Posted on 12/24/2009 5:08:09 AM PST by LS
Folks, I hate to be a perpetual gloomster here, but anyone putting his faith in a Supreme Court reversal of any of this health non-care monstrosity has another think coming. First, the USSC seldom rules in favor of constitutionally limited government. Even in the Affirmative Action slapdown of the University of Michigan several years ago, the Court said in essence, “what you’re doing is wrong the way you’re doing it, but try other methods to reach racial balance.” In the notorious Kelo case, the Court affirmed the right of a local government to take land from one person and give it to another solely on the basis of efficient use of the land.
So prepare yourselves: the challenges to the health non-care bill will be on the grounds of inequality—that is, Nebraska got a special deal—or various “takings” that say that the Federal Government is taking money without constitutional authority. While valid in and of themselves, even if successful, they will result in a nit-picking approach that legitimates the entire premise that a) health care is a “right” and b) everyone else is forced to pay for your right.
Moreover, on the Fox Business Channel, a roundtable of analysts debated the impact on business, and this raises yet another danger of ever repealing this, namely it was argued that small businesses will simply pay the $750 fine rather than pick up the $9,000 health care tab for employees, foisting it on the federal government. I’d do the same if I was a small business owner, but this avoids the central point that the government will instantly adjust those fines to be $10,000. Once something is deemed illegal, the fine is the easiest thing to manipulate—just look at speeding fines.
The Republicans, both in the House and Senate, combined for a 256/257 votes against the bill (Cao, LA voting for the House version, but announcing he would vote against the conference bill). I don’t want to ever, ever again hear how the two parties are the same. You will never see such a stark difference in ideology, where even the limp-wristed RINOs voted against this horrid legislation. Elections do have consequences.
That said, the next election can swing dramatically the Republicans’ way, and make little difference. First, it’s darn near impossible to withdraw or repeal legislation once the bureaucracy starts to take root. Rush Limbaugh has explained this quite well. Second, the ideological commitment to take something away that has already been given requires an increased factor of two or more—look at how long it took to get rid of just some of the farm welfare programs, which lasted from the New Deal to 1994. No conservative president or congress has ever dismantled the Department of Education or Department of Energy.
But here’s the real genius of the Democrats’ plan, and it has even escaped some of our conservative commentators: Why did the Democrats put in place the taxes immediately, but the benefits only after 2014? Isn’t that the exact opposite of the FDR strategy of carrots first, sticks later?
In fact, the Democrats are well aware of the Tea Parties, which are now going to work against liberty. Here’s how: by passing the stimulus first and ballooning the deficits—which the Tea Parties and Liberty Groups became obsessed with (rightly so)—the Democrats will now run specifically on the tax increases as a means to battle the deficits and claim that any attempt to repeal any of this health non-care bill will be fiscally irresponsible and will result in higher deficits. I don’t know if it will work, but it’s the only play they have right now, and Republicans, running on dismantling the health non-care system will be fighting both the image of taking health care away from granny AND “spending more money.”
What’s the solution? There are only two avenues that I can see. One is to not only elect Republicans (and ONLY Republicans, because third parties are going to destroy any chance of repealing this by electing more Democrats), but to elect so many conservative Republicans that you actually get a massive majority in the House to the point that they can, and will, de-fund any and all parts of this. That’s a very, very tough row to hoe, because Newt tried it in 1995 and was permanently damaged by it. And we’re talking a very big majority—perhaps 60-100 new seats. Possible? Maybe. Likely? Not right now. The other alternative is a massive citizen strike, of such tremendous proportions that you pull a reverse “Piven-Cloward.” This is the radical Left strategy of so overloading the social welfare system that it breaks down and forces a radical revolution. (If no one gets their welfare checks, they take to the streets).
Lots of people have been blustering that they won’t pay their taxes, or will “go to jail” rather than follow parts of this bill—and absolutely a black market in medicine and drugs will appear—or otherwise refuse to comply with regulations. The problem with this approach is that the new legislation is going to be regulated and policed almost entirely either by the IRS or by employers. So it shifts the burden of civil disobedience from the many to the few who have the most to lose (owners), while at the same time taking the resolution of all protests out of the hands of citizen juries and into the hands of the government (the Tax Man).
If the Liberty Groups/Tea Parties were smart, they’d fold up their tents and attempt to get a two-thirds GOP majority in both houses, which is our last, best hope.
You summed it all up.
The battle has been lost. We must salvage what we can of our Country before it’s too late.
And of course, once this passes, anyone who tries to repeal it will have to contend with ads saying "That evil GOP is trying to take away your health care." Good luck winning against that.
speak for yourself
And good luck doing anything once the USSC says Health care IS a constitutional right...ROE v. Wade anybody...
I’m no expert, but I predict the nation will be broke in very short order; without healthcare for anyone.
There's no other way. Getting a two-thirds majority in both houses simply isn't going to happen. The media and ACORN will not allow the vote count to come out that way.
Some state has to go first. Then others will follow. But it's time to leave the party.
ROE v. Wade anybody...
Legalizing the murdering of babies has come full cycle.
The EASIEST WAY for us to end this nonsense is to contribute to Scott Brown’s candidacy (Kennedy seat). The Dem nominee up there isn’t lighting anyone on fire and the rumor is that State Sen. Brown is leading that race.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2413769/posts
I heard that we will have two retirements before the end of 2010 in the Supreme Court...two liberals but two Justices just the same. I wonder who will be chosen to replace them.
Here’s his website:
http://www.brownforussenate.com/senator-brown
It’s too bad the talk show guys are mostly on vacation right now because they could invite him on their shows and raise some money, like Hoffman in NY-23.
“..No conservative president or congress has ever dismantled the Department of Education or Department of Energy.”
Has one EVER even made a serious attempt to do this?
Brown is a rino
There os one thing to try before secession, nullification. It a tough play too. But the options to fight this in washington dc are dead now. There is no way gop will repeal this even if they get the numbers.
http://texas.tenthamendmentcenter.com
I would imagine that Texas and Alaska, two states that I think could stand as their own countries, would be the first to leave (again).
It is going to go down like this... first... countries like China simply are going to stop lending money to us because they know that with over a hundred trillion dollars of unfunded liabilities, there is simply no way the US government can pay the interest on the debt, much less any principal.
Second, because the need for money still won't be contained, the US will simply resort to printing more money. Both of these moves will make the US dollar even more worthless than it is.
Third, since no welfare program ever gets cut, and demand always increases, defense will be gutted to help pay for pay for welfare. Though at that point it will be moot because worthless dollars cannot buy advanced military technology, and I cannot imagine that soldiers are going to put their lives on the line for nothing.
Without a real currency, and without a military, states which want freedom will be able to leave very easily, and foreign powers will be able to take for themselves what is left. It will be just like what happened to the Western Roman Empire. It was so burdened by government expenditures that it simply had to abandon vast swaths of territory because it could not afford to pay its military to defend them, and in the end enemies from without were able to take for themselves what was left.
My daughter is one year old now. And I do not imagine that the country she will end up growing old in will be the United States of America.
Well in MA, that is to be expected. But he will NOT vote for this bill, if his website is any indication.
I’m no expert, but I predict the nation will be broke in very short order; without healthcare for anyone.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
A safe bet seeing that the nation is broke already and healthcare is already becoming harder to obtain. We will soon be trying to import doctors and nurses by the millions from the Phillipines, India etc. Many people will not be able to see the same provider twice in a row even if they do manage to see someone for two or three minutes in six months.
Ronnie with Ed Mease...this was before serious grassroots conservative groups though.
Constitutional amendment for congressional term limits and the the right of recall.
Simply put, the people have to elect huge Republican/Conservative majorities in both houses, the presidency would be nice too, but not necessary. Then they would have to begin impeachment hearings on all those federal judges who violate their oath of office, to wit, they do not uphold the constitution. After a couple of hundred impeachments, maybe things would change.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.