March 22, 2010

Standing in the Fallout

Where do we go from here?

That was the question on the minds of Americans this morning as they awoke to find that Democrats have overridden overwhelming public opposition and forced through a massive entitlement program for the first time in our nation's history, purely along partisan lines.

Obamacare passed not because it reforms the health care system and reduces costs—it will create trillions in debt—but because of backroom deals, bribery, arm-twisting, deceptive accounting schemes, and outright lies from the majority party.

The select few who think they will benefit from this affront to liberty are giddy this morning with the prospect of what has transpired overnight. Most Americans however, awoke to a feeling of dread.

They know entitlement programs always cost far more than Democrats claim. They know that forcing employers to provide health care for all of their workers means that these employers are forced into the uncomfortable position of being bullied into providing health care they can't afford and watching their company's decline, or of letting go valued employees in the worst of times.

The first casualties of Obamacare are already rolling in. A commenter at WRAL lamented that the small business where his wife was employed was forced into firing 35 of their 60 part-time employees this morning because they would not be able to afford their health care. His wife was one of those let go. There will be tens, if not hundreds of thousands more that will lose their jobs. The economy will suffer as a result.

And Democrats are quietly pleased, because more will become dependent on the nanny state they would create and lord over.

America is angry. Americans feel betrayed. And yet the question remains.

Where do we go from here?

Some are calling for the armed revolt against this encroaching tyranny. It was for this specific reason, after all, that our Founders made sure Americans would not be denied the use of arms.

Some misguided souls seem to already be responding to this affront to liberty with violence. I fail to find the usefulness or utility of such symbolic and largely impotent acts. This sort of petty vandalism is not what the Founders sought to protect.

They sought to protect our right to replace—yes, overthow—would-be tyrants and rouges that history has taught us always eventually arrive to usurp power and run roughshod over the rights of the people.

As we have been told countless times by philosophers and statesmen, tyranny is always seeking power and it comes in many guises. Sometimes sunlight is enough to dissuade those who would enslave others. In other instances, the mechanisms of justice can undo such wrongs. Thankfully, the final mechanism our founders instill to protect us from tyranny has not had to be used since an isolated event 64 years ago.

We live in a nation full of freshly-experienced combat veterans and graying patriots alike that still remember their oaths to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. The taste of liberty is much sweeter for them, having been to parts of the world where such things cannot be taken for granted. Pray that we are not required to call upon their service in a struggle against our own countrymen. God protect us all if we are forced to such extremes by a power-mad clique intent on transforming citizens into dependent subjects.

I have some hope that the courts will respond favorably to the many states suing to eradicate this unconstitutional scheme, or that November's elections will destroy the Democratic majority and lay the ground for a full repeal of a bad law designed purely for one party's political gain.

The thought of the morally-required alternative is almost too much to bear.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at March 22, 2010 11:31 AM

We need the home addresses of our congressmen.

Posted by: David at March 22, 2010 11:40 AM

This is one graying patriot that is ready

Posted by: ron at March 22, 2010 11:58 AM

The line has been crossed. All we wait for now is the enforcement. We will not be the first to start the unthinkable because most of us have see this in some form before. So if there is still time and if you think there is something that has not been tried please do your best. Butfor me, I am tiered of them spitting in my face and refusing to listen. I have my doughts that we will see another election. My guess is that we will see immigration reform next and anything else they canram in. Somewhere is the process something will trigger this dance...

Posted by: s4f at March 22, 2010 12:38 PM

There are several steps to be taken before armed rebellion is necessary.

1. Suits to block this Obamanation.

2. Elections in November and in 2012.

3. A Constitutional Convention.

The only time to consider armed rebellion is when it appears a Constitutional Convention will fail.

Of course, if you live in Texas as I do, seccession is at least a 4th option to wistfully consider short of armed rebellion.

Just buy your weapons before 2014 because it's going to take at least that long to sort out the non violent options.

Posted by: Riverrat at March 22, 2010 01:19 PM

Texas may just get an influx of like minded patriots as new residents. My once great state of Florida has become a cesspool of illegals and liberal Yankees. It is so discouraging.

Posted by: capt26thga at March 22, 2010 02:33 PM

You people are very misguided. Those of you who entertain thoughts of an armed revolt have no idea what would lie in store for you. The response of the government at all levels would be swift and sure. You are foolish to even suggest such a thing.

This legislation is simply the beginning to bring America up to par with the rest of the civilized world. It ain't perfect but it's a start.

In a few years this legislation will be viewed by history as being as monumental as The New Deal, The Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, etc. Furthermore, history will also record the opponents of this legislation as nothing more than what they are, uninformed people being led around like cows with a ring in their nose.

Thirty years from now people in this country will be scratching their heads and asking, "Why in the world would some of those folks back in 2010 have been so opposed to all of the citizens of this great country having health care?. I suppose it was just the ignorance of the masses being played for fools by right wing whackos."

The other question they'll be asking in few decades will be, "Why did it take so long to ensure that all Americans have healthcare?!"

As for a constitutional convention, ain't gonna happen. There's good reason why there hasn't been one since the founding our our nation. Do you realize what would be at stake, even IF those who support a convention could meet the Constitutional requirements for a convention to become reality. It ain't gonna happen.

Finally, neither Texas nor any other state is going to secede from the Union. Secession simply isn't an option. It's a fantasy.

While this legislation leaves much to be desired, it is, at least, a start in the right direction. Thank God!!

Posted by: Dude at March 22, 2010 02:34 PM

You obviously don't understand. The legislation that you mentioned, even the Civil Rights Act, are all laws that conservatives feel have robed us of freedom. This particular bill just put finished on an effort by both parties to shred the Constitution. If it stands, that is it.

Posted by: David at March 22, 2010 02:53 PM

The other thing about confrontation. Most Anglo-Saxons are not interested in blowing up planes or other stupid expressions. They know our weaknesses and that is the politicians. They are scared. Any effort will be aimed in that direction.

Posted by: David at March 22, 2010 02:59 PM

overridden overwhelming public opposition?

Um Obama campaigned on HCR, he's done pretty much what he said he was going to do so if the public is opposed to it why'd they vote the Democrats in?

Are you sure you know what you're talking about?

Posted by: salvage at March 22, 2010 02:59 PM

It is unlikely that this country is going to last 30 more years in its present form. We are about to loose our Triple A bond rating for Treasury instruments. Enactment of a huge new entitlement, nmust be followed by a large increase in capital gainse, corporate and personal taxes.

The result is huge inflationary pressuer, increasing unemployement and a tightening of lending policies at all levels.

The so-called "civilized countries, who are even more broke than we are heading for the same implosion, but faster. Think what Grreece is going through right now. Their government, today, does not have the cash on hand to fund day to day expenditures, much less pensions and health care responsibilities.

That is the near-term future.

The longer term future is a large scale reduction of defense and a corresponding increase in instability across the globe. When the world's policeman canno longer enforce stability, the class of civilizations will be impossible to ignore. Imagine a nuclear-armed mid-east, whose only resources is terrorism and oil, under economic pressure fro an imploding West.

Imagine your own scenarios. None are pretty. All will directly impact our safety.

Don't worry, there will be no armed rebellion, just the slow steady process of Darwinian selection.

Posted by: garrettc at March 22, 2010 03:10 PM


Why don't you just move to Europe or Cuba? That seems to be your "rest of the the world". Maybe Venezuela?

As to the equivalent of a Constitutional Convention let me refer you to the 21st amendment in 1933.

Read the Texas Constitution, Dude. You're right, its probably not going to happen but for those of us that are libertarian it's a "wistful" dream when we have correspond with Stalinists like you.

Best wishes and enjoy Cuban heath care.


Posted by: RiverRat at March 22, 2010 03:25 PM

You are wrong. Many people voted for Obama for many different reasons. Some thought he was cute, some liked the way he talked, most didn't like McCain, but few were voting for his principals. Only 20% of Americans are dedicated socialist. But look at this, 46% of Americans are on the US payrole in some manner. Only 20 to 30% of Americans pay tax of any degree. That is setting up friction that is clearly being expressed here. We are tired of our government and the direction it is taking. You can not say that elections indicate the will of the people and we will need to do something to get the politicians back on track. Our forefathers set up a system of elections much different from what we have. Originally only people of property were able to vote. This process that we are currently seeing shows the reason why.

Posted by: David at March 22, 2010 03:29 PM

but few were voting for his principal?

Really? You know this how?

Are you sure you're not just upset because the guy you didn't vote for is doing stuff you don't like so rather than accepting the democratic reality you're just making stuff up to compensate? Like pretending that the majority thinks as you do despite the obvious truth that they do not?

Posted by: salvage at March 22, 2010 03:47 PM


Well, the insurance companies will only be "private" for a few years. Then they'll be bankrupted, management bailed out by the Obamunists, and they'll become wards of the elite political bureaucracy just like GM, aka Government Motors. Enjoy your Yugo and your Cuban heathcare. That's what your friends, like Dude, voted for.

If the useful fools commenting here don't understand this maybe they could take the time to study the 80 year history of the Soviet Socialist Republic as well as France and Britain more recently.

Posted by: RiverRat at March 22, 2010 03:54 PM

That's really helpful Dave(TM)



Posted by: RiverRat at March 22, 2010 03:58 PM

How I long for the good old days when we had a legitimate President. Someone who lost the popular vote but had the Supreme Court rule 5-4 that a state can't recount it's own votes. That was Democracy at it's finest! Having a bill past the Senate with 60 votes, and then pass the House with 219 is...Tyranny!

If you don't like the way our President and Congress govern, vote for other people. That's the American way. It worked wonders in 1994, it worked wonders in 2008.

Wishing for the good old days when only propertied white males had full civil rights is not only unproductive, but it's fairly disgusting.

Posted by: Jim at March 22, 2010 04:23 PM

For Dude,

Something to consider and add to the fears: 90% of the US Military voted for the Conservative candidate. The Armed Forces Network has had to - for the first time in its history - run ads reminding Military personnel that bad-mouthing the President or other Federal elected officials is a court-martial offense.

Because from what I've seen and heard, the vast majority of the Military looks at these folks as fools at best and tyrants at worst. The US Military has a very, very long history of staying OUT of politics, as it well should be!

But things are starting to rumble and that is scary. Tens of thousands of Americans are veterans, combat trained and experienced and they are buying guns and ammunition at record rates.

I dunno about you, but if *I* were a politician, especially a liberal politician, I'd be scared witless right about now.

I mean, IF, say 30,000 Armed Americans marched on Washington to drag those folks out of their offices and tar and feather them...Would the Military - especially the average Soldier - feel that stopping them was defending the Constitution...or that helping them would be?

Think about the fall of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact nations. Think about the actions of the people and those Soldiers. Think about Boris Yeltsin, riding on a Tank. *I* surely would be were I one of the folks that voted for this bill.


Posted by: Orion at March 22, 2010 04:37 PM

...The President is not elected by the popular vote. The Supreme Court vote was 7-2. The 5-4 vote was different. Try to get your facts straight. Also, why not mention that the newspapers went in afterwards and counted all the ballots and found that Bush won FL?

Yes, it is tyranny. Ever hear of the Tyranny of the Majority? Especially with the illegal maneuvering required to get those 219 votes (Cornhusker Kickback, Gator Aid, Louisiana Purchase, etc.)...And the same bill DIDN'T pass the House and the Senate, in violation of the legislative process that's been used for hundreds of years. Yes, that's tyranny.

Vote for other people. Yes, that would work nicely if not for ACORN and other Democrat groups supplying tens of thousands of fraudulent votes in state after state after state. C'Mon, even YOU guys admit you use illegal vote-gathering methods. It worked in Washington, Ohio, Pennsylvania...and it almost worked in Massachusetts, didn't it?

Nice straw man there with the 'only propertied white males'...Anyone here - except you - mention race at all? No, that'd be you. And only you. Racist.


Posted by: Orion at March 22, 2010 04:42 PM

RiverRat, The 21st Amendment is in no way an equivalent of a Constitutional Convention to amend the Constitution of the United States. That language to which you refer in the 21st was used therein simply to confirm the Constitutional requirements of amending the Constitution, in this case an amendment repealing a previous amendment.

Article V of the Constitution clearly tells us what has to happen for a Constitutional Convention to be called. It's not an easy thing to accomplish. I quote:

"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress"

So, you have to get 2/3 of the states to agree to call for a convention. Then, any proposed amendments have to be either ratified by 3/4 of the state legislatures or by conventions in 3/4 of the states.

The reason that we won't have a Constitutional Convention is because a convention, unlike a proposed single amendment to the constitution, would make the "entire" constitution subject to being amended, even our precious Bill of Rights. Regardless of which political party happens to be the "party du jour", that just ain't gonna happen. There's simply too much at stake and too much to lose.

As for your fantasies of secession, I don't need to read the Texas Constitution. However, for you to get a clear understanding on the issue of secession I do recommend that you research the SCOTUS ruling known as Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869). Unless and until that ruling is overturned, states do not have a constitutional right to secede from the Union, in spite of libertarian rhetoric to the contrary.

I'm not a Stalinist. I'm an American citizen and I'm a patriot. Fortunately, I've taken the time to learn a little bit about debating with folks like you, who frequently resort to fallacies in argumentation. When you can't debate a topic on the issues, what the heck, just call the other fella some insulting names. Yeah, that will settle the debate!

I have no intention of moving out of MY country. Feel free to move if you wish, but I'm staying here.

David: Actually, I do understand. I think that it's you who don't understand. I know many conservatives; family and friends. However, I can't say that I personally know ANY self professed conservatives today who view the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as a "loss of freedom".

Anyone who does consider that legislation as having "robbed them of their freedom" is in a very small minority. Imagine, if you will, the political future of any politician in America today who would propose the repeal of that legislation. Such thinking is far removed from mainstream conservatism.

Posted by: Dude at March 22, 2010 04:52 PM

Dude, if/when this abonmination is forced on the people, I don't think you and your socialist friends are going to be as happy with the results as you had planned on being.

Posted by: emdfl at March 22, 2010 05:04 PM


Bush v Gore was 5-4.

Of course I've heard of the tyranny of the majority. What's your point, that no legislation is legitimate unless it has 100% support in Congress and with the public? I'd love to hear you explain your remedy to this sort of 60 vote tyranny.

Illegal maneuvering? Please. Yeah, some congressmen got things into the bill that help their constituents, that's not illegal, that's how laws get made.

The House passed the Senate bill last night, in what way was there a different bill?

As for the tens of thousands of illegal ACORN votes I'd love to see you link to one fraudulent vote in one federal election. Just one please.

No Orion, David didn't mention race, or sex, when he gushed about the the good old days when our Forefathers only let some adults vote, I was just reminding him who those some people were and weren't. I'm glad to see you agree with me that we're much better off having rid our country of those qualifications.

Posted by: Jim at March 22, 2010 05:20 PM

Dude, salvage,
You are wrong. Your arguments are empty and I do congratulate dude on admitting that all you want to do is debate. This bill has started a ball rolling and I feel that people are going to react like they never have in the past. Obama seems hell bent on distroying the country. So far we have not seen an economic reaction, that will come in due course and as people begin to loose their jobs and savings, things will happen.

Posted by: David at March 22, 2010 05:26 PM

The other thing about confrontation. Most Anglo-Saxons are not interested in blowing up planes or other stupid expressions. They know our weaknesses and that is the politicians. They are scared. Any effort will be aimed in that direction.

I'm not quite following you, David. Are you advocating that right-wingers ASSASSINATE politicians such as OBAMA and PELOSI? Can you be a bit more explicit about what you're hinting out, while we're out here on a public forum?

Why be so coy?

Posted by: Phoenician in a time of Romans at March 22, 2010 05:27 PM

CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. March 19-21, 2010
“As you may know, the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate are trying to pass final legislation that would make major changes in the country’s health care system. Based on what you have read or heard about that legislation, do you generally favor it or generally oppose it?” If oppose: “Do you oppose that legislation because you think its approach toward health care is too liberal, or because you think it is not liberal enough?”

Favor: %39
Too Liberal Oppose: %43
Not Liberal Enough Oppose: %13

=> %52 vs %43

i'm sorry, the truth is that this %13 who opposed the bill because is it not liberal enough ain't a gonna be voting republican this fall

and more:

“Who do you trust more to handle major changes in the country’s health care system: Barack Obama or the Republicans in Congress?”

Barack Obama %51
Republicans %39

“Who do you trust more to handle major changes in the country’s health care system: the Democrats in Congress or the Republicans in Congress?”

Democrats in Congress %45
Republicans in Congress %39

Posted by: tacitus voltaire at March 22, 2010 07:56 PM


I think you're confusing the issue. The 7-2 vote was that Gore's re-count strategem's were unconstitutional (different standards to try to get his counts up). That pretty much ended the election. The 5-4 vote was that Gore should stop his nonsense and that the date for recounts was past. Don't forget, the papers did another recount 'just for fun' and found out Bush won anyway, by any standard. That didn't get as much publicity, of course.

To Phonecian, anyone who is advocating any sort of violence or unlawful insurrection against the Government of the United States is a fool and probably a troll. Nice use of emphasis there...are YOU a troll? Starting to smell like one.

The next 'battle' is electoral and at the ballot box in November, not in the streets.

Jim again - I think you'll find the vast majority of Conservatives are non-racist. Remember, the Republicans are the ones who passed the Civil Rights Act while the Democrats did everything they could to derail it.

My point on the tyranny of the majority is exactly that. Read up on it. What you have is a group of people who are ramming legislation down our throats. Despite huge, vocal majorities showing that they do NOT want this bill. And the only way they PASSED the bill was through so many dirt backroom deals that about 2/3 of the States are already preparing legal challenges against it.

These people are supposed to REPRESENT their people, not RULE them.


Posted by: Orion at March 22, 2010 08:16 PM

Yes one of the votes in B v G was 7-2, another was 5-4, and a 3rd was 3-6. Different cases have different internal votes but what counts and get's reported is the final decision, the remedy, which in B v G was 5-4. It was 5-4 to stop the recount on 12/9 and 5-4 to deny Gore any further chances to get a recount.

My point isn't that Bush was illegitimate, my point is that there was a far stronger argument about the legitimacy of his Presidency than the fact that while he was in office he signed some bills that didn't have wide based support.

I never said anything about Conservatives in general being racist, I made a comment about two of the posts made here. David was dreaming of better times if only some people didn't have the right to vote as per our forefathers wishes.

As for the Civil Rights act, yes it had support from northern Republicans (and Democrats) but it certainly was opposed by Conservatives, and all most all of the Southern Democrats. The negative reaction of conservatives to the Civil Rights Act is the direct cause for the South switching from being solid Democratic to being solid Republican. The racists left the Democrats and have voted Republican ever since. Just ask Newt Gingrich.

Lastly, what huge vocal majority is against this bill? 43-39-13, with the 39% for the bill and 13% who wanted a bill that was more liberal.

Even if you lump the ultra liberals into the 43% opposed to the bill that's still only 60-40. The country was 60-40 or more against continued occupation of Iraq from about 2005 on. That wasn't tyranny either, although it did cost the Republican party in the 2006 and 2008 elections.

Were you honestly asking Bush to listen to the polls about Iraq? Elections matter -- well at least when Republicans win!

Posted by: Jim at March 22, 2010 09:58 PM

Oh, I'm wrong, usually when I think other people are wrong I bring up like and points to back my statement up, I don't rely on my naked declaration alone.

Would it be too much beyond your paygrade to explain how I'm wrong when I point out that Obama ran on HCR and won thus suggesting that the American people in fact want HCR?

Posted by: salvage at March 22, 2010 10:39 PM

I just re-read the blog to which we're responding. The last sentence says: "The thought of the morally-required alternative is almost too much to bear."

Morally-required alternative??? This would be funny if it weren't so absurd. You folks who subscribe to this line of reasoning are a puzzle to the rest of us. Thank God that you're an insignificant minority.

Morally-required alternative??? Get over it. America is changing, for the better.

Posted by: Dude at March 22, 2010 11:02 PM

Armed rebellion? And against whom, exactly, do we rebel at this moment? Storm the Congress and do what, exactly and to whom? Are Congressional staff as culpable as their bosses? Are appointed officials as culpable as elected officials? Career bureaucrats?

No. Now is not the time. But the mere fact that so many peaceful, honest, patriotic Americans are actively considering the potential necessity of revolt is a clear indication of how deranged and destructive to liberty the socialists (that is what the democrats have revealed themselves to be) truly are. Remember that even Hubert Humphrey--hardly a conservative firebrand--said, decades ago, that tyranny seems remote in contemporary America, yet it's always possible.

Here might be some signs of increasing concern:

(1) The courts refuse to consider challenges to Obamacare, or rule that government can require Americans to buy whatever they want them to buy and can imprison and fine them if they refuse. Does anyone see a Chevy or Chrysler in their future? Look for the union label?

(2) The socialists continue to impose all of the trappings of the worker's paradise on America, including taking over energy, education, throwing open the borders, etc., using corrupt, ugly, unconstitutional methods.

(3) Socialist attempts to establish a domestic police/security/intelligence force--Obama spoke of this kind of brown shirt force even while campaigning--to enforce socialist orthodoxy.

(4) Socialist attempts to restrict or abolish the First Amendment, and particularly, the Second Amendment.

(5) Declaring martial law in part or all of America, in response to a natural disaster or terrorist attack, or on any other pretext.

We can absolutely count on the first two items, and the rest could easily follow. Brownshirts, or in this case, more likely purple shirts, will be necessary because most American police and military will not support Obama and his comrades. Some will. Some always do.

Will Obama try to seize all firearms? When that happens, that could easily be the final trip wire and it would likely be accompanied by declarations of martial law.

What is disturbing is that no rational person will have any difficulty imagining that what I'm suggesting could easily come to pass if Obama and the Socialist party gets their way. Not too much more seizure of power, and they'll be sufficiently emboldened.

But let's remember a few things:

If American descends into internal strife, the crazed dictators around the world will act (much more of Obama and some of them doubtless will anyway). Russia could very well seize a new soviet empire, Taiwan and South Korea could easily be lost, Israel destroyed, global genocides, many South and Central American nations overrun, and the world economy collapsed.

And let's be very, very careful about calling a Constitutional Convention. Once established, a Con Con can literally rewrite the Constitution in any way it pleases. No matter the good intentions of those calling it, that's a terribly, terribly dangerous proposition.

So in the meantime, watch, wait, prepare. Relish in the fact that Obama is the best firearm salesman America has ever seen. Stock up on all one might need to survive if the worst case scenario comes to pass, but do all that you can within the law and the Constitution, first, last and always, to avoid that worst case scenario.

Posted by: mikemcdaniel at March 22, 2010 11:40 PM

Dude, Savage, Jim, and I probably missed a few. Keep trolling. Get out of your Progressive town and look around. We are not a minority. Nullification and Secession are both option. I am hoping that enough States use nullification to force the Federal government back in line but I have little hope at this point. I have come to the point that I don't see how this country can remain in its present form. We have two diametrically opposing cultures (progressive vs Constitutionalism) and the two can not coexist so I think it is just a matter of time. Compound peek-energy and the planned implosion of the economy by members of congress and the bankers and there is really no reason to put up with this mess any longer. I left CA for a reason and not it is fully at the Federal level and I find that unbearable as do mean others. Remember the first revolution was not fought and won by a majority and we are again seeing by the crooks in congress over the last year and more. It will only take an active 3% to stop this mess and before you crow about the government stepping in please research asymmetric warfare and what 3% or more would mean. You may not like it and believe it but that is exactly why it is going to happen unless this stops. We just finished healthcare and now we are starting on immigration. Does anyone really think the country is going to "roll over"? Really?

The number of people looking for cover is growing every day so are the people that know they are going to have to fix this if the politicians don't start listening...

I know that I have wasted my time in writing this. I have lived around progressives for too many years to know you are even capable of changing. On top of that you feel that this is your time. Well I guess it is so go ahead and do your best. But at some point don't say we did not warn you....

Posted by: s4f at March 22, 2010 11:51 PM

"I left CA for a reason and not it is fully at the Federal level and I find that unbearable as do mean others."

That right there makes just as much sense as preaching nullification and secession as majority views.

Posted by: Jim at March 23, 2010 12:50 AM

Bob can you help me understand something? In your post you say:

"A commenter at WRAL lamented that the small business where his wife was employed was forced into firing 35 of their 60 part-time employees this morning because they would not be able to afford their health care."

Why would anyone have to fire people today because of changes that will occur in 2014?

Posted by: Jim at March 23, 2010 12:57 AM

For those of you who are simple enough to want to be like the "Other Civilized" countries of Europe you might want to sheck out their unemployment and social problems. The other main reason that these wonderfully civilized countries can do so much with their health care is because they spend almost no money on defense. They know the US will come to their aid anytime and their armies are worthless. Their birth rates are below replacement levels and the Muslims are taking over their cultures. As far as the election in Fl. is concerned no state is allowed to make up rules that govern federal elections. The SCOTUS had to step in to prevent a mockery of national election laws. Anyone who thinks this arrogance by the Dems is business as usual is full of s**t. And to compare this rotten bill and the majority who did not and do not want with the war in Iraq is not only stupid but devoid of rational thought . If you look at the polls taken during WW II you will see huge swings in public opinion on very successful operations. No one, I repeat no one could ever run a war by poll. What an asinine thing to say. You have to be very young to not understand that. The last thing on this issue is that the US is the last hope of mankind and when we sink to the third world level we will be fighting to save our own skins, not the world's.

Posted by: inspectorudy at March 23, 2010 01:41 AM

mikemcdaniel: Armed rebellion? And against whom, exactly, do we rebel at this moment? Storm the Congress and do what, exactly and to whom? Are Congressional staff as culpable as their bosses? Are appointed officials as culpable as elected officials? Career bureaucrats?


Posted by: wolfwalker at March 23, 2010 06:51 AM

As a member of the armed forces, I'm stunned by the absolute and utter stupidity of this post and the blatant bigotry of those who commented.

I'm not sure I could have imagined a more patently moronic debate.

Posted by: Sam at March 23, 2010 07:16 AM

>We are not a minority.

Really? Weird that Obama got more votes,usually that means a majority but I live in reality so I guess my experience may be a bit different from yours.

I am getting a kick out of these wingnut fantasies about socialized medicine ebing the gateway to communism, I guess in your world you haven't noticed that every single Western democracy has that sort of a system and are still capitalists.

But again reality, it's not for everyone.

Posted by: salvage at March 23, 2010 07:37 AM


hey, take a trip to Europe one day, don't believe all the bs from Steyn and the like about Europe. We are nto getting taken over by muslims, we have proper well funded healthcare, as well as decent education and fine looking women. As for 'a lack of defence spending', well so what, can't see many folk lining up to attack us.

The reason your wingnut lords and masters keep talking smack about Europe is that Europe works, and the sooner you guys get on board, the better for civilization as a whole. Progressives win cause we are always proved right.

Posted by: Mangoes of Evil at March 23, 2010 08:08 AM

You are all right. Violene is not yet the answer but soon can be. I will hold fire until then. A constitutional convention is ideal and very possible and who cares if we throw everything out? Look at what we have! I see so many here educated beyond their intelligence. I cannot kill everyone who is responsible for this. I only have two boxes of .45 shells. Many are not worth the price of the shells. A good thing I have knives, swords, bolts and arrows aplenty. Meyhem is too much work. Property in Belize is cheap. They speak English and it is warm. I like a country founded by pirates. I will still be a Texan until I die. If Texas allows this we are the last generation. We should make them remember. Bang!

Posted by: Odins Acolyte at March 23, 2010 09:52 AM

I do not know all that is in this giant bill but things are beginning to come out and I oppose it and I think in 2014 when tne benefits begin the poor will be shocked by substandard healthcare.

I am trying to become self sufficient, I live in a small farm house nestled next to Hoffman Forrest and I think I could support myself for awhile when our economy collapses under the weight of all of these socialist reforms, I oppose violence but alot of folk who work and pay taxes are tired of supporting those who do not.

A very smug Obama just signed this bill into law, does that mean all of the new taxes start ??? And 16,000 new IRS agents to enforce the new taxes with new expanded powers, when do they get hired and get busy???

Posted by: duncan at March 23, 2010 11:15 AM

Odins: Enjoy your new home in Belize. If you haven't thoroughly checked it out yet, I'd advise that you take a trip down there, explore, investigate to make sure you'll be satisfied living there. Do keep in mind that you Constitutional rights as an American citizen will be meaningless down there.

Sam: Thank you. It's nice to hear from a member of our armed forces chiming in with a bit of a reality check in response to the many "patently moronic" responses in this debate. My hat is off to you, Sir.

Salvage and tacitus voltaire: I appreciate the thoughtful contributions that both of you have made to this discussion. It's refreshing to see some reality based folks adding to this discussion.

And to all of you folks who think that an armed revolution is imminent, I'd suggest that you read news and commentaries from both sides of the political fence, so to speak. Really, it will help you to put things in a more proper, reality based perspective. That's exactly why I (a self described progressive on many, but not all, issues) spend time on reading news and commentaries from across the spectrum.

In fact, even better than that, spend time within your own community to get a feel for how the community at large feels about the current situation. In my community many people disagree with the Obama administration. However, I don't talk of an armed revolution. Get a grip on reality.

Posted by: Dude at March 23, 2010 11:37 AM

For CY: If, as you suggest, that this piece of legislation is unconstitutional, we already have in place a system of checks and balances to decide if it is or isn't unconstitutional. It's known as The Supreme Court of the United States.

I'm sure that many lawsuits will ensue as a result of the legislation. Let the Constitutionally provided system of checks and balances play its role and let the chips fall where they may.

In your blog you state: "Some are calling for the armed revolt against this encroaching tyranny. It was for this specific reason, after all, that our Founders made sure Americans would not be denied the use of arms."

It's my opinion that we have the Second Amendment because the Founders were concerned about tyranny on the local level more so than on a national level. I concede that this is just my opinion.

Nevertheless, in this modern era, an armed revolt on a national scale would be immediately crushed. Think back to the civil rights era and the firm stance by Governor Wallace against integration of the public education system in Alabama. While many of the individual members of the Alabama National Guard surely agreed with Governor Wallace's position, once the Guard had been nationalized by President Kennedy, there was no question as to who was, in fact, the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.

We have yet to experience a revolt of the Armed Forces against the Commander in Chief of our nation. To suggest that they might do so as a result of health care legislation is, I think, delusional. In fact, you insult them to suggest that they may do such a thing, especially over a piece of legislation which seeks to ultimately ensure that all Americans have health care.

Posted by: Dude at March 23, 2010 12:02 PM

@ Orion

"Vote for other people. Yes, that would work nicely if not for ACORN and other Democrat groups supplying tens of thousands of fraudulent votes in state after state after state."

Oh noes..... not the awesome power of a fully operational ACORN office! Kindly forward one credible link... just one, dude... that supports your paranoid delusions about ACORN.

Posted by: montysano at March 23, 2010 03:19 PM

If this erupts into gun violence, just remember that it is YOU on the right advocating it. It is YOU openly talking of breaking windows and heads. It is YOU on the right defying the laws of our nation. It is YOU on the right screaming about the failings of democracy when democracy hasn't failed - you've just failed to get your way. and now it's YOU on the right acting like soon-to-be criminals and terrorists threatening gun violence on the streets of America.

All because you didn't get a vote to go the way you want. You're no better than Saddam's henchmen who would cut off the purple-stained fingers of those who dared to vote in the first elections.

You on the right advocating this violence (and using the 3rd grade "they made me hit them" excuse) are burgeoning domestic terrorists.

Much respect to our police and law enforcement who will jail your law-breaking asses if you do try any of this wingnut crap.

s4f sets it up as progressive vs Constitutionalist. Laughable. What about violent overthrow of the government is in the Constitution. Which Article or Amendment mentions that as a right? It does not. In fact, this barely hidden talk of violence is a crime. It's called sedition. Carrying it out is treason.

You paranoiacs would be laughable if it weren't so frightening that you believe all of this bunker-mentality nonsense.

Democracy worked, even if you don't like the result. This is NOT what George Washington and Sam Adams fought for. They fought because they couldn't get a vote. You had yours. You just lost, and now you're behaving like poorly-trained children.

Democracy worked.

Posted by: CJ at March 23, 2010 10:24 PM

Some are calling for the armed revolt against this encroaching tyranny.

Oh, well, it's America. Somebody's always calling for armed revolt against something or other. I remember when Handicap Parking laws were first instituted. Gunshots rang out over that. And ordinances requiring color-sorted recyclables. Integrated lunch counters. That got ugly. Oddly enough, the only time the US government ever actually rounded up people and shipped them by rail to internment camps, no shots were fired.

We are a strange country.

Posted by: Twinks Tvet at March 23, 2010 10:25 PM

Big deal. There's no way their beloved Kenyan messiah is going to be able to pay for this monstrosity - in 5-10 yrs' time repeal won't even be an issue because it will be so blatantly obvious that there is no way to fund all of the benefits included. Preexisting conditions funded? benefits for illegals? lol. In a way I admire teleprompter Jeebus - he sure does have a way of convincing this country's rubes that there is such a thing as a free lunch. More fool them.

Posted by: Nine-of-Diamonds at March 24, 2010 09:50 AM

"Kenyan messiah"? the man is an American citizen and the President of the United States

Why don't you just nut up, act like man and call him a ni**er? You KNOW you do it in private and you KNOW want to do it in public. Grow a set of nuts.

Say it. Ni**er. You know you'll feel better and all will be able to see what you REALLY are and what your agenda REALLY is.

Posted by: CJ at March 24, 2010 01:26 PM

Oooh yeah! Goldstein's Law is proven once again!

As the length of an internet thread increases, the likelihood that "progressive" slime will resort to racial slurs approaches 100%.

Face it, rube:

1) The shine's coming off your beloved Kenyan jeebus.

2) It's not a mater of politics - it's a matter of mathematics. There is no way the Kenyan can fulfill all the promises he has made re: health care, whether he decides to use the current bastardized model or a utopian 100% gov't run solution.

3) No need to take out your hate on black people. It's a beautiful day outside - go do something constructive, like putting Senator Byrd's linens on the clothesline. lol!

Posted by: Nine-of-Diamonds at March 27, 2010 12:26 PM