neutrality' will soon after mean Net control, and eventually a Net loss - this is potentially Far worse than a new A.M. Radio Fairness Doctrine (which, btw, is next in the obama hopper of "to be implemented by other means" items).
Without the Internet, Talk Radio may have raised a ruckus over healthcontrol, but there would have been no sustained Tea Party movement as we have today - and proregressive regulators know it.
There doesn't need to be a law made to outlaw dissent. All that needs to be done, is to cause the chief forum for dissent to collapse, and there will be no more effective dissent - and that is what this measure (and those which would soon follow, 'improving' it) is guaranteed to accomplish.
Forget about the supposed details and distractions, forget about who is supporting it and who is opposing it. If you want to see how it works out when the Govt steps in to make a 'fairer' distribution of traffic and access, of what happens to the industry as a whole, take a look at how the 'help' they gave to the railroad industry worked out.
Don't fool yourself into thinking that Airlines ended railroad travel, they capitalized on the mess which ended up with a Govt subsidized Amtrak being all that remains of a once vibrant industry and service (and with poetic justice, they were targeted by regulators next - like to complain about airline service? Send the thanks to your Govt - you listening O'Reilly?).
Or if you want a single demonstration and explanation of what it will be, and how it will work, read Atlas Shrugged. The joke of the book, is that all the regulations and directives by Govt thugs to 'aid' the railroad industry... they were fiction in name only! They mirror actual laws, regulations & agencies actually put into place to more fairly distribute rail traffic, and reduced it to having its only business being essentially heavy transport alone.
This bill is no different in it's planned inception, or what will be guaranteed to follow in it's footsteps.
If you value the Internet, SAVE it from the threat of Govt Help! Contact your Congressmen and contact your Senators!
Forget about the supposed details and distractions, forget about who is supporting it and who is opposing it. If you want to see how it works out when the Govt steps in to make a 'fairer' distribution of traffic and access, of what happens to the industry as a whole, take a look at how the 'help' they gave to the railroad industry worked out.
Don't fool yourself into thinking that Airlines ended railroad travel, they capitalized on the mess which ended up with a Govt subsidized Amtrak being all that remains of a once vibrant industry and service (and with poetic justice, they were targeted by regulators next - like to complain about airline service? Send the thanks to your Govt - you listening O'Reilly?).
Or if you want a single demonstration and explanation of what it will be, and how it will work, read Atlas Shrugged. The joke of the book, is that all the regulations and directives by Govt thugs to 'aid' the railroad industry... they were fiction in name only! They mirror actual laws, regulations & agencies actually put into place to more fairly distribute rail traffic, and reduced it to having its only business being essentially heavy transport alone.
This bill is no different in it's planned inception, or what will be guaranteed to follow in it's footsteps.
If you value the Internet, SAVE it from the threat of Govt Help! Contact your Congressmen and contact your Senators!
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Birthdate of Liberty: Preserving the Right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness
Tomorrow, Sept 17th, 1787, is the birth date of the Constitution of the United States of America, which was designed, and amended, to provide a framework for governing a free and moral people, who for the first time in history, were to be able to live as human beings - free.
Today, Sept 16th, 2009, Senator Baucus released his healthcontrol plan for the Govt takeover of the healthcare industry, and by extension, nearly every personal choice remaining to us in our lives (I haven't been able to make a detailed examination of it yet, but download the .pdf and run searches for "prohibit", "contribut" (most cases 'contribute' and 'contribution' can be read as PC for Tax or Fee) - and you'll begin to get a view nearly as chilling as the House Bill which I dug into here), and which would spell the effective end of "Government of the people, by the people and for the people".
Today, the misshapen descendants of our Founding Fathers, who they would have recognized as their oft dreaded and foretold "Debased Posterity", are busy churning out plans to extend - like candy to children - a new 'right' to health care, in order to rob us of our rights - and worse.
Yesteryear, our Founding Fathers designed a sound framework for governing, and then after lengthy debate, available to us in the greatest extended political discussion in the history of mankind, The Federalist Papers, and the Anti-Federalist Papers, the Constitution was accepted, with the proviso that certain vital amendments were to be written and submitted to ratification by the states, to protect vital rights of the people.
One question: Why was a vital 'right' such as Health care, not included in those first 10 amendments known as The Bill of Rights?
Why were obviously more vital 'rights' such as food, shelter, clothing, jobs... why weren't they included in those amendments?
Of all the many Rights included under the concept of Individual Rights, why were only a few selected? And why were the ones that were selected, selected, and not the others?
The Right to political free speech, the right to practice (or not) your own religion as you saw fit, the right to peaceably assemble, the right to bare arms, , to be secure in your home and possessions and to be free from unlawful search and seizure, the right to due process, to be safe from double jeopardy and self incrimination, trial by jury under objective laws, to be free from the imposition of excessive bail, fines and cruel and unusual punishment... and why list a right that did nothing but say there were other rights not listed that can't be denied or disparaged... and though unnamed, were retained by the people??? Or again, that there were other unnamed rights, which were reserved to the States, and to the people again? What was that about?
Why list add the amendments listing those rights, and then add the Ninth and Tenth amendments, which essentially list other rights by not naming them, and claim these unnamed rights belonged to the states and to the people? Why do all that, and yet not list any of the the 'rights' so important to proregressive leftists, such as the (abominable) 'economic bill of rights', and 'rights' to health care, ala FDR, Obama... & Baucus?
Today, the misshapen descendants of our Founding Fathers, who they would have recognized as their oft dreaded and foretold "Debased Posterity", are busy churning out plans to extend - like candy to children - a new 'right' to health care, in order to rob us of our rights - and worse.
Yesteryear, our Founding Fathers designed a sound framework for governing, and then after lengthy debate, available to us in the greatest extended political discussion in the history of mankind, The Federalist Papers, and the Anti-Federalist Papers, the Constitution was accepted, with the proviso that certain vital amendments were to be written and submitted to ratification by the states, to protect vital rights of the people.
One question: Why was a vital 'right' such as Health care, not included in those first 10 amendments known as The Bill of Rights?
Why were obviously more vital 'rights' such as food, shelter, clothing, jobs... why weren't they included in those amendments?
Of all the many Rights included under the concept of Individual Rights, why were only a few selected? And why were the ones that were selected, selected, and not the others?
The Right to political free speech, the right to practice (or not) your own religion as you saw fit, the right to peaceably assemble, the right to bare arms, , to be secure in your home and possessions and to be free from unlawful search and seizure, the right to due process, to be safe from double jeopardy and self incrimination, trial by jury under objective laws, to be free from the imposition of excessive bail, fines and cruel and unusual punishment... and why list a right that did nothing but say there were other rights not listed that can't be denied or disparaged... and though unnamed, were retained by the people??? Or again, that there were other unnamed rights, which were reserved to the States, and to the people again? What was that about?
Why list add the amendments listing those rights, and then add the Ninth and Tenth amendments, which essentially list other rights by not naming them, and claim these unnamed rights belonged to the states and to the people? Why do all that, and yet not list any of the the 'rights' so important to proregressive leftists, such as the (abominable) 'economic bill of rights', and 'rights' to health care, ala FDR, Obama... & Baucus?
First off, of course, not being children, they didn't mistake needs for Rights, and I won't say anything further about such idiocies on this day.
Secondly, because these were men who understood history, who had a working knowledge of philosophy and law and first hand experience with tyranny. They knew Rights were not bestowed by Govt, but were already possessed by man in his nature as man, that we were "Endowed by our Creator" with these inalienable Rights, and that all men were all created equally with these rights.
The Founding Fathers, benefiting from not being burdened by over a century of public education and over a half century of Main (yellow) Stream Media, they were not deluded into thinking that Govt had ANYTHING to do with bestowing 'Rights'... the Bill Of Rights were designed to protect those particular Rights because they knew that no Tyrant could ever make a successfull rise to power, while they were still safely retained by We The People.
This is the 'secret' that has been chipped away at by over a century of assertions of a 'living constitution' and 'economic bill of rights' and other schemes by proregressive leftist demagogues seeking power at the cost of your precious individual rights, rights which you possess in your bones, and which the Constitution and its amendments were designed to see that you retained.
President Obama, Senator Harry Reid, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and nearly all of the 535 Senators & Representatives, as well as much of the Judiciary and regulatory bureaucracy are trying their damnedest to trade you a lolly pop of specious 'benefits', in exchange for your rights and liberty, as the political perverts they truly are.
Fight them! Stand up for your Constitution! Men and Women far better than most of us, pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to make it possible, for the first time in history, for a people to live as human beings were meant to live - Free! Millions of young men and women have died in our battles and wars defending your right to keep predatory govt's - foreign and domestic - at arms length from your precious Rights.
The Founding Fathers, benefiting from not being burdened by over a century of public education and over a half century of Main (yellow) Stream Media, they were not deluded into thinking that Govt had ANYTHING to do with bestowing 'Rights'... the Bill Of Rights were designed to protect those particular Rights because they knew that no Tyrant could ever make a successfull rise to power, while they were still safely retained by We The People.
This is the 'secret' that has been chipped away at by over a century of assertions of a 'living constitution' and 'economic bill of rights' and other schemes by proregressive leftist demagogues seeking power at the cost of your precious individual rights, rights which you possess in your bones, and which the Constitution and its amendments were designed to see that you retained.
President Obama, Senator Harry Reid, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and nearly all of the 535 Senators & Representatives, as well as much of the Judiciary and regulatory bureaucracy are trying their damnedest to trade you a lolly pop of specious 'benefits', in exchange for your rights and liberty, as the political perverts they truly are.
Fight them! Stand up for your Constitution! Men and Women far better than most of us, pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to make it possible, for the first time in history, for a people to live as human beings were meant to live - Free! Millions of young men and women have died in our battles and wars defending your right to keep predatory govt's - foreign and domestic - at arms length from your precious Rights.
Remember most of all that these Rights are not merely the dry, dusty chits of academics and politicians to be used in their contests. These Rights are vital not only to your Liberty and Freedom, but to your very soul.
Stand up for them in the only way you really can - by learning what they are and what they mean and how they Must be defended - and do it!
Stand up for them in the only way you really can - by learning what they are and what they mean and how they Must be defended - and do it!
Monday, September 14, 2009
One lump or two? What next as the Tea Party brew strengthens
"...maybe it’s best left in its natural decentralized structures as they are now, each ‘chapter’ communicating, debating, but putting their own public pressure on their local pol’s… kind of a new situation we need to give some thought to.
We shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that we have had many, many political parties, and presidents elected under them… Whigs, Federalists, Democratic-Republican, Know Nothings (!)… but in this current political climate, I just can’t see it being helpful or successful – better to have people who are united on principles, though not necessarily on their application (remember Madison & Hamilton agreed on principles, but violently disagreed on applying them), finding, screening and nailing or promoting, candidates through the existing parties..."
and I think those initial thoughts are still the lines along which it needs to go. No new Party is necessary, needed or wise - as the Who said, that just ends up as 'Meet the new boss, same as the old boss'. And I don't think it needs to push candidates in the GOP, or the Dems for that matter.
What I think, is that it needs to remain it's own, non-affiliated (though obviously 'conservative' in the constitutional sense), 'Voice of the people', of those who usually don't bother to speak up and make nuisances of themselves. A sustained grass roots voice of 'We The People' which will target idiotic corruptions of our government, weak knee'd or hypocritical legislators, judges and bureaucrats, and bring the focus of Govt back down to the ground of Individual Rights, Property Rights and objective, Constitutional Law.
Something else to note about the Tea Party movement, it has been noted that patriotism caught fire after 9/11 - for a time, and now again with the Bush/Obama abuses of bailouts, tax and spend and healthcontrol issues... as if those events somehow manufactured responses from a cross section of America, in and of themselves. I disagree.
These events didn't generate responses in the people at all. These events were only those rare moments when something on the national level reflected the existing ideals and convictions of the vast majority of Americans; and thrilled to see one of these rare moments when the MSM took note of their values, their in every way normal responses, widespread across America, were visible, and the MSM could not ignore it.
These are the people who normally don't want to be bothered with public issues, the people who'd just assume turn their backs and walk away when the local blowhards and loudmouths begin spouting off. But this time, they are beginning to realize that the blowhards can't be ignored any longer, that they are actually doing damage to the nation and principles which they value.
and I think those initial thoughts are still the lines along which it needs to go. No new Party is necessary, needed or wise - as the Who said, that just ends up as 'Meet the new boss, same as the old boss'. And I don't think it needs to push candidates in the GOP, or the Dems for that matter.
What I think, is that it needs to remain it's own, non-affiliated (though obviously 'conservative' in the constitutional sense), 'Voice of the people', of those who usually don't bother to speak up and make nuisances of themselves. A sustained grass roots voice of 'We The People' which will target idiotic corruptions of our government, weak knee'd or hypocritical legislators, judges and bureaucrats, and bring the focus of Govt back down to the ground of Individual Rights, Property Rights and objective, Constitutional Law.
Something else to note about the Tea Party movement, it has been noted that patriotism caught fire after 9/11 - for a time, and now again with the Bush/Obama abuses of bailouts, tax and spend and healthcontrol issues... as if those events somehow manufactured responses from a cross section of America, in and of themselves. I disagree.
These events didn't generate responses in the people at all. These events were only those rare moments when something on the national level reflected the existing ideals and convictions of the vast majority of Americans; and thrilled to see one of these rare moments when the MSM took note of their values, their in every way normal responses, widespread across America, were visible, and the MSM could not ignore it.
These are the people who normally don't want to be bothered with public issues, the people who'd just assume turn their backs and walk away when the local blowhards and loudmouths begin spouting off. But this time, they are beginning to realize that the blowhards can't be ignored any longer, that they are actually doing damage to the nation and principles which they value.
With the WWW, the people are no longer reliant upon the MSM's momentary interest in an event, in order to be seen. Now, they can communicate and organize across the nation, and boy oh boy are they doing that! Check out 'Moderate in the Middle' and 'Gateway Pundit', estimates ranging from 1 to 2 million Tea Partier's gathering in Washington D.C. alone, not to mention hundreds of thousands more across the nation. Gateway Pundit also points out that Conservatives seem to be a lot neater than the lefties. The MSM is flabbergasted, because they are no longer able to end their visibility, now that their fickle attention and interests in novelty has tried to turn elsewhere.
People ask 'what happened to the 9/12 feeling', my answer is that nothing happened to it, it is and has always been there - even before 9/12 - in the past, it just had relied upon a MSM to take note of it, to be seen. That is no longer the case.
For the first time in history, the Remnant is able to communicate, to know that, as Glenn Beck put it earlier this year, 'We surround them'. For the first time in history, the Remnant may be able to turn the tide before they do become an actual remnant.
We'll see.
I caught Glenn Beck Saturday, and that seems to be the direction he is going in, pressing Rep and Dem alike to show some backbone and reject any legislation that isn't classically constitutional. That I like very much. But he's also got some fixation upon 56 new Founders to re-establish the ideas of the nation... not so sure what's up with the '56', other than that there were originally 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence, but of what significance is the number? Maybe he'll clear it up soon and it'll make sense... seems odd at the moment.
I watched a bit of CNN coverage of the 9/12 DC event, some metro-sexual named Don Lemon, and a couple leftie pundits, and all they could do was claim it was veiled racism. That the only thing that brought out these people to travel across the country, or to their local Tea Parties, was an inability to tolerate a heavier than normal melanin content in the White house.
That is the level of their intellectual depth. That really is all they've got. They have no arguments, they have no reasoning behind their positions, other than 'they just want it!' and that of course Conservatives are just a big bunch of meanies who hate minorities and poor people. That and that they are so sure that there are more of them than us, and they won and intend to force healthcontrol, and the other statist policies through, not because they are right, but because they can.
Infuriating, yes, but hopeful too. Very hopeful.
They have no argument. None whatsoever.
And for a political party in a nation founded upon an Idea, that is a fatal disease.
We'll see.
I caught Glenn Beck Saturday, and that seems to be the direction he is going in, pressing Rep and Dem alike to show some backbone and reject any legislation that isn't classically constitutional. That I like very much. But he's also got some fixation upon 56 new Founders to re-establish the ideas of the nation... not so sure what's up with the '56', other than that there were originally 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence, but of what significance is the number? Maybe he'll clear it up soon and it'll make sense... seems odd at the moment.
I watched a bit of CNN coverage of the 9/12 DC event, some metro-sexual named Don Lemon, and a couple leftie pundits, and all they could do was claim it was veiled racism. That the only thing that brought out these people to travel across the country, or to their local Tea Parties, was an inability to tolerate a heavier than normal melanin content in the White house.
That is the level of their intellectual depth. That really is all they've got. They have no arguments, they have no reasoning behind their positions, other than 'they just want it!' and that of course Conservatives are just a big bunch of meanies who hate minorities and poor people. That and that they are so sure that there are more of them than us, and they won and intend to force healthcontrol, and the other statist policies through, not because they are right, but because they can.
Infuriating, yes, but hopeful too. Very hopeful.
They have no argument. None whatsoever.
And for a political party in a nation founded upon an Idea, that is a fatal disease.
Again, don't make the mistake of thinking this is about tax dollars, as I said in April,
"Do not make the mistake of thinking these Tea Parties are about the amount of money being taxed - This is NOT a tax revolt, any more than it was for the generation of our Founding Fathers. This is an issue of whether individuals should be secure in their property and so free to live their lives in liberty and in the pursuit of happiness, or whether Government should have first claim to their property, in order to set the boundaries of their lives, distributing favors and benefits as needed, to keep them in order and happy.
The Tea Party revolt is about whether the government serves you, or whether you serve the government.
In 1773 our Founding Father’s – YOUR Founding Fathers, whether your family have been citizens here for over two centuries or two months – YOUR Founding Fathers came to the most radical of political decisions ever proposed, that Individuals had minds and souls of their own, and that they should have the liberty to exercise them in their pursuit of happiness, and that no one had the right to rob them of the rights necessary to those ends.
In 1787, those Founding Fathers, sobered by revolution and the specter of political dissolution and potential tyrannies, created the first moral government in the history of the world, one which upheld Individuals Rights to use their own minds to live their lives, free from the dictates of tyrants.
It has come to us to reaffirm those founding principles, and stake our claim to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. "
The politicians who don't grasp that idea, the idea this nation was founded upon... their time may well be up... if we just keep the heat on, the Tea brewing and the whistle blowing.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Remember September 11, 2001.
We should remember. We should reflect. The only service we should concern ourselves with today, are those who are serving our nation in the military services, Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard.
Screw healing.
We should pick at the wound, keep it burning. Remember the parents on the plane heading in to strike the Towers, their child sitting next to them... remember the people in the Tower on the phone to 911, crying, scared, burning from the heat, and then screaming as the impossible happened, the tower collapsed beneath them into nothingness. Remember the wives, husbands, children, of those who just went to work that day, and had their lives and world stolen from them by islambie thugs.
Remember that no matter what idiot politician or educationista prattles... we are a people who have known, and still know freedom and liberty and law, a people who believe it is good to live a moral life and pursue our happiness where we see fit to choose to. Remember that there are alleged human beings who wish noting more than to destroy that possibility.
Reme
mber Sept. 11, 2001. Be angry, feel hatred, seek the destruction of those who seek yours. It is altogether fitting and proper that we do so, and remember that those who lost their lives, and those who have since given their lives in this cause, have hallowed this day far beyond and above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say today, but it will remember what happened, and it will take note of whether or not we remember.
It will take note of whether or not we take note of those who had taken, and those who have given, the last full measure of devotion -- and it will judge whether or not we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain; whether or not this nation, shall continue to give birth to, and stand up for and defend freedom, and it shall judge from that, whether or not government of the people by the people for the people, shall, or shall not perish from the earth.
And it will judge and act accordingly.
Remember September 11, 2001.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Listen to what a Liar Doesn't tell you
In Obama's government health control speech last night (Powerline gives it a thorough going over), he said,
"I am not the first president to take up this cause, but I am determined to be the last."
Well, that's one statement I can really get behind. I'd very much like to see that prove true - it began with our first proregressive president, Teddy Roosevelt, I'd be thrilled to see Obama be our last proregressive president - oh, and of course, with notions of govt health control fading away into discarded memories as well.
One hundred years of anti-American ideals in our presidents is quite enough, thank you very much.
Thomas Sowell has a very good column on how to listen to a liar, by comparing his words and his actions. I'd like to emphasise that you shouldn't listen to what he does say, but to what he is avoiding saying - which is the reason for the lie.
"Our collective failure to meet this challenge year after year, decade after decade, has led us to the breaking point."
What Obama didn't say here, was that it has been because of the measures that govt has passed, year after year, decade after decade, interfering in licensing, educating, mandating insurance, mandating policies, making a free market in health insurance illegal, foisting a nearly discarded medical care method, HMO's, upon us, PPO's, and so forth - all of govt's actions to 'Help us', have served only to bring us to the point that they can say we are in a crisis, and need more govt help.
This is the Modis Operandi of govt, and it can be seen in every area it has had no business whatsoever having gone into, and has worsened that market because of its presence: Education, Food & Drug, Banking, Savings, Securities, Corporate independence, Railroads... all of these industries have been either ruined, or brought to the brink of it - because of the incremental, creeping death of govt intervention... little by little making honest thought and free choice - illegal.
Is that going overboard? You tell me, between Fed, State and Local Govt, if I'd like to become a teacher tomorrow, that would be illegal, a Real Estate agent? - illegal, if I'd like to start a school tomorrow, that would be illegal, buy a gun, open most any business, drain a swamp ('wetland') from your property and build anything upon it without appeasing several layers of bureaucracy first... all of that would be illegal.
When my father was a boy, there were no drivers licenses, HIS father determined whether or not he could drive and at what age - govt is everywhere removing you, and your relevance, from your own life, by gainsaying or overriding, or disallowing you to make your own choices.
And now Obama and his statist cronies, are slavering over their next actions - if we don't stop them - they will end this Nation - they will remove it from being a nation founded upon the ideal that men should be free to live their own lives and pursue their happiness, without tyrannical intervention from the Govt.
Don't be distracted by the irrelevant issues:
- rising costs
- pre-existing conditions
- rising taxes
- worsening economy,
all of those and more are mere sideshow theatrics. The real issue is the assault on the sanctity of private property, the sanctity of contract (which means your ability to make an agreement with another), upon your right to choose your own actions, to live Your Life, they are what is under assault from all levels of govt.
When listening to a liar, don't bother trying to listen to his words to figure out what he is saying - he's a liar! The truth, is what his words are meant to conceal. You need to listen to what a liar is not saying, to figure out what the truth is that he is trying to keep from you.
It is what the liar doesn't say, that tells you what they are hoping you won't hear. Take this gem for instance:
"First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, or Medicare, or Medicaid, or the V.A., nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have."
He says the bill won't require you to change coverage - so you know that statement isn't worth looking at, what is he not saying? What he does not say, is that it does make requirements that will put either your employer, or your existing insurance plan, out of business if they don't comply with what the govt does require.
Here's what it does say, on pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer with a payroll 400k & above who does not provide a public option, will pay an additional 8% tax on all of their payroll, and together with other 'language' on pg 24, the GOVT is the one which decides what will be acceptable to be offered.
Here's how John David Lewis at Classical Ideals makes the case for this and other key claims,
"You see, our predecessors understood that government could not, and should not, solve every problem. They understood that there are instances when the gains in security from government action are not worth the added constraints on our freedom."
Sounds great... because it is meant to reassure you, keep you from seeing the lie it conceals. Find me one scrap of your life, your freedom, that this, or one of their other proposals, from Americore to Education to the Arts, from a little Acorn, to full govt Health Control; where is there is one shred of independent life they intend to leave untouched?!
What they are not saying, is that little by little, govt is inserting itself into your life, inserting itself into areas of your life that should be your own, private, principal concern, slowly but surely they are excluding you from your own life.
Fight IT!
"I am not the first president to take up this cause, but I am determined to be the last."
Well, that's one statement I can really get behind. I'd very much like to see that prove true - it began with our first proregressive president, Teddy Roosevelt, I'd be thrilled to see Obama be our last proregressive president - oh, and of course, with notions of govt health control fading away into discarded memories as well.
One hundred years of anti-American ideals in our presidents is quite enough, thank you very much.
Thomas Sowell has a very good column on how to listen to a liar, by comparing his words and his actions. I'd like to emphasise that you shouldn't listen to what he does say, but to what he is avoiding saying - which is the reason for the lie.
"Our collective failure to meet this challenge year after year, decade after decade, has led us to the breaking point."
What Obama didn't say here, was that it has been because of the measures that govt has passed, year after year, decade after decade, interfering in licensing, educating, mandating insurance, mandating policies, making a free market in health insurance illegal, foisting a nearly discarded medical care method, HMO's, upon us, PPO's, and so forth - all of govt's actions to 'Help us', have served only to bring us to the point that they can say we are in a crisis, and need more govt help.
This is the Modis Operandi of govt, and it can be seen in every area it has had no business whatsoever having gone into, and has worsened that market because of its presence: Education, Food & Drug, Banking, Savings, Securities, Corporate independence, Railroads... all of these industries have been either ruined, or brought to the brink of it - because of the incremental, creeping death of govt intervention... little by little making honest thought and free choice - illegal.
Is that going overboard? You tell me, between Fed, State and Local Govt, if I'd like to become a teacher tomorrow, that would be illegal, a Real Estate agent? - illegal, if I'd like to start a school tomorrow, that would be illegal, buy a gun, open most any business, drain a swamp ('wetland') from your property and build anything upon it without appeasing several layers of bureaucracy first... all of that would be illegal.
When my father was a boy, there were no drivers licenses, HIS father determined whether or not he could drive and at what age - govt is everywhere removing you, and your relevance, from your own life, by gainsaying or overriding, or disallowing you to make your own choices.
And now Obama and his statist cronies, are slavering over their next actions - if we don't stop them - they will end this Nation - they will remove it from being a nation founded upon the ideal that men should be free to live their own lives and pursue their happiness, without tyrannical intervention from the Govt.
Don't be distracted by the irrelevant issues:
- rising costs
- pre-existing conditions
- rising taxes
- worsening economy,
all of those and more are mere sideshow theatrics. The real issue is the assault on the sanctity of private property, the sanctity of contract (which means your ability to make an agreement with another), upon your right to choose your own actions, to live Your Life, they are what is under assault from all levels of govt.
When listening to a liar, don't bother trying to listen to his words to figure out what he is saying - he's a liar! The truth, is what his words are meant to conceal. You need to listen to what a liar is not saying, to figure out what the truth is that he is trying to keep from you.
It is what the liar doesn't say, that tells you what they are hoping you won't hear. Take this gem for instance:
"First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, or Medicare, or Medicaid, or the V.A., nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have."
He says the bill won't require you to change coverage - so you know that statement isn't worth looking at, what is he not saying? What he does not say, is that it does make requirements that will put either your employer, or your existing insurance plan, out of business if they don't comply with what the govt does require.
Here's what it does say, on pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer with a payroll 400k & above who does not provide a public option, will pay an additional 8% tax on all of their payroll, and together with other 'language' on pg 24, the GOVT is the one which decides what will be acceptable to be offered.
Here's how John David Lewis at Classical Ideals makes the case for this and other key claims,
"Here is what it requires, for businesses with payrolls greater than $400,000 per year. (The bill uses “contribution” to refer to mandatory payments to the government plan.) Pages 149-150, SEC. 313, EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTIONS IN LIEU OF COVERAGEAs one congressmen, perhaps inartfully burst out, Obama is a liar. Pay attention to what he does not say, remember, it is what the liar doesn't say, that tells you what they are hoping you won't hear. Will you hear what he and his fellow govt health control statists are trying so hard not to say?
(a) IN GENERAL.—A contribution is made in accordance with this section with respect to an employee if such contribution is equal to an amount equal to 8 percent of the average wages paid by the employer during the period of enrollment (determined by taking into account all employees of the employer and in such manner as the Commissioner provides, including rules providing for the appropriate aggregation of related employers). Any such contribution—
(1) shall be paid to the Health Choices Commissioner for deposit into the Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund, and
(2) shall not be applied against the premium of the employee under the Exchange-participating health benefits plan in which the employee is enrolled.
(The bill then includes a sliding scale of payments for business with less than $400,000 in annual payroll.)
The Bill also reserves, for the government, the power to determine an acceptable benefits plan: page 24, SEC. 115. ENSURING ADEQUACY OF PROVIDER NETWORKS.
5 (a) IN GENERAL.—A qualified health benefits plan that uses a provider network for items and services shall meet such standards respecting provider networks as the Commissioner may establish to assure the adequacy of such networks in ensuring enrollee access to such items and services and transparency in the cost-sharing differentials between in-network coverage and out-of-network coverage.
EVALUATION OF THE PASSAGES:
1. The bill does not prohibit a person from buying private insurance.
2. Small businesses—with say 8-10 employees—will either have to provide insurance to federal standards, or pay an 8% payroll tax. Business costs for health care are higher than this, especially considering administrative costs. Any competitive business that tries to stay with a private plan will face a payroll disadvantage against competitors who go with the government “option.”
3. The pressure for business owners to terminate the private plans will be enormous.
4. With employers ending plans, millions of Americans will lose their private coverage, and fewer companies will offer it.
5. The Commissioner (meaning, always, the bureaucrats) will determine whether a particular network of physicians, hospitals and insurance is acceptable.
6. With private insurance starved, many people enrolled in the government “option” will have no place else to go "
"You see, our predecessors understood that government could not, and should not, solve every problem. They understood that there are instances when the gains in security from government action are not worth the added constraints on our freedom."
Sounds great... because it is meant to reassure you, keep you from seeing the lie it conceals. Find me one scrap of your life, your freedom, that this, or one of their other proposals, from Americore to Education to the Arts, from a little Acorn, to full govt Health Control; where is there is one shred of independent life they intend to leave untouched?!
What they are not saying, is that little by little, govt is inserting itself into your life, inserting itself into areas of your life that should be your own, private, principal concern, slowly but surely they are excluding you from your own life.
Fight IT!
Friday, September 04, 2009
Seniors Bill of Rights - GOP Stuck on Stupid
What part of their being stupid did the GOP feel we didn't know well enough about them? Any doubts I had about the intensity of the GOP's stupidity, has been done away with, with their latest promotion "Seniors’ Health Care Bill Of Rights".
What is the modern root of the welfare and entitlement state?
FDR's 'Economic Bill of Rights' - which not only negated the concept of property rights, but claimed that citizens had a right to demand that other citizens serve them, which is the negation of ALL of our rights. Social Security was the first sizable implementation of that socialistic plan, Medicare was the second measure to cement the leftist immoral, anti-individual rights, anti-American policies - and the GOP just validated them.
Their latest effort to complete the destruction of the concept of Rights, starts off with "PROTECT MEDICARE AND NOT CUT IT IN THE NAME OF HEALTH CARE REFORM".
The major battle conservatives who are actually conservatives, seeking to conserve the ideas of classical liberalism as expressed in the U.S. Constitution, has been to overcome the notion so popularized by leftists, that virtually enslaving your fellow man to serve your failings and shortcomings through the force of law, was a proper role of government. And here comes the GOP officially tossing in the towel and declaring Medicare to be a RIGHT of seniors.
They didn't feel the line item was sufficient, so they elaborated,
"President Obama and Congressional Democrats are promoting a government-run health care experiment that will cut over $500 billion from Medicare to be used to pay for their plan. Medicare should not be raided to pay for another entitlement."
Why would they do it? Principles being something they have none of, no doubt they calculated it to be a clever marketing ploy. At best this is a disingenuous tactic to con those who have bought into anti-American leftist values, into thinking that the GOP would support keeping one of the chief programs which conservatives would love to see done away with. At worst - they actually believe it.
Either way, they are stuck on stupid - and they disgust the hell out of me. I don't have time to get longwinded on this one, so I'll leave it there... for now.
What is the modern root of the welfare and entitlement state?
FDR's 'Economic Bill of Rights' - which not only negated the concept of property rights, but claimed that citizens had a right to demand that other citizens serve them, which is the negation of ALL of our rights. Social Security was the first sizable implementation of that socialistic plan, Medicare was the second measure to cement the leftist immoral, anti-individual rights, anti-American policies - and the GOP just validated them.
Their latest effort to complete the destruction of the concept of Rights, starts off with "PROTECT MEDICARE AND NOT CUT IT IN THE NAME OF HEALTH CARE REFORM".
The major battle conservatives who are actually conservatives, seeking to conserve the ideas of classical liberalism as expressed in the U.S. Constitution, has been to overcome the notion so popularized by leftists, that virtually enslaving your fellow man to serve your failings and shortcomings through the force of law, was a proper role of government. And here comes the GOP officially tossing in the towel and declaring Medicare to be a RIGHT of seniors.
They didn't feel the line item was sufficient, so they elaborated,
"President Obama and Congressional Democrats are promoting a government-run health care experiment that will cut over $500 billion from Medicare to be used to pay for their plan. Medicare should not be raided to pay for another entitlement."
Why would they do it? Principles being something they have none of, no doubt they calculated it to be a clever marketing ploy. At best this is a disingenuous tactic to con those who have bought into anti-American leftist values, into thinking that the GOP would support keeping one of the chief programs which conservatives would love to see done away with. At worst - they actually believe it.
Either way, they are stuck on stupid - and they disgust the hell out of me. I don't have time to get longwinded on this one, so I'll leave it there... for now.
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Ted Kennedy - What a Piece of Work is Man
I was watching a TIVO'd C-SPAN Booknotes episode ("Economics does not lie", on Gagdad Bob's buy list, looks very interesting and is soon to be in my library), and as it ended the news was on, and it was smack dab in the midst of the Memorial service for Teddy Kennedy, mid way into son Joseph's speech.
I have no remaining fondness for Ted Kennedy, my early hero worship of JFK & RFK long since eroded by understanding the meaning of their actions, they retain no aura to shelter him with in my thoughts, and he has generated a deep, deep guilt of wrong doings, political and personal, all his own. The words "Good riddance" comes tantalizingly to mind.
But.
It brought home to me again, the importance of remembering that the principles you grasp, are not necessarily all of the principles involved; the facts you plainly perceive, are not necessarily all of the facts involved; nor is your perception - right though it maybe in its context - the only perception available and justified (though his son Patrick's sailing anecdote about his Dad's pursuit of the details of rules as a way around a rule, sums up my perspective of him, his party, and much more).
I doubt I have any need to detail the many, many points of disagreement, if not downright revulsion, I have for the figure I know of as Ted Kennedy, but it seems likely and proper to remind myself, and us all, that though he can properly be roundly condemned for his actions, he was a person, something which is captured neither well nor fully, in a profiles portrait, or in any series of pictures.
Watching the service, it is obivous that his children and family obviously saw something much more than we did.
(Ugh... Obama is on now... trying to get through without the TOTUS... reminding me of both what I dislike about him... and, yes, the point of this post at the same time.)
Because someone is obviously wrong, does not mean that they willfully turn away from the truth. Because someone does evil, does not mean that they recognize the evil they are doing. Because someone hurts and wrongs people horribly, does not mean that they did not also treat others with deep love and affection.
People are amazingly Deep creatures, capable of an infinite number of facets... and our philosophies will never thoroughly plumb those depths. A single misperception, unwitting or self deceptive, can mis-draw the world and what is Right and True, into an elaborate and seeming real cognitive illusion, every bit as apparently true, though actually false, as any mere optical illusion you could produce.
We are well justified condemning a person and calling them on accounts for deeds they've done, delivering whatever punishments are justified by their actions. We have no need to leaven our condemnation of him for those actions we are so well aware of.
But.
But we are foolish, we deceive ourselves, when we think that we know all that there is, or needs to be known, about someone we know only from a distance - or even close at hand.
Truly, "What a piece of work is a man".
I have no remaining fondness for Ted Kennedy, my early hero worship of JFK & RFK long since eroded by understanding the meaning of their actions, they retain no aura to shelter him with in my thoughts, and he has generated a deep, deep guilt of wrong doings, political and personal, all his own. The words "Good riddance" comes tantalizingly to mind.
But.
It brought home to me again, the importance of remembering that the principles you grasp, are not necessarily all of the principles involved; the facts you plainly perceive, are not necessarily all of the facts involved; nor is your perception - right though it maybe in its context - the only perception available and justified (though his son Patrick's sailing anecdote about his Dad's pursuit of the details of rules as a way around a rule, sums up my perspective of him, his party, and much more).
I doubt I have any need to detail the many, many points of disagreement, if not downright revulsion, I have for the figure I know of as Ted Kennedy, but it seems likely and proper to remind myself, and us all, that though he can properly be roundly condemned for his actions, he was a person, something which is captured neither well nor fully, in a profiles portrait, or in any series of pictures.
Watching the service, it is obivous that his children and family obviously saw something much more than we did.
(Ugh... Obama is on now... trying to get through without the TOTUS... reminding me of both what I dislike about him... and, yes, the point of this post at the same time.)
Because someone is obviously wrong, does not mean that they willfully turn away from the truth. Because someone does evil, does not mean that they recognize the evil they are doing. Because someone hurts and wrongs people horribly, does not mean that they did not also treat others with deep love and affection.
People are amazingly Deep creatures, capable of an infinite number of facets... and our philosophies will never thoroughly plumb those depths. A single misperception, unwitting or self deceptive, can mis-draw the world and what is Right and True, into an elaborate and seeming real cognitive illusion, every bit as apparently true, though actually false, as any mere optical illusion you could produce.
We are well justified condemning a person and calling them on accounts for deeds they've done, delivering whatever punishments are justified by their actions. We have no need to leaven our condemnation of him for those actions we are so well aware of.
But.
But we are foolish, we deceive ourselves, when we think that we know all that there is, or needs to be known, about someone we know only from a distance - or even close at hand.
Truly, "What a piece of work is a man".
HAMLET
I will tell you why; so shall my anticipation
prevent your discovery, and your secrecy to the king
and queen moult no feather. I have of late--but
wherefore I know not--lost all my mirth, forgone all
custom of exercises; and indeed it goes so heavily
with my disposition that this goodly frame, the
earth, seems to me a sterile promontory, this most
excellent canopy, the air, look you, this brave
o'erhanging firmament, this majestical roof fretted
with golden fire, why, it appears no other thing to
me than a foul and pestilent congregation of vapours.
What a piece of work is a man! how noble in reason!
how infinite in faculty! in form and moving how
express and admirable! in action how like an angel!
in apprehension how like a god! the beauty of the
world! the paragon of animals! And yet, to me,
what is this quintessence of dust? man delights not
me: no, nor woman neither, though by your smiling
you seem to say so.
ROSENCRANTZ
My lord, there was no such stuff in my thoughts.
HAMLET
Why did you laugh then, when I said 'man delights not me'?
ROSENCRANTZ
To think, my lord, if you delight not in man, what
lenten entertainment the players shall receive from
you: we coted them on the way; and hither are they
coming, to offer you service.
HAMLET
He that plays the king shall be welcome; his majesty
shall have tribute of me; the adventurous knight
shall use his foil and target; the lover shall not
sigh gratis; the humourous man shall end his part
in peace; the clown shall make those laugh whose
lungs are tickled o' the sere; and the lady shall
say her mind freely, or the blank verse shall halt
for't. What players are they?
ROSENCRANTZ
Even those you were wont to take delight in, the
tragedians of the city.
HAMLET
How chances it they travel? their residence, both
in reputation and profit, was better both ways.
ROSENCRANTZ
I think their inhibition comes by the means of the
late innovation.
HAMLET
Do they hold the same estimation they did when I was
in the city? are they so followed?
ROSENCRANTZ
No, indeed, are they not.
HAMLET
How comes it? do they grow rusty?
ROSENCRANTZ
Nay, their endeavour keeps in the wonted pace: but
there is, sir, an aery of children, little eyases,
that cry out on the top of question, and are most
tyrannically clapped for't: these are now the
fashion, and so berattle the common stages--so they
call them--that many wearing rapiers are afraid of
goose-quills and dare scarce come thither.
HAMLET
What, are they children? who maintains 'em? how are
they escoted? Will they pursue the quality no
longer than they can sing? will they not say
afterwards, if they should grow themselves to common
players--as it is most like, if their means are no
better--their writers do them wrong, to make them
exclaim against their own succession?
ROSENCRANTZ
'Faith, there has been much to do on both sides; and
the nation holds it no sin to tarre them to
controversy: there was, for a while, no money bid
for argument, unless the poet and the player went to
cuffs in the question.
HAMLET
Is't possible?
GUILDENSTERN
O, there has been much throwing about of brains.
HAMLET
Do the boys carry it away?
ROSENCRANTZ
Ay, that they do, my lord; Hercules and his load too.
HAMLET
It is not very strange; for mine uncle is king of
Denmark, and those that would make mows at him while
my father lived, give twenty, forty, fifty, an
hundred ducats a-piece for his picture in little.
'Sblood, there is something in this more than
natural, if philosophy could find it out.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Our Shame, Our Blame, Our Responsibility To Right Our Times Wrongs
"It is our shame, and our fault. We are the malfeasant ones. We are to blame."
From an excellent post by The Gunslinger, and Yes, it is our fault and we are to blame for the chaos enveloping us.
We The People gave it up, grandparents, parents and definitely ourselves, bit by bit, thinking we were getting something for nothing, free education (but 'educated' into ignorance of what was worth knowing and vitally important to be known), for govt provided services and care (but at the expense of our right to our lives and property and self responsibility), for govt stepping in and making us behave civilly (but at the expense of our no longer understanding what the meaning and requirements of civil behavior are)... but there is no free Free.
As dire as things are in the face of Obamacare's threat of total governmental control of our lives, there is a bright light, people are finally beginning to wake up across this country, finally beginning to see the peril we've let gain power over us... and that spreading awareness, if we will each work to keep it burning bright, we can turn it around.
Yes! We! Can!
As to the oft heard plaints "But the constitution says govt has the power to provide for the general welfare of the United States ...", the Preamble NEVER meant what it has been twisted into, a blank check for doing anything any petty politician pines for. If you have doubts of that, or are unsure of how to argue against such notions, read the Preamble here, and then scroll down and read what ideas informed the Founders, what understanding and concerns they had, and how such liberality was argued against before the Supreme Court, and particularly how an outstanding early Supreme Court Justice, Joseph Story, dealt with it, such as:
And the Commerce Clause NEVER was meant to allow govt to take control of all commerce related activities within the Nation, it was in response to the chaotic recriminations between one state and another in the original Confederacy (which brought several to the brink of war) which the Constitution corrected and replaced. As Madison stated,
We're already seeing the destruction which change for changes sake can do, now it is time to put some effort into understanding what real change requires, and is required of us.
Can win this fight? Yes! We! Can!
From an excellent post by The Gunslinger, and Yes, it is our fault and we are to blame for the chaos enveloping us.
We The People gave it up, grandparents, parents and definitely ourselves, bit by bit, thinking we were getting something for nothing, free education (but 'educated' into ignorance of what was worth knowing and vitally important to be known), for govt provided services and care (but at the expense of our right to our lives and property and self responsibility), for govt stepping in and making us behave civilly (but at the expense of our no longer understanding what the meaning and requirements of civil behavior are)... but there is no free Free.
As dire as things are in the face of Obamacare's threat of total governmental control of our lives, there is a bright light, people are finally beginning to wake up across this country, finally beginning to see the peril we've let gain power over us... and that spreading awareness, if we will each work to keep it burning bright, we can turn it around.
Yes! We! Can!
As to the oft heard plaints "But the constitution says govt has the power to provide for the general welfare of the United States ...", the Preamble NEVER meant what it has been twisted into, a blank check for doing anything any petty politician pines for. If you have doubts of that, or are unsure of how to argue against such notions, read the Preamble here, and then scroll down and read what ideas informed the Founders, what understanding and concerns they had, and how such liberality was argued against before the Supreme Court, and particularly how an outstanding early Supreme Court Justice, Joseph Story, dealt with it, such as:
"§ 462. And, here, we must guard ourselves against an error, which is too often allowed to creep into the discussions upon this subject. The preamble never can be resorted to, to enlarge the powers confided to the general government, or any of its departments. It cannot confer any power per se; it can never amount, by implication, to an enlargement of any power expressly given. It can never be the legitimate source of any implied power, when otherwise withdrawn from the constitution. Its true office is to expound the nature, and extent, and application of the powers actually conferred by the constitution, and not substantively to create them. . . ."Or the link from President Monroe,
"...The people, the highest authority known to our system, from whom all our institutions spring and on whom they depend, formed it. Had the people of the several States thought proper to incorporate themselves into one community, under one government, they might have done it. They had the power, and there was nothing then nor is there anything now, should they be so disposed, to prevent it. They wisely stopped, however, ..."
And the Commerce Clause NEVER was meant to allow govt to take control of all commerce related activities within the Nation, it was in response to the chaotic recriminations between one state and another in the original Confederacy (which brought several to the brink of war) which the Constitution corrected and replaced. As Madison stated,
"... separate attempts to raise revenue by duties on imports, soon appeared in Representations from her Merchts., that the commerce of the State was banished by them into other channels, especially of Maryd., where imports were less burdened than in Virginia. (See do. 1786).There Is No More Vital Action that you can take, now, today, than to read, study and come to understand our Constitution, and then talk to others about it, demand that YOUR elected officials explain how and why they don't understand it, or if they do, then demand of them to explain their acting contrary to it.
Such a tendency of separate regulations was indeed too manifest to escape anticipation. Among the projects prompted by the want of a federal authy. over Comerce, was that of a concert, first proposed on the part of Maryd. for a uniformity of regulations between the 2 States, and commissioners were appointed for that purpose. It was soon perceived however that the concurrence of Pena. was as necessy. to Maryd. as of Maryd. to Virga., and the concurrence of Pennsylvania was accordingly invited. But Pa. could no more concur witht. N. Y. than Md. witht. Pa. nor N. Y. witht. the concurrence of Boston &c.
These projects were superseded for the moment by that of the Convention at Annapolis in 1786, and forever by the Convn at Pha in 1787, and the Consn. which was the fruit of it."
We're already seeing the destruction which change for changes sake can do, now it is time to put some effort into understanding what real change requires, and is required of us.
Leftist ideas are attacking our Liberty and Freedom, it is only the ideas of our Founding Fathers which can defend us against them. Learn what the Constitution of the United States of America means. Learn it and spread your understanding. America is the only nation ever formed upon Ideas, and the field of Ideas is the ONLY battleground upon which we can fight to can save it from destruction.
Can win this fight? Yes! We! Can!
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Govt Healthcontrol? Anyone Remember HMO's?
Obamacare? Hello America, this is Cassandra calling...
Anyone recall the brouhaha over the one time dreaded HMO's? Remember how, this was what, the early 90's? Where everyone wanted to be sure that their insurance plan did not restrict them to HMO's? Remember how if you couldn't afford a plan that gave you the ability to pick your own Dr's (what a concept), we at least wanted to have PPO's instead?
Don't you remember why?
Oh yes, it was the early 90's... as a matter of fact, it was about '93 when the fear that Hillarycare was going to look like an HMO which sunk Clinton's national healthcare proposal during that go around.
Anyone remember WHY the HMO's were so dreaded at that time? If you don't remember, there were lawsuits and biter complaints flying right and left over things like:
Anyone recall the brouhaha over the one time dreaded HMO's? Remember how, this was what, the early 90's? Where everyone wanted to be sure that their insurance plan did not restrict them to HMO's? Remember how if you couldn't afford a plan that gave you the ability to pick your own Dr's (what a concept), we at least wanted to have PPO's instead?
Don't you remember why?
Oh yes, it was the early 90's... as a matter of fact, it was about '93 when the fear that Hillarycare was going to look like an HMO which sunk Clinton's national healthcare proposal during that go around.
Anyone remember WHY the HMO's were so dreaded at that time? If you don't remember, there were lawsuits and biter complaints flying right and left over things like:
- malpractice suits,
- hours and hours of waiting in crowded (seated lines) in doctors offices,
- an inability to get the more effective treatments and medications,
- bottom of the barrel physicians - even in many cases incompetent,
Why?
What brought those issues about? It's a simple question, and there is a simple answer.
Because Doctors were not free to practice Medicine in the way the Doctor's would choose to practice it! And at that time, this was mostly due to private rules - imagine how things will be when they are being told what to do by Federally mandated rules! Here's a summary of what takes place in the physicians mind (and here a much fuller explanation of not only the issues, but of the immorality behind them) who is not free to make his own decisions,
What brought those issues about? It's a simple question, and there is a simple answer.
Because Doctors were not free to practice Medicine in the way the Doctor's would choose to practice it! And at that time, this was mostly due to private rules - imagine how things will be when they are being told what to do by Federally mandated rules! Here's a summary of what takes place in the physicians mind (and here a much fuller explanation of not only the issues, but of the immorality behind them) who is not free to make his own decisions,
"Today, in one form or another, the following also has to enter that brain: 'The DRG administrator [in effect, the hospital or HMO man trying to control costs] will raise hell if I operate, but the malpractice attorney will have a field day if I don't -- and my rival down the street, who heads the local PRO [Peer Review Organization], favors a CAT scan in these cases, I can't afford to antagonize him, but the CON boys disagree and they won't authorize a CAT scanner for our hospital -- and besides the FDA prohibits the drug I should be prescribing, even though it is widely used in Europe, and the IRS might not allow the patient a tax deduction for it, anyhow, and I can't get a specialist's advice because the latest Medicare rules prohibit a consultation with this diagnosis, and maybe I shouldn't even take this patient, he's so sick -- after all, some doctors are manipulating their slate of patients, they accept only the healthiest ones, so their average costs are coming in lower than mine, and it looks bad for my staff privileges.' ..."
In part, the uproar over HMO's (and the fear of hyper-HMO's that Hillarycare would've mandated (which pales in comparison to Obamacare)) was due to what the:
Insurance companies policies and existing govt regulations,
- would and wouldn't allow their Dr's to do or offer,
- the hours they shecheduled them to work,
- the time they'd allow per patient visit,
- the 'allowed' diagnosis' and tests they would pay for
Or as one of the Insurance companies sites today that is promoting both HMO's and PPO's describes some HMO considerations as,
"That means your costs stay lower - but there will be restrictions on how you receive your care....HMOs and PPOs differ in two main ways: cost and access... The tradeoff for these low costs is that your HMO plan comes with restrictions on when you can receive care - and who you can receive it from."
What seems to slip peoples awareness, is that these factors came about in an environment where there were free market 'controls' of consumer choice (also called competition) in effect.
Ok, anyone remember where HMO's came from? Or why? Did they come from the free market? Well ... sort of... at one time. Originally HMO's were little different from company co-ops, a pooling of patients for lower costs from Dr's willing to systemize there fee's onto a schedule of limited services. They weren't all that popular, and had pretty much died out in the free market for lack of interest, on the party of either party, due to general dissatisfaction in both receiving AND giving care.
Almost dissappeared. Why not completely? Well....
Along came something called the "Health Maintenance Organization Act of 1973", a govt plan to keep pesky medical care costs from rising (at which point of course they rose even faster), and it was signed into law by the proregressive republican President Richard Nixon. Passed in typical little 'r' washington republican fashion, as a 'moderate' way of countering a leftist's proposal that 'we put a gun to our heads and pull the trigger', with an offer for a less extreme compromise of 'how about we inject ourselves with a slow acting poison instead'?
Oh, and guess who the 'gun to the head' option was sponsored by? Oh, come on, guess!
Correct! Sen. Ted Kennedy. I just can't wait to receive both barrels of his wisdom, fermented now for 36 years!
It bears all the hallmarks of proregressive, leftist, policy making: Experts create panels of experts to lay out the most 'scientifically' sensible plans for managing (always a key term) all potential issues beforehand, which expert 'healthcare professionals' aka bureaucrats, can then use to direct and manage the healthcare process, smoothly, efficiently, and for lower costs.
What was the predictable result of this proregressive leftist washington wisdom?
What seems to slip peoples awareness, is that these factors came about in an environment where there were free market 'controls' of consumer choice (also called competition) in effect.
Ok, anyone remember where HMO's came from? Or why? Did they come from the free market? Well ... sort of... at one time. Originally HMO's were little different from company co-ops, a pooling of patients for lower costs from Dr's willing to systemize there fee's onto a schedule of limited services. They weren't all that popular, and had pretty much died out in the free market for lack of interest, on the party of either party, due to general dissatisfaction in both receiving AND giving care.
Almost dissappeared. Why not completely? Well....
Along came something called the "Health Maintenance Organization Act of 1973", a govt plan to keep pesky medical care costs from rising (at which point of course they rose even faster), and it was signed into law by the proregressive republican President Richard Nixon. Passed in typical little 'r' washington republican fashion, as a 'moderate' way of countering a leftist's proposal that 'we put a gun to our heads and pull the trigger', with an offer for a less extreme compromise of 'how about we inject ourselves with a slow acting poison instead'?
Oh, and guess who the 'gun to the head' option was sponsored by? Oh, come on, guess!
Correct! Sen. Ted Kennedy. I just can't wait to receive both barrels of his wisdom, fermented now for 36 years!
It bears all the hallmarks of proregressive, leftist, policy making: Experts create panels of experts to lay out the most 'scientifically' sensible plans for managing (always a key term) all potential issues beforehand, which expert 'healthcare professionals' aka bureaucrats, can then use to direct and manage the healthcare process, smoothly, efficiently, and for lower costs.
What was the predictable result of this proregressive leftist washington wisdom?
- patient dissatisfaction,
- doctor dissatisfaction,
- rising malpractice suits,
- hours and hours of waiting in crowded (seated lines) in doctors offices,
- an inability to get the more effective treatments and medications,
- bottom of the barrel physicians - even in many cases incompetent,
- a shortages of doctors able to cover the hours they shecheduled them to work,
- rationed time allowed per patient visit,
- inflexible and often inappropriate 'allowed' diagnosis' and tests they would pay for
Sounds like I've heard those warnings somewhere before (... oh, hello there Cassandra)
Ladies and Gentlemen, HMO's were the creation of the federal government, created to FIX THE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM that was working far better then, than it was after the FIX was applied.
I don't know about you, but I can easily foresee what will happen when the entire healthcare system becomes one big HMO, when the 'Insurance policies' are written by the govt and are immune to any pesky concerns over competition or 'consumer' complaints.
Does anyone have any reason, any evidence, any track record to hearken to, in order to believe that the Federal Government, this time, will make things better, instead of worse?
Anybody?
Anyone interested in some info that doesn't reak of the current conflict of today? If so, might want to take a look at what USS Ben has to say on current matters (VA, etc).
Not enought? How about a little recollection on previous promises of how things would turn out, things like,
Income Tax was promised to be - a temporary tax for current (circa WWI) defense related costs, that's all , what it was promised it would never exceed "1 percent tax on net personal incomes above $3,000 with a 6 percent surtax on incomes of more than $500,000", and who it would NEVER apply to - only one-half percent of Americans would EVER pay taxes, only the richest people would ever be taxed! Ever! How'd that bit of hope and change work out for ya?
Social Security - was promised to be only a tax of 1% each on the employer and the employee, on the first $3,000 of earnings, and originally, Social Security benefits were not taxable income, it was sold as an "Insurance Plan", a 'Trust Fund' but was from the very start a 'pay as you go' ponzi type scheme.
Medicare - When passed in 1965, it was confidently forecast that it would cost only 9 Billion in 1990. As is typical of Govt forecasts, that was a bit shy of the mark, it was 66 Billion in 1990 (don't ask, it's projected to become insolvent by 2017).
People - COMPARE THE HISTORY OF FEDERAL PROMISES AND ACTUAL FACTS!!!
Perhaps a few reminders from the past might yet help us keep Cassandra at bay:
1996
1999
2000
2003
2003
2004
2004
Two videos on the key issue, far more important than ANY consideration of costs,
Health Care Is Not a Right By Leonard Peikoff
Anyone interested in an indepth balanced (meaning much of it rankles me)
Overview, from Duke Univ. Law Journal
Saturday, August 08, 2009
Obama Care? I 'Dis' his 'information' (Updated page links)
I recently received an email from a friend of mine (you know, one of those biter clingers, bent on manufacturing astroturf, without pay, and only to be malicious and promote extremism) that listed several disturbing aspects of congress's healthcare proposal. Today this article in politico was brought to my attention, it noted that:
Here's one rumor that needs quashing right off the bat, coincidentally it is one begun by da prez himself:
Simply Outlandish! How can he say such a thing?
Well, if his positions on healthcare reform are anything like his positions on economic reform, the answer is simple: He's a Marxist. He cares nothing for facts, let alone principles. His concern is solely for advancing his agenda, which boils down to: what he wants to be true, he demands that we accept as being true. He knows nothing of the principles of economics (let alone of liberty), or of the massive economic disruptions that are caused by govt interfering in peoples choices, or the stifling effects to real freedom and liberty that follows from such actions by an interventionist government.
He knows not, and he cares not (for a truly revealing look at the full meaning of nObama Care, see this from my local St. Louis Tea Party and summed up by Gateway Pundit here).
He knows even less about that 1/7th portion of our economy (which, btw, 'economy' refers to the decisions and actions of free people making choices in their lives, within a free market - aka Liberty and Freedom) which is referred to as Healthcare.
Now, actual facts are abundantly available, as are the principles which elucidate them, principles which brings the seeming random cacophony of disintegrated data into intelligent relief (See Bastiat's "What is seen and what is not seen" or Adam Smith and many more), he knows nothing of the real facts of European (see Theodore Dalrymple's recent "Is there a 'Right' to Healthcare" for the euro-perspective of a 'healthcare' provider) and Canadian (Krugman dis's himself) healthcare which clearly point to the results he here denies as 'outlandish'.
He no's only what he wants to believe. He is, in fact, one of those modern children of Descartes I referred to earlier who see conspiracies everywhere, who thinks that what he believes deeply and sincerely, must obviously be true, as he could imagine it being no other way.
Let's make sure we don't fall into the same trap, ya with me? Ok then, let's refer him to those pages in 'his' healthcare bill which refute his platitudes in the lingo of governmentalese black 'n white, shall we?
First from my friends hit parade of citations:
""Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get"
When we look at that page (linked to above), we find the following text:
It then goes on to list the numbers of people who will either be Federal Employees, or not Fed employees, but appointed by the President or the Comptroller, or other functionaries of the Federal Government. Nice useful distinction there, don't you think? I somehow miss out on the 'Private' decision making nature of that apparatus.
No matter, reading a bit further on, down at the bottom of
Pg 31, and carrying over to the next page, we find this section describing what sort of people these non-federal employees, who are appointed by federal employees, are to be:
And don't you just love the inclusion of "...experts in racial and ethnic disparities..."? Isn't it comforting to know that Gov't Committee's on the make up of healthcare services will be sure to move beyond any chance of acting stupidly and letting issues of race or ethnicity, become involved in our healthcare concerns? I just feel warm and tingly all over.
A little further down, we find this,
You should seriously be beginning to flag in your mind whenever seeing the word "Healthcare" to consciously begin seeing the word "Healthcontrol", because that is what will be done, every aspect of will fall under govt standards and controls, and what always results from such measures, will assuredly result in your declining health.
Some things that should pop into peoples minds are the other things gov't has done to care for other sectors of the economy - remember telephone 'service' under the governmental 'one provider' policy of Ma Bell? Remember the wage and price controls of Richard Nixon? Remember the gas station lines of Jimmy Carter?
Or how about this, in the 1930's, gov't mandated regulations to improve the security of banks, peoples access to them, and their reliability. The results? There were huge numbers of panicked runs on banks, and thousands of U.S. Banks collapsed along with their patrons assets. Across the border in Canada, which had no such 'govt help' and attention in their banking system during the same worldwide economic crisis? Zero bank runs, and zero bank collapses (See: FDR's Folly: How Roosevelt and His New Deal Prolonged the Great Depression).
You had better get busy forecasting the same lesson being applied to healthcare. Thomas Sowell points out in a recent article:
If you still have access to some cash, get yourself a copy of Thomas Sowell's Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One,
"When we are talking about applied economic policies, we are no longer talking about pure economic principles, but about the interactions of politics and economics. The principles of economics remain the same, but the liklihood of those principles being applied unchanged is considerable reduced, because politics has its own principles and imperatives."
If anyone thinks that they will be able to separate their govt aided health and medical care from the state of our govt aided economic care, I submit that you are mortally mistaken. Buy Sowell's book, pay particular attention to Chp. 3 "The Economics of Mecidal Care", or at least take a gander at his article "Alice in Obama Medical Care Land".
For myself, I hereby willingly and knowingly 'dis' Obama's healthcare information.
I'll leave it up to your own judgment whether or not you should do the same. Here are some helpful study guides for you, passed along from my friend David. Do yourself, and our future, a favor - read them - if even 1% of them mean what it seems they mean, and they are passed, we are doomed.
This is not a healthcare bill, it is a lifecontrol bill.
This is not a bill to argue on the merits of whether it will accomplish this or that at more or less cost, this is a bill to be identified and fought on moral grounds of Right and Wrong. The govt has no right to intrude into and control our lives in such ways.
This thing means evil to our lives and liberties, pure and simple. Read it. Identify it. Fight it.
As David would say Make a Difference!
***UPDATED***
Congressmen/Physician lays out "... a charade that will destroy healthcare in America":
(all links are to that page in the actual house bill).
22 of the HC Bill MANDATES the Govt will audit books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self insure!!
30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get
29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill - YOUR HEALTHCARE IS RATIONED!!! You can only get so much "care" per year
42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC Benefits 4 you. You have no choice!
50 Section 152 in HC bill - HC will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise
58HC Bill - Govt will have real-time access to individs finances & a National ID Healthcard will be issued!
59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access 2 your banks accts for elective funds transfer
65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions & community orgs (ACORN).
72 Lines 8-14 Govt is creating an HC Exchange to bring private HC plans under Govt control.
84 Sec 203 HC bill - Govt mandates ALL benefit pkgs for private HC plans in the Exchange
85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs for Benefit Levels for Plans = The Govt will ration your Healthcare!
91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill - Govt mandates linguistic appropriate services..... Example - Translation for illegal aliens
95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The Govt will use groups i.e., ACORN & Americorps to sign up individually for Govt HC plan
85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs of Benefit Levels for Plans. #AARP members - your Health care WILL be rationed
-102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill - Medicaid Eligible Indiv. will be automat.enrolled in Medicaid. No choice
124 lines 24-25 HC No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Govt Monopoly
127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill - Doctors/ #AMA - The Govt will tell YOU what you can make.
145 Line 15-17 An Employer MUST auto enroll employees into public opt plan. NO CHOICE
126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay for HC for part time employees AND their families.
149 Lines 16-24 ANY Emplyr w payroll 400k & above who does not prov. pub opt. pays 8% tax on all payroll
150 Lines 9-13 Biz w payroll between 251k & 400k who doesnt prov. pub. opt pays 2-6% tax on all payroll
167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesnt have acceptable HC accrdng to Govt will be taxed 2.5%
170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (You and I will pay for them)
195 HC Bill -officers & employees of HC Admin (GOVT) will have access to ALL Americans financial/personal recds
203 Line 14-15 HC - "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax" Yes, it says that
239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors, low income, poor will be very affected
241 Line 6-8 HC Bill - Doctors, doesnt matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same
253 Line 10-18 Govt sets value of Dr's time, professional judgments, etc. Literally value of humans.
265 Sec 1131Govt mandates & controls productivity for private HC industries
268 Sec 1141 Fed Govt regulates rental & purchase of power driven wheelchairs
272 SEC. 1145. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!
Page 280 Sec 1151 The Govt will penalize hospitals for what Govt deems preventable readmissions.
317 L 13-20 OMG!! PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Govt tells Drs. what/how much they can own.
317-318 lines 21-25,1-3 PROHIBITION on expansion- Govt is mandating hospitals cannot expand
321 2-13 Hospitals have oppt to apply for exception BUT community input required. Can you say ACORN?!!
Pg335 L 16-25
341 Lines 3-9 Govt has authority to disqualify Medicare Adv Plans, HMOs, etc. Forcing all into Govt HC plan
354 Sec 1177 - Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of Special needs
379 Sec 1191 Govt creates more bureaucracy - Telehealth Advisory Cmtte. Can you say HC by phone?
425 Lines 4-12 Govt mandates Advance Care Planning Consult. Think Senior Citizens end of life. Seniors will be interviewed every year for health issues and decisions made as to what care they can or can't receive (This was even too much for the Washington Post:"If Section 1233 is innocuous, why would "strategists" want to tip-toe around the subject? Perhaps because, at least as I read it, Section 1233 is not totally innocuous.")
425 Lines 17-19 Govt will instruct & consult regarding living wills, durable powers of atty. Mandatory!
425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 Govt provides apprvd list of end of life resources, guiding you in death
427 Lines 15-24 Govt mandates program for orders for end of life. The Govt has a say in how your life ends
429 Lines 1-9 An "adv. care planning consult" will be used frequently as patients health deteriorates
429 Lines 10-12 "adv. care consultation" may include an ORDER for end of life plans. AN ORDER from GOV
429 Lines 13-25 - The govt will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order.
430 Lines 11-15 The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life
469 - Community Based Home Medical Services=Non profit orgs. Hello, ACORN Medical Services here!!?
Page 472 Lines 14-17 PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORG. 1 monthly payment to a community-based org. Like ACORN?
489 Sec 1308 The Govt will cover Marriage & Family therapy. Which means they will insert Govt into your marriage
494-498 Govt will cover Mental Health Svcs including defining, creating, rationing those services
838 - sections 440 and 1904 "Dirty secret No. 1 in Obamacare is about the government's coming into homes and usurping parental rights over child care and development."(Editorial online)
"President Barack Obama is warning Americans not to believe “rumors” that the health reform initiative he’s pushing will lead to a government-run health care system or push Medicare recipients to die rather than running up a hefty tab for medical services. ", and I heartily concur. Don't believe rumors, check them out. See for yourself whether or not they are true.
Here's one rumor that needs quashing right off the bat, coincidentally it is one begun by da prez himself:
"Let me start by dispelling the outlandish rumors that reform will promote euthanasia, or cut Medicaid, or bring about a government takeover of health care. That's simply not true," Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address released Saturday morning."
Simply Outlandish! How can he say such a thing?
Well, if his positions on healthcare reform are anything like his positions on economic reform, the answer is simple: He's a Marxist. He cares nothing for facts, let alone principles. His concern is solely for advancing his agenda, which boils down to: what he wants to be true, he demands that we accept as being true. He knows nothing of the principles of economics (let alone of liberty), or of the massive economic disruptions that are caused by govt interfering in peoples choices, or the stifling effects to real freedom and liberty that follows from such actions by an interventionist government.
He knows not, and he cares not (for a truly revealing look at the full meaning of nObama Care, see this from my local St. Louis Tea Party and summed up by Gateway Pundit here).
He knows even less about that 1/7th portion of our economy (which, btw, 'economy' refers to the decisions and actions of free people making choices in their lives, within a free market - aka Liberty and Freedom) which is referred to as Healthcare.
Now, actual facts are abundantly available, as are the principles which elucidate them, principles which brings the seeming random cacophony of disintegrated data into intelligent relief (See Bastiat's "What is seen and what is not seen" or Adam Smith and many more), he knows nothing of the real facts of European (see Theodore Dalrymple's recent "Is there a 'Right' to Healthcare" for the euro-perspective of a 'healthcare' provider) and Canadian (Krugman dis's himself) healthcare which clearly point to the results he here denies as 'outlandish'.
He no's only what he wants to believe. He is, in fact, one of those modern children of Descartes I referred to earlier who see conspiracies everywhere, who thinks that what he believes deeply and sincerely, must obviously be true, as he could imagine it being no other way.
Øbama said "This isn’t about putting government in charge of your health insurance; it’s about putting you in charge of your health insurance. Under the reforms we seek, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan,” Obama insisted."Uh-huh. Perhaps if he actually read some of the reform bill he supports he wouldn't be so quick to 'behave stupidly'.
Let's make sure we don't fall into the same trap, ya with me? Ok then, let's refer him to those pages in 'his' healthcare bill which refute his platitudes in the lingo of governmentalese black 'n white, shall we?
First from my friends hit parade of citations:
""Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get"
When we look at that page (linked to above), we find the following text:
"SEC. 123. HEALTH BENEFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
12 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—
13 (1) IN GENERAL.—There is established a pri
14 vate-public advisory committee which shall be a
15 panel of medical and other experts to be known as
16 the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to rec
17 ommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced,
18 and premium plans."
It then goes on to list the numbers of people who will either be Federal Employees, or not Fed employees, but appointed by the President or the Comptroller, or other functionaries of the Federal Government. Nice useful distinction there, don't you think? I somehow miss out on the 'Private' decision making nature of that apparatus.
No matter, reading a bit further on, down at the bottom of
Pg 31, and carrying over to the next page, we find this section describing what sort of people these non-federal employees, who are appointed by federal employees, are to be:
"(5) PARTICIPATION.—The membership of theMy oh my, I don't know about you, but my concerns about a govt committee deciding what is best for me, about it ceasing to remain a private decision, are fully alleviated by the portion that says "...and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system...", isn't that comforting!? At least One Practicing Physician (... OR...) health professional (you might want to look up just what is meant by a 'health professional'... unless you have an aversion to administrators and bureaucrats being involved in your health care, that is) will certainly balance out any undue influence caused by those pesky non-federal employees, who are appointed by federal employees.
24 Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least
25 reflect providers, consumer representatives, employ-
1 ers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in health
2 care financing and delivery, experts in racial and
3 ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with dis
4 abilities, representatives of relevant governmental
5 agencies. and at least one practicing physician or
6 other health professional and an expert on children’s
7 health and shall represent a balance among various
8 sectors of the health care system so that no single
9 sector unduly influences the recommendations of
10 such Committee."
And don't you just love the inclusion of "...experts in racial and ethnic disparities..."? Isn't it comforting to know that Gov't Committee's on the make up of healthcare services will be sure to move beyond any chance of acting stupidly and letting issues of race or ethnicity, become involved in our healthcare concerns? I just feel warm and tingly all over.
A little further down, we find this,
"11 (b) DUTIES.—Ladies & Gents, this "...shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce..." should strike fear into your hearts. If not, pull your head out of your ... er... the sand... and look at the long and pitiful history of govt 'helping' any portion of any industry to innovate and reduce its problems.
12 (1) RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND
13 ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee
14 shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and
15 Human Services (in this subtitle referred to as the
16 ‘‘Secretary’’) benefit standards (as defined in para
17 graph (4)), and periodic updates to such standards.
18 In developing such recommendations, the Committee
19 shall take into account innovation in health care and
20 consider how such standards could reduce health dis
21 parities."
You should seriously be beginning to flag in your mind whenever seeing the word "Healthcare" to consciously begin seeing the word "Healthcontrol", because that is what will be done, every aspect of will fall under govt standards and controls, and what always results from such measures, will assuredly result in your declining health.
Some things that should pop into peoples minds are the other things gov't has done to care for other sectors of the economy - remember telephone 'service' under the governmental 'one provider' policy of Ma Bell? Remember the wage and price controls of Richard Nixon? Remember the gas station lines of Jimmy Carter?
Or how about this, in the 1930's, gov't mandated regulations to improve the security of banks, peoples access to them, and their reliability. The results? There were huge numbers of panicked runs on banks, and thousands of U.S. Banks collapsed along with their patrons assets. Across the border in Canada, which had no such 'govt help' and attention in their banking system during the same worldwide economic crisis? Zero bank runs, and zero bank collapses (See: FDR's Folly: How Roosevelt and His New Deal Prolonged the Great Depression).
You had better get busy forecasting the same lesson being applied to healthcare. Thomas Sowell points out in a recent article:
"An old advertising slogan said, "Progress is our most important product." With politicians, confusion is their most important product. They confuse bringing down the price of medical care with bringing down the cost. And they confuse medical care with health care.
Nothing is easier than for governments to impose price controls. They have been doing this, off an on, for thousands of years-- repeatedly resulting in (1) shortages, (2) quality deterioration and (3) black markets. Why would anyone want any of those things when it comes to medical care?
Refusing to pay the costs is not the same as bringing down the cost. That is why price controls create these problems. When developing a new pharmaceutical drug costs roughly a billion dollars, you are either going to pay the billion dollars or cause people to stop spending a billion dollars to develop new drugs."
If you still have access to some cash, get yourself a copy of Thomas Sowell's Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One,
"When we are talking about applied economic policies, we are no longer talking about pure economic principles, but about the interactions of politics and economics. The principles of economics remain the same, but the liklihood of those principles being applied unchanged is considerable reduced, because politics has its own principles and imperatives."
If anyone thinks that they will be able to separate their govt aided health and medical care from the state of our govt aided economic care, I submit that you are mortally mistaken. Buy Sowell's book, pay particular attention to Chp. 3 "The Economics of Mecidal Care", or at least take a gander at his article "Alice in Obama Medical Care Land".
For myself, I hereby willingly and knowingly 'dis' Obama's healthcare information.
I'll leave it up to your own judgment whether or not you should do the same. Here are some helpful study guides for you, passed along from my friend David. Do yourself, and our future, a favor - read them - if even 1% of them mean what it seems they mean, and they are passed, we are doomed.
This is not a healthcare bill, it is a lifecontrol bill.
This is not a bill to argue on the merits of whether it will accomplish this or that at more or less cost, this is a bill to be identified and fought on moral grounds of Right and Wrong. The govt has no right to intrude into and control our lives in such ways.
This thing means evil to our lives and liberties, pure and simple. Read it. Identify it. Fight it.
As David would say Make a Difference!
***UPDATED***
Congressmen/Physician lays out "... a charade that will destroy healthcare in America":
(all links are to that page in the actual house bill).
22 of the HC Bill MANDATES the Govt will audit books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self insure!!
30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get
29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill - YOUR HEALTHCARE IS RATIONED!!! You can only get so much "care" per year
42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC Benefits 4 you. You have no choice!
50 Section 152 in HC bill - HC will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise
58HC Bill - Govt will have real-time access to individs finances & a National ID Healthcard will be issued!
59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access 2 your banks accts for elective funds transfer
65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions & community orgs (ACORN).
72 Lines 8-14 Govt is creating an HC Exchange to bring private HC plans under Govt control.
84 Sec 203 HC bill - Govt mandates ALL benefit pkgs for private HC plans in the Exchange
85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs for Benefit Levels for Plans = The Govt will ration your Healthcare!
91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill - Govt mandates linguistic appropriate services..... Example - Translation for illegal aliens
95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The Govt will use groups i.e., ACORN & Americorps to sign up individually for Govt HC plan
85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs of Benefit Levels for Plans. #AARP members - your Health care WILL be rationed
-102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill - Medicaid Eligible Indiv. will be automat.enrolled in Medicaid. No choice
124 lines 24-25 HC No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Govt Monopoly
127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill - Doctors/ #AMA - The Govt will tell YOU what you can make.
145 Line 15-17 An Employer MUST auto enroll employees into public opt plan. NO CHOICE
126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay for HC for part time employees AND their families.
149 Lines 16-24 ANY Emplyr w payroll 400k & above who does not prov. pub opt. pays 8% tax on all payroll
150 Lines 9-13 Biz w payroll between 251k & 400k who doesnt prov. pub. opt pays 2-6% tax on all payroll
167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesnt have acceptable HC accrdng to Govt will be taxed 2.5%
170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (You and I will pay for them)
195 HC Bill -officers & employees of HC Admin (GOVT) will have access to ALL Americans financial/personal recds
203 Line 14-15 HC - "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax" Yes, it says that
239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors, low income, poor will be very affected
241 Line 6-8 HC Bill - Doctors, doesnt matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same
253 Line 10-18 Govt sets value of Dr's time, professional judgments, etc. Literally value of humans.
265 Sec 1131Govt mandates & controls productivity for private HC industries
268 Sec 1141 Fed Govt regulates rental & purchase of power driven wheelchairs
272 SEC. 1145. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!
Page 280 Sec 1151 The Govt will penalize hospitals for what Govt deems preventable readmissions.
317 L 13-20 OMG!! PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Govt tells Drs. what/how much they can own.
317-318 lines 21-25,1-3 PROHIBITION on expansion- Govt is mandating hospitals cannot expand
321 2-13 Hospitals have oppt to apply for exception BUT community input required. Can you say ACORN?!!
Pg335 L 16-25
341 Lines 3-9 Govt has authority to disqualify Medicare Adv Plans, HMOs, etc. Forcing all into Govt HC plan
354 Sec 1177 - Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of Special needs
379 Sec 1191 Govt creates more bureaucracy - Telehealth Advisory Cmtte. Can you say HC by phone?
425 Lines 4-12 Govt mandates Advance Care Planning Consult. Think Senior Citizens end of life. Seniors will be interviewed every year for health issues and decisions made as to what care they can or can't receive (This was even too much for the Washington Post:"If Section 1233 is innocuous, why would "strategists" want to tip-toe around the subject? Perhaps because, at least as I read it, Section 1233 is not totally innocuous.")
425 Lines 17-19 Govt will instruct & consult regarding living wills, durable powers of atty. Mandatory!
425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 Govt provides apprvd list of end of life resources, guiding you in death
427 Lines 15-24 Govt mandates program for orders for end of life. The Govt has a say in how your life ends
429 Lines 1-9 An "adv. care planning consult" will be used frequently as patients health deteriorates
429 Lines 10-12 "adv. care consultation" may include an ORDER for end of life plans. AN ORDER from GOV
429 Lines 13-25 - The govt will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order.
430 Lines 11-15 The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life
469 - Community Based Home Medical Services=Non profit orgs. Hello, ACORN Medical Services here!!?
Page 472 Lines 14-17 PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORG. 1 monthly payment to a community-based org. Like ACORN?
489 Sec 1308 The Govt will cover Marriage & Family therapy. Which means they will insert Govt into your marriage
494-498 Govt will cover Mental Health Svcs including defining, creating, rationing those services
838 - sections 440 and 1904 "Dirty secret No. 1 in Obamacare is about the government's coming into homes and usurping parental rights over child care and development."(Editorial online)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)