This is not about a frivolous question of which provisions are acceptable and which are unacceptable. This is about a power struggle between the principles the founding generation were willing to stake their "lives, property, and sacred honor" for, and those who, throughout the history of civilization have arrogated unto themselves power over other people's lives.
The current "issue" called "health care reform," or its equally obnoxious semantic twin "health insurance reform," is just the invasion of liberty by arrogant elected officials which has finally aroused citizens who, heretofore, ignored the decades-long power grab by those who were supposed to protect "We, the People's" constitutional principles.
Now, citizens are seeing that it is a matter of "principle," not an issue of semantics over wording.
They should not allow their elected representatives to be coopted by "blue dogs" or any other "wolf in sheep's clothing" that would allow what may turn out to be the most important watershed moment in the history of American liberty to be further threatened. Now, Conrad and Sebelius, and others, sensing the voter mood are throwing out "compromise" talk this weekend, all to punt for better position down the road. Seize the moment for the sake of posterity and just say, "no"!
A word from the author of our Declaration of Independence regarding citizens and oppressive government might give some backbone to today's citizens:
"The most effectual means of preventing the perversion of power into tyranny are to illuminate . . . the minds of the people at large, and more especially to give them knowledge of those facts which history exhibits, that they may. . . know ambition under all its shapes, and . . . exert their natural power to defeat its purposes." - Thomas Jefferson
And, for more wisdom from the same source:
" . . . this is a tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for a second, that second for a third, and so on, till the bulk of the society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery, to have no sensibilities left but for sin and suffering. Then begins, indeed, the bellum omnium in omnia, which some philosophers. . . have mistaken it for the natural, instead of the abusive state of man. And the forehorse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follws that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression."- Thomas Jefferson
‘Git yer grubby hands outta MY pockets.’
It’s that simple. My sign for Obama. I know he’ll relate to the slack English grammar, speaking Ebonics the way he does when necessary.
This is a ruse, simply government care by another name, except with double speak terminology. This is a move to confuse the issue, and appear like they are being “flexible”.
This is a dangerous move, and shows very like movement off of the monstrosity they have proposed. I trust most people will see right through it.
You are exactly right.
ANY compromise on the overall bill and the philosophy behind it, will make it look like a victory from a newly moderated Democratic Party. THey will thus be emboldened to push other aspects of the bill they think they can and will “win” on. We’ll be left with something very similar to the monstrosity they proposed initially -—1017 pages of Social Engineering gobbledygook that would make a perfect bookend to the Tax Code. NO COMPROMISE!
ANY “concession” the Dems make should be highlighted again and again as NOT THEIR IDEA, therefore a LOSS for them, not a gain.
“Now, citizens are seeing that it is a matter of “principle,” not an issue of semantics over wording.”
Bravo!
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO.
TORT REFORM. HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNTS. LESS GOVERNMENT CONTROL. THOSE ARE THE PRINCIPLES.
Republicans, you better wake up and not let Hussein claim a victory here--the cooperatives forced upon the industry by government is not the pursuit of liberty. Keep your MITTS off healthcare. Period.