Skip to comments.Obama Creates the Stamp Act for Healthcare
Posted on 07/24/2014 11:07:52 AM PDT by Kaslin
Obamacare is what we have always said it was.
Its not just bad policy; its now proven to be poor law too.
Time to repeal it, and replace it with alternative free-market solutions.
Only in Washington, DC would you solve the problem of the government not being able to afford an aging population by burdening the taxpayers with the rest of the population that is uninsurable.
Whether you buy into the Dems argument that the exclusion of subsidies to states without exchanges in the ACA law was a drafting error, a typo, or-- the Republicans contention-- that it was deliberate deceit, the biggest problem with the law is the law itself. And the policy. And the math. And the laws of nature. And the sum total of science that has revealed itself since the beginning of creation.
Anxious to win a Nobel, er, Grammy, er, Golden Globe, er, make a name for himself as the GREATEST PROGRESSIVE WHO EVER LIVED, Obama and his Merry Band of Mental Midgets passed a law that wasnt even read, yet alone proofed for typos.
But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, said the Most Mental, away from the fog of the controversy.
Good thing its not controversial, Nancy, you know now that its been passed and we know whats in it.
Because the fog has lifted and, um, that wasnt a fog. That was a stench so thick you could see it.
Heres a short list of things that are wrong with the law:
1) Subsidies are illegal outside the state exchanges
2) They had to implement a doc fix
3) The law has changed the complexion of the labor force to less work, fewer jobs
4) Taxes, taxes, taxes
5) The law adds to the deficit long-term, it doesnt work as a deficit fighter, Ezra Klein, you freakin liar
6) It does nothing to solve the problem of runaway cost unless you start to ration care and impose price controlswhich is likely the next step
7) It imposes another level of bureaucracy to a system already burdened by bureaucratic expense
8) It interferes with the relationship between the doctor and the patient-- which is the most important relationship, economic as well as professional, that needs to be restored to make the system work
9) Its been used as a political tool to beat up religious and other groups with whom progressives disagree
10) Its an overreach of government power interfering with God-given rights
11) Its another boondoggle subject to vote buying schemes
12) The law cant be implemented; witness, um, the constant delays
The law is so bad that Obama has promised to defy the courts and implement it even if the courts find against it.
Why does that matter? Only because what that really admits is that ultimately to make the law work and in this case we use the term work only in regards to implementation, not policy successthe federal government will have to use coercion.
That is to say the law is so bad, that since it cant be implemented any other way, it will be implemented by force if necessary.
We have entered a very dangerous time in our nations history when laws arent being bent to national exigencies, but rather broken because of personal whims.
So the fight against Obamacare is the Stamp Act, the penny tax on tea, the Gunpowder Alarms of today. This is the same existential threat that faced our grandparents.
We face this new crisis-this new threat to the security of our Nation-with the same courage and realism, said Franklin Roosevelt about the threat from Hitler, who successfully implemented universal healthcare with the help of death panels. Never before since Jamestown and Plymouth Rock has our American civilization been in such danger as now.
And what happens tomorrow is largely up to you. If you want to be defeatist, go ahead. I'm going to fight.
We will either prove ourselves worthy of previous generations who bequeathed to us liberty unencumbered, or we will be found wanting, giving away those gifts that God told us could not be given over to any man or government.
Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord. And I shall repay.
Has anybody asked the Democrats who voted for this what the intent of the law was?
Nope. Why? Because they did not read it.
So, even if SCOTUS throws it out, we still get it
Bad politicians make bad laws. If we stuck to the original 10 we would be better off.
Yeah? Without getting into inflammatory rhetoric, I think we will have passed the tipping point. With predictable responses by (at least some) of the people. Those (few?) that still see liberty as our birthright.
“..With predictable responses by (at least some) of the people.”
Triggered some historical memory.
Remember that during the American Revolution, about one- third of the people were still British loyalists, one-third did not even care, and the other third fought the Revolution and WON!
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.