Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Clinton Unable to Save Sink from Obamacare in FL Election
Truth Revolt ^ | 3.12.2014 | Bradford Thomas

Posted on 03/12/2014 9:40:18 AM PDT by Cheerio

Bill Clinton lent his political muscle to Democrat Alex Sink’s election campaign for the 13th congressional district of Florida, but to no avail. Sink wound up losing to her Rand Paul-supported Republican opponent, David Jolly, in what many analysts are calling a bellwether election for the impact of Obamacare on the 2014 election cycle.

In a high-profile election that pitted candidates on opposite sides of the Obamacare issue and saw over $11 million spent, both parties pulled out the big guns in the days leading up to Tuesday's election.

The week before the election, Bill Clinton offered his support to Sink, recording a phone call that went out to local Democratic volunteers. The Huffington Post reports that over a half-dozen House Democrats also emailed fundraising appeals on Sink’s behalf.

(Excerpt) Read more at truthrevolt.org ...


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: 2014; clinton; gop

1 posted on 03/12/2014 9:40:18 AM PDT by Cheerio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

That’s the second sink that had issues with Clinton.


2 posted on 03/12/2014 9:42:16 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

In before the Sink Emperor comments ... oh, wait ...


3 posted on 03/12/2014 9:43:37 AM PDT by Fast Moving Angel (It is no more than a dream remembered, a Civilization gone with the wind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeshugeMikey

Cougar Clinton PING!


4 posted on 03/12/2014 9:44:46 AM PDT by Graewoulf (Democrats' Obamacare Socialist Health Insur. Tax violates U.S. Constitution AND Anti-Trust Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

Most interesting because Sink is known as a rainmaker here due to her ability to raise very large amounts for cold hard cash quickly.
She certainly outspent Jolly.
Good omen.


5 posted on 03/12/2014 9:44:55 AM PDT by bill1952 (Choice is an illusion created between those with power - and those without)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

Typical GOP war against women. Headline should probably be: “Female Democrat ‘Beaten’ by White Male.”


6 posted on 03/12/2014 9:45:40 AM PDT by rktman (Ethnicity: Redneck. Race: Daytona 500)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

Clinton has always had problems where sinks are concerned.....................


7 posted on 03/12/2014 9:45:58 AM PDT by Red Badger (LIberal is an oxymoron......................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bill1952

Interesting insight, thanks.
Occasionally we get a hopeful development.


8 posted on 03/12/2014 9:46:47 AM PDT by nascarnation (I'm hiring Jack Palladino to investigate Baraq's golf scores.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio
Bill Clinton lent his political muscle...?
9 posted on 03/12/2014 9:46:48 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

Rand Paul’s strategy of attacking Clinton makes good political sense. There will be a backlash against perversity.


10 posted on 03/12/2014 9:48:29 AM PDT by allendale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

He just let her sink.


11 posted on 03/12/2014 9:54:34 AM PDT by rightwingintelligentsia (Democrats: The perfect party for the helpless and stupid, and those who would rule over them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
THIS MUST GO VIRAL---Hillary Clinton insists O/Care is too important to “turn the clock back.”
The Politico ^ | March 5, 2014 | David Nather / FR Posted by 2ndDivisionVet

In a question-and-answer session following a lecture at UCLA, Hillary Clinton suggested she’s open to different ways of achieving the health law’s goals.

She praised Arkansas — the state where she and her husband rose to political fame — for carrying out a new approach to expanding Medicaid coverage, by using the federal money to buy private health insurance for more than 100,000 low-income residents.

Hillary Clinton called the Arkansas move, spearheaded by Democratic Gov. Mike Beebe and a Republican-led Legislature, a “brilliant approach” that allowed the state to increase health coverage despite GOP concerns about adding more people to the traditional Medicaid program.

The Arkansas House approved the plan’s renewal Tuesday...(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...

================================================

Even if Hillary manages to escape the O/Care stigma, she is toxic----b/c lock-stepping Dems are super-glued onto Obamacare ......

BACKSTORY In 2009, retiring Arkansas Rep. Marion Berry presciently warned that ObamaCare was setting up Democrats for a huge 2010 midterm defeat; just as “HillaryCare” led to Democrat loss of 54 House seats in 1994.

Obama scoffed at such concerns; he told Berry, “Well, the big difference here is you’ve got me.”

SO MUCH FOR O'S EGOTISM 2010 Republicans went on to win 63 House seats and six Senate seats.....the largest swing to Repubs in the House since 1938. So Obama was right---the difference was him. ROTFL.

On to 2016 (and 2014).

12 posted on 03/12/2014 10:04:41 AM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

Bill Who?


13 posted on 03/12/2014 10:08:25 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rightwingintelligentsia

Sink sank.


14 posted on 03/12/2014 10:08:27 AM PDT by Aria ( 2008 & 2012 weren't elections - they were coup d'etats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

Hey, Bill, the ‘90’s called.
They want their pop-culture President back.


15 posted on 03/12/2014 10:08:53 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: All
I GET A WARM AND FUZZY FEELING OVER THIS Bill Clinton endorsed Sink and starred in her robocalls----but he's still the kiss of death---sucking up for his and Hillary's squalid 2016 ambitions.

Fact remains, Florida is a scab that wont heal WRT Democrat's presidential ambitions---- b/c of the Gore loss to Bush over a hanging chad. The USSC was deployed due to the legal brilliance of Bush SoS James Baker---who outmaneuvered Gore's people at every turn. The Dems ploy is to count and count until they have the votes to win----the Supremes ordered the count to stop.

========================================================

I do believe Billy-Boy---paranoid over Hillary's chances--- stepped in it bigtime when he advised Obama to keep his promise---to let people keep their plans.

Now, more than ever, the electorate is focused on the blunders of Obamacare........ which preceded Hillarycare. In fact, it was 2007 Hillary Clinton who originally used the wonderfully reassuring “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan."

Hillary's 2007 campaign website was unearthed by America Rising. America's Rising found written on the website under "HILLARYCARE"---AKA Hillary’s American Health Choices Plan---the phrase: “if you have a plan you like, you keep it.”

VIDEO http://burstupdates.wordpress.com/2013/11/15/hillary-2007-if-you-like-your-plan-you-can-keep-it/

See a smiling Hillary (above) in 2007, saying: “You can keep the doctors you know and trust. You keep the insurance you have. If you have private insurance you like, nothing changes, you can keep that insurance.”

===========================================

Debbie Wassername must be swilling vodka and valium as we type. Lock-stepping Dumbos kept swearing they were gonna run and win on the (gag) "glories" of Obamacare b/c "if you like your plan, you can keep your plan."

(waiting for hysterical laughter to die down)

THE DUMBOCRAT LOSER LIST MOUNTS: Lock-stepping Democrats Feinstein, Boxer AND Pres Obama all endorsed the San Diego Democrat mayoral latino loser Alvarez (Third World pressure groups ordered to vote illegally were no-shows).

Obamacare was touted as Democrat Valhalla. As far back as 2008, at the presidential debate in Nashville, Democrat candidate Obama advanced his signature healthcare plan---ultimately enacted, by an historic straight Democrat party-line vote, into the "Affordable Care Act"

QUOTING 2008 OBAMA: "No. 1, let me just repeat, if you’ve got a health care plan that you like, you can keep it. All I’m going to do is help you to lower the premiums on it. You’ll still have choice of doctor.” Repeated over and over again---- with his promise that every American family would be saving $2500.00 on healthcare costs.

Significantly, Obamba NEVER corrected lock-stepping Democrats, all reading from the same Democrat talking points, all of them repeating the same Democrat promises---over and over again.

LOCK-STEPPING PARTY LOYALTY NOT SEEN SINCE 1930-40's ERA EUROPE Obama And the Dems marched in lockstep.....the persistent Dumbocrat drumbeat ---- in obeisance to Obama ---- kept ringing reassuringly in our ears: "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan."

SEN. BARBARA BOXER (D-CALIF): “So we Democrats want people to be able to keep the health care they have. And the answer to that is choice of plans. And in the state exchange, we’re going to have lots of different plans, and people will be able to keep the health care coverage they need and they want.” (Sen. Boxer, Press Release, 2/8/11)

SEN DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D-CALI): “I listened to the president and I believed him when he said, 'if you like your plan, you can keep your plan.' I believed he was correct. I didn't realize there were all these codicils attached to it. President Obama should never have promised that people would be able to keep their health plans. I think he was done a disservice. Someone should have stopped him and said – on his staff. There's this condition and that condition."

SEN. MARY LANDRIEU (D-La): “If you like the insurance that you have, you’ll be able to keep it.” (MSNBC’s Hardball, 12/16/09)

THEN-HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER NANCY PELOSI (Dim-CALIF): "We must pass the O-care bill so we can find out what’s in it."

The lock-stepping Dumbo list goes on and on.

16 posted on 03/12/2014 10:10:06 AM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graewoulf
with friends like the CLINTONS who needs Enemies?


17 posted on 03/12/2014 10:10:16 AM PDT by MeshugeMikey (Jesus came to Save not Entertain / Ground John Kerry Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MeshugeMikey

Does that bottle really contain Mrs. Bill Clinton’s Pee?

I can see the ad now- - - -

“Cougar Pee is what you need, to be as admired as if you were Mrs. Bill Clinton, the most admired Cougar in America. Take a swig today!”


18 posted on 03/12/2014 10:13:26 AM PDT by Graewoulf (Democrats' Obamacare Socialist Health Insur. Tax violates U.S. Constitution AND Anti-Trust Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Liz

I am sure there is folly in my thinking but I have thought for a long time that some sort of catastrophic insurance could be provided to those below certain income levels...to CITIZENS, not illegals.

And this would be for private insurance - not the takeover farce that is Obamacare. However, not sure what is cheaper - letting them go to the emergency rooms like they are now or giving them a bare bones private insurance plan.


19 posted on 03/12/2014 10:21:28 AM PDT by Aria ( 2008 & 2012 weren't elections - they were coup d'etats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Graewoulf

Mrs Clinton refers to it in private.... as Cougar Wee Wee!


20 posted on 03/12/2014 10:22:25 AM PDT by MeshugeMikey (Jesus came to Save not Entertain / Ground John Kerry Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: MeshugeMikey

CWW!
This stuff is good!
Makes my skin
Look like Cottonwood,
Bark, that is.


21 posted on 03/12/2014 10:24:46 AM PDT by Graewoulf (Democrats' Obamacare Socialist Health Insur. Tax violates U.S. Constitution AND Anti-Trust Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: allendale

Rand Paul’s strategy of attacking Clinton makes good political sense. There will be a backlash against perversity.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I agree.


22 posted on 03/12/2014 10:29:36 AM PDT by Din Maker (If Ted Cruz gave Rand Paul one of his balls, they'd both have one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio; Grampa Dave; tubebender; NormsRevenge; budwiesest; Carry_Okie; forester; sergeantdave; ...

Ya, well… Bill Clinton may have been the 1st Black President, but Obama is the last!!!


23 posted on 03/12/2014 10:33:23 AM PDT by SierraWasp (Bill Clinton, America's 1st Black PresidentÂ… Obama, IS the LAST!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graewoulf

Interesting that the GOP managed to eke it out despite the Libertarian carve-out. Interesting too that Paul broke ranks for a Libertarian. That will cost him.


24 posted on 03/12/2014 10:38:14 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (ObamaCare: Make them pay; do not delay.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

Agreed. My concern is that the RINOs will cave in again to the Obamacrats.

The con-artist challenge by Democrats to RINOs to “Fix” the failed Federal Medical Insurance Law, Obamacare, is now approaching a decision point: April Fools Day, 2014.

Always eager to do nothing unless it is something that might make the Democrats hate them less, the GOP Establishment is actively searching for ways to help “their best friends across the aisle” on the failed Obamacare Law which is set to fail April Fools Day, 2014.

The GOP-E has recently picked up Romney’s “Torch of Tyranny” (Romneycare), and are happily working on their own version of Federal Medical Inurance called “RINOcare.”

Will the TEA Party Reps. in the US House rise up and replace “Doormat for Obama” Boehner, and then ABOLISH the RINOcare replacement of Obamacare, or will everyone just sit on their hands and be happy to be everybody’s fool, again?

Romney is hoping that Boehner’s RINOcare prevails, as it will allow Romney to run again as the GOP-E Nominee in 2016.

BTW, why are so many RINOs so determined to continue the financial destruction of America by advocating Federal RINOcare?

Obamacare has proven to millions of Americans that Federal Medical Insurance will always be doomed to fail, a lesson ignored by our sorry Federal RINOs.

FORWARD !

[BTW, have you ever noticed that the Obamanation command “FORWARD !” is ALWAYS towards the Financial Cliff?]


25 posted on 03/12/2014 10:42:56 AM PDT by Graewoulf (Democrats' Obamacare Socialist Health Insur. Tax violates U.S. Constitution AND Anti-Trust Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

No matter how badly ObamaCare threatens to hurt the Democrats this year, Democrats running for re-election can’t vote to repeal it, since doing so would anger the Democrats’ pro-ObamaCare liberals and keep them away from the polls.

The Democrats must find a way to get ObamaCare out of the news. Yesterday’s Republican win in Florida was a test case of whether bashing the Koch brothers day and night was a winning formula to distract the voters. Since it wasn’t, we should expect increasingly desperate, harebrained attacks on whatever or whoever Harry Reid’s paranoia convinces him is out to destroy the Democrats.


26 posted on 03/12/2014 10:44:59 AM PDT by Bluestocking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aria
I am sure there is folly in my thinking but I have thought for a long time that some sort of catastrophic insurance could be provided to those below certain income levels..

Your folly is ignoring charity. There is an important difference between charity and entitlement: The truly needy will get help before the creeps get anything. Charity demands a change in behavior if the recipient is able. Entitlement demands nothing, and becomes and indentured constituency.

27 posted on 03/12/2014 11:13:39 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (ObamaCare: Make them pay; do not delay.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Bluestocking

Rush said today that some of the Dems will decide to run against Obamacare, after Sink tried running on a platform of “fixing” it. (It needs “fixing” all right.)

I think the ones who actually voted for it will have a hard time taking that tack however. Sink didn’t vote for it so she had a little more latitude.

Best guess is that they’ll try to talk about anything but Obamacare. Second guess is that they’ll be working hard to nominate Romney again in the GOP primaries so that they can neutralize the issue with Romneycare.


28 posted on 03/12/2014 11:16:46 AM PDT by Norseman (Defund the Left-Completely!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Graewoulf
Will the TEA Party Reps. in the US House rise up and replace “Doormat for Obama” Boehner, and then ABOLISH the RINOcare replacement of Obamacare, or will everyone just sit on their hands and be happy to be everybody’s fool, again?

That has been the question since Boehner took the Speaker's chair.

Romney is hoping that Boehner’s RINOcare prevails, as it will allow Romney to run again as the GOP-E Nominee in 2016.

Reduce, reuse, recycle. Who could get excited about that creep?

BTW, why are so many RINOs so determined to continue the financial destruction of America by advocating Federal RINOcare?

I think it is because they are facing demographic reality. The longer the aged live the more medical care they will require and the more Social Security will drain. Both sides want the aged to die. See tag line.

[BTW, have you ever noticed that the Obamanation command “FORWARD !” is ALWAYS towards the Financial Cliff?]

Think of the powers our creditors (that we bailed out) will acquire in a national bankruptcy. There is a reason he was named George WALKER Bush.

29 posted on 03/12/2014 11:20:49 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (ObamaCare is Medicaid: They'll pull a sheet over your head and send you the bill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

Both of you have good points. I think the government should play a role in subsidizing high deductible plans for the indigent so that no one ends up without personal health insurance if they lose a job, etc. But the subsidized plan should be a person’s own private plan, not an employer plan or a government plan like Medicare.

The subsidy should be enough to cover a catastrophic plan when a person has no ability to keep up the premiums on the personal plan they chose originally.

Then charity, whether via hospital and doctor forgiveness of money due, or private charity from others, could step in and help people out with their deductibles and co-pays.

It’s important when doing this, though, to not create a tax wedge that keeps people from looking for work to get back on their feet, as the current Obamacare disaster does.

Government should also pass a law specifying that once an individual has health insurance, they will always be insurable, and they will always be able to switch insurance companies without consideration of pre-existing conditions. Then pass a grace period law that enables everyone access to insurance one time, or when they turn 19 or 20 years old. That would take care of the pre-existing conditions problem.

With this approach, both Medicare and Medicaid could eventually be scrapped, Most people would prefer to continue with their private insurance throughout their lives if the money currently being dumped into Medicare and Medicaid were redirected to a system of subsidies.

With all that in place, healthcare costs would continue moderating under the pressure of mostly high-deductible plans, as they have been since such plans started becoming much more common recently.


30 posted on 03/12/2014 11:27:38 AM PDT by Norseman (Defund the Left-Completely!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

Sink sank sunk.


31 posted on 03/12/2014 11:42:39 AM PDT by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson ONLINEhttp://steshaw.org/economics-in-one-lesson/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
That’s the second sink that had issues with Clinton.

My thoughts, exactly!

32 posted on 03/12/2014 12:00:49 PM PDT by KosmicKitty (WARNING: Hormonally crazed woman ahead!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

I see from the posts above there are plenty of folks who think the idea of Clinton helping a Sink is amusing as heck.


33 posted on 03/12/2014 12:02:32 PM PDT by Cyber Liberty (H.L. Mencken: "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

Clinton support has been the kiss of death for any candidate except himself.


34 posted on 03/12/2014 12:33:53 PM PDT by Optimist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Norseman
I think the government should play a role in subsidizing high deductible plans for the indigent so that no one ends up without personal health insurance if they lose a job, etc.

Why? How do you justify taking money by force from one person to dispense medical treatment to another? When does "enough" become "Enough!"?

The only role of State governments in health care that I see is in managing contagious diseases. I see no healthcare role for the Federal government enumerated in the Constitution.

35 posted on 03/12/2014 12:54:43 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (ObamaCare is Medicaid: They'll pull a sheet over your head and send you the bill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

Did he receive his obligatory blow job from Sink?


36 posted on 03/12/2014 12:56:36 PM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

Dateline Nov 2016:

Clinton Unable to Save Clinton from Obamacare in Presidential Election


37 posted on 03/12/2014 1:51:12 PM PDT by IAGeezer912 (One out of every 20 people on the face of the earth are Americans. We have won life's lottery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio; SierraWasp

Has BJ Clintoon had a successful campaign for another rat after his Impeachment?

Seems like he is the kiss of eternal sleep when he campaigns for rats.


38 posted on 03/12/2014 1:53:13 PM PDT by Grampa Dave ( Obozo Care is a Trinity of Lies! Obozo Care is probably a serious Black Swan event.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

You r such a dirty boy, dirtboy. :)


39 posted on 03/12/2014 2:00:03 PM PDT by Delta Dawn (Fluent in two languages: English and cursive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

Didn’t he campaign with Terry in Virginia?


40 posted on 03/12/2014 2:00:21 PM PDT by KC Burke (Officially since Memorial Day they are the Gimmie-crat Party.ha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

You justify it the same way you justify any other action in a Democracy. You vote on it. If most people feel the way you do, and they don’t by the way, then the poor suffer and starve. If, on the other hand, most people feel that we live in a rich enough nation that we should not countenance people starving in the streets, and going without adequate shelter and medical care, then you’ll be on the losing end of that vote.

As for being “forced”, yes, you will pay your taxes, as voted upon by the majority, or you’ll eventually end up in jail. That’s part of living in a country governed by laws. And healthcare isn’t a constitutional right, but that doesn’t mean that laws can’t be passed ensuring that the destitute don’t get it.

As for “enough” becoming “Enough,” we went past that point long ago, and I agree that we need to cut the federal government way, way, back in scope and size. I just question your choice of priorities, and I suspect I wouldn’t be the only one to question them.


41 posted on 03/12/2014 3:26:31 PM PDT by Norseman (Defund the Left-Completely!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Norseman

“ensuring that the destitute don’t get it” should read “ensuring that the will get it.”

misstated before...


42 posted on 03/12/2014 3:32:03 PM PDT by Norseman (Defund the Left-Completely!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Norseman

okay trying again....”ensuring that the destitute will get it.”

sheesh...


43 posted on 03/12/2014 3:33:04 PM PDT by Norseman (Defund the Left-Completely!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

Sink sunk


44 posted on 03/12/2014 3:54:32 PM PDT by minnesota_bound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Norseman
You justify it the same way you justify any other action in a Democracy.

What "Democracy" would that be? This is a constitutional republic.

You vote on it. If most people feel the way you do, and they don’t by the way, then the poor suffer and starve.

Yeah, who cares about enumerated powers, private property, and no standing army? That's all so passe. /s

If, on the other hand, most people feel that we live in a rich enough nation that we should not countenance people starving in the streets, and going without adequate shelter and medical care, then you’ll be on the losing end of that vote.

People weren't starving in the streets before there were food stamps. You sound just like a Democrat. Earth to Norseman: People fed their neighbors when they were hungry. My grandparents sat a half-dozen or more at their table every night. At that time, 25% of American households had servants' quarters. When charity was the coin of the public welfare, we were a richer country.

As for being “forced”, yes, you will pay your taxes, as voted upon by the majority, or you’ll eventually end up in jail. That’s part of living in a country governed by laws.

Laws you say? Well let's take a look at that. The Supreme Law is the Constitution. Here is what its principal architect had to say on this topic:

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." - James Madison criticizing an attempt to grant public monies for charitable means, 1794 Hence, the "laws" upon which you rely are unlawful. But let that not deter you in the covetous desire to use other people's money to make yourself feel magnanimous, just, and benevolent, thief.

And healthcare isn’t a constitutional right, but that doesn’t mean that laws can’t be passed ensuring that the destitute don’t get it.

Yes, it does. I don't care what Roberts says.

As for “enough” becoming “Enough,” we went past that point long ago, and I agree that we need to cut the federal government way, way, back in scope and size. I just question your choice of priorities, and I suspect I wouldn’t be the only one to question them.

My "priority" in this vein is to see the mechanics of charity work as they once did, MOTIVATING the able poor to better themselves. The system you advocate does the opposite.

45 posted on 03/12/2014 3:56:02 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (ObamaCare is Medicaid: They'll pull a sheet over your head and send you the bill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

Yes, it’s a constitutional republic. It’s also governed by democratic means. They aren’t mutually exclusive terms.

Who’s picking on private property? Anyone who taxes it? You think a government can exist without taxation of any form? Where does that Utopia (or more likely anarchy) exist?

Yes, people were starving before there were food stamps. And yes, private charity filled most of those stomachs at the time. That doesn’t mean they wouldn’t have starved without private charity, and you have no idea whether or not some actually did starve, do you? At a minimum, during the Great Depression, many were underfed and malnourished. You want to return to a time when hoboes relied upon secret signs on fences to indicate who the charitable were, and who to avoid? Really?

You think we were wealthier because more families had servants? What about the servants? Why were so many people willing to work so cheaply that the average family could afford to hire them? Did they think we were a wealthy society? And were we, really, just because we could find someone to work that we could afford to hire. That’s a strange, and very limited, definition of wealth.

Then you quote James Madison to justify calling me a thief, so enough already. You obviously just want to pontificate, not discuss rationally. But I do love the way people like you saddle the high horse and call everyone who disagrees with them on any particular issue everything from thief to liberal to Democrat without the slightest notion of what we really stand for.


46 posted on 03/12/2014 4:31:58 PM PDT by Norseman (Defund the Left-Completely!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Norseman
Yes, it’s a constitutional republic. It’s also governed by democratic means. They aren’t mutually exclusive terms.

There are exclusions when it comes to the government's constitutionally limited powers. The public cannot merely "vote" to increase those powers with which to get the goodies. There is an extended amendment process, which has not been invoked for this purpose. Hence, the welfare state as we know it is illegal.

Yes, people were starving before there were food stamps.

Document that.

You want to return to a time when hoboes relied upon secret signs on fences to indicate who the charitable were, and who to avoid?

San Francisco spends $165 million a year on services for homeless people, but all that money hasn't made a dent in the homeless population in at least nine years.

Poor people are useful to the Slave Party. They vote for pols who then get to make illegal deals on behalf of their benefactors. That is why the Democrats are the party of the extremely rich.

At a minimum, during the Great Depression, many were underfed and malnourished.

How many starved? Write it down with sources sirrah. Moreover, there are more people who in some respects are malnourished now, only they are obese. Guess which one is more hazardous long term? Guess where those many of those kids eat breakfast and lunch?

You think we were wealthier because more families had servants?

If you start putting words into my mouth this conversation is over. The poor found jobs. They were fed. They were housed. They were productive. They were taught skills with which to climb the ladder. That increased wealth. What you want destroys it.

Why were so many people willing to work so cheaply that the average family could afford to hire them?

Because those doing the hiring didn't have to deal with Social Security, MediCare, and the local housing bureaucrats. Nor did the poor have a government tenement waiting as long as they voted for the welfare plantation.

Then you quote James Madison to justify calling me a thief, so enough already.

No, I quoted James Madison to prove that your bogus assertion that the democratically enacted "laws" that supposedly permit the forced confiscation of private property for the supposed public welfare are in fact illegal. You just don't like it that I posted the facts.

But I do love the way people like you saddle the high horse and call everyone who disagrees with them on any particular issue everything from thief to liberal to Democrat without the slightest notion of what we really stand for.

| BWA HAW, HAW, HAW, HAW!!!

I knew where you were coming from when I believed that kind of crap thirty years ago. I have since learned better. You hate what the welfare system has become but you pretend that it is superior to what preceded it. It is not. It has destroyed families. Why? Because it profits those in charge, who paid handsomely for Mr. Kinsey to publish his fradulant "research." Why? Broken families produce competing claims, crime, and other contentions that increase the power of the state, employ scads of bureaucrats, police, lawyers, social workers, and other "fix-its." It produces a permanently indentured underclass. The cost of supporting it drags the middle class down too. Its overlords enact regulations supposedly for the public health and safety that in fact destroy their jobs, so that the wealthy sponsors of said regulations can make more money elsewhere. The entire democratic system is corrupted, and you love it.

Yes indeed, that apparently is what "we" stand for.

47 posted on 03/12/2014 4:59:48 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (ObamaCare is Medicaid: They'll pull a sheet over your head and send you the bill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson