Posts Tagged ‘Fascism’

It is always amusing when a Socialist objects to central control — a rare thing indeed.

And yet here is Bernie on the proposed Puerto Rico debt bailout bill currently up for a vote in Congress:

In a letter to Senate colleagues released Monday, Sanders rips the agreement to restructure the island’s $70 billion in debt…

In particular, Sanders takes issue with a new oversight board created under the legislation to oversee Puerto Rico’s finances because the majority of the seven-member panel…The board will have expansive power over Puerto Rico’s economy. <Politico.com, link>

And now for Bernie’s strong statement against central control:

In my view, we must never give an unelected control board the power to make life and death decisions for the people of Puerto Rico without any meaningful input from them at all.

That’s right, Bernie! Welcome to the side of liberty, where have you been?

It is refreshing to see a candidate for president vigorously opposing a powerful, unelected Board whose members are appointed by Washington officials (Democrats and Republicans each get Board seats that would control Puerto Rico).

But, Bernie, I ask you: did you oppose the IPAB inside of Obamacare?

Do you remember Barack Obama’s IPAB?

As I wrote in 2012, the Affordable Care Act includes something called the Independent Payment Advisory Board, or IPAB, a 15-member board that is appointed by the president. Its stated goal is to control Medicare spending. How will it do that? From Cato.org, my emphasis added:

When the unelected government officials on this board submit a legislative proposal to Congress, it automatically becomes law: PPACA requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to implement it. Blocking an IPAB “proposal” requires at a minimum that the Houseand the Senate and the president agree on a substitute. The Board’s edicts therefore can become law without congressional action, congressional approval, meaningful congressional oversight, or being subject to a presidential veto. Citizens will have no power to challenge IPAB’s edicts in court<Cato.org, link >

This is fascism (or socialism, if you prefer): a 15-member panel, unelected, makes decisions that automatically become law and control the amount of care Americans will receive.

IPAB’s unelected members will have effectively unfettered power to impose taxes and ration care for all Americans, whether the government pays their medical bills or not. In some circumstances, just one political party or even one individual would have full command of IPAB’s lawmaking powers. IPAB truly is independent, but in the worst sense of the word. It wields power independent of Congress, independent of the president, independent of the judiciary, and independent of the will of the people.

As of this writing, the IPAB remains a part of Obamacare. It’s still in there, though some Democrats have since come to their senses and urged for repeal of it (link).

So I ask you, Bern baby Bern, where do you stand on the draconian, Barack Obama IPAB?




Read Full Post »

Barack Obama is celebratory once again in the wake of another Supreme Court vote in favor of his monstrosity known as Obamacare. In the wake of this victory for him and his socialist wrecking ball of a law, he uttered a now-familiar phrase: the Affordable Care Act is “here to stay“.

I find the phrase to be Orwellian not because it is more a wish of his than an actual fact, but because Barack Obama has unilaterally (and unconstitutionally) thwarted the full implementation of the law almost since its first passage; that is, Obamacare has yet to fully be here, in all its ugliness, and so it cannot be said to be here to stay.

Employer Mandate Delays

Principal among these delaying actions was Obama’s suspension of the so-called Employer Mandate, which he has done multiple times. Why has he done this again and again? Because the Employer Mandate forces American businesses with greater than 50 employees to offer government-approved health insurance or else pay substantial fines.

There are so many problems with this (and unintended consequences, including that companies with 49 or 50 employees plan to stop hiring) that I won’t mention them all here. Suffice it to say, federal bureaucrats expect the fines to generate $10 billion for Leviathan, all at the expense of private companies who employ the nation.

Will Americans agree that “Obamacare is working” once this mandate hits businesses and their employees?

Cadillac Tax: 2017 implementation

The real destruction to our nation’s health insurance system will come when the so-called Cadillac Tax kicks in in 2017. This provision in my opinion is one of the most sadistic and cruel legislative acts in our nation’s history, particularly considering the spiteful motivation behind it and its lack of any redeeming qualities.

The Cadillac Tax, designed by Jonathan Gruber and John Kerry on behalf of Barack Obama, will levy a 40% tax on the most lucrative, wonderful health insurance plans offered to workers by private employers. That’s right, Obamacare stands for the destruction of above-average health plans that have been available to tens of millions of Americans for years and years, and it is easy to see why mr. Obama elected to launch it in 2017, a year after he will have left office.

Will Americans agree that “Obamacare is working” once this cruel tax hits businesses and their employees?

Independent Payment Advisory Board: Obama has yet to nominate anyone…

The IPAB is to be a 15-member star chamber of central government bureaucrats who will have sole authority to beat down the Medicare system, taking decisions out of the hands of doctors and patients, and even elected representatives in Congress, all in the name of “controlling health care costs”.

The IPAB is so draconian and smacks so much of fascism that even Democrats want it removed from the Affordable Care Act (see Even Barney Frank Knows It’s Wrong and Hates it).

The ACA called for this group of high priests to start wielding power over our senior citizens beginning in 2011, and yet it has never been convened, and its members never named by Barack Obama.

…even after the Senate changed its rules to require only 51 votes to confirm presidential appointees, the President never nominated any IPAB members. <Commonwealthfund.org, link)


Because it is the same as all the other deadly provisions of Obamacare: so bad that if Americans actually experienced it, they would vote to have even more Republicans in Congress and perhaps one in the White House in order to take back control over their bodies and their lives. Barack Obama knows this, and so pursues a slow suffocation of all of us, claiming that “Obamacare is here to stay” and that “…it is working…”.

It is not working, and when it finally achieves full implementation, the extraordinary pain and suffering inherent in the law will descend upon nearly all 270 million Americans who were happy with their health care in the years prior to 2010.

But by then, Obama’s thinking goes, it will be too late to reverse it, and the forces of central power will be fully ensconced in their ivory tower, lording over our health and well-being like so many kings in the year 1150 AD, before the Magna Carta and long before representative government.

Oh, and did I forget to mention that the federal government exempted itself from Obamacare?

Of course it did — this is how tyranny works.

Obama the archer

Here is a long list of Obama’s intentional, unilateral, slowing-down of the law’s provisions, excerpted from a helpful article at Galen Institute (link). If you have the patience to read through this long list, you will experience the full reality of how Barack Obama has deliberately prevented the truth of Obamacare’s consequences from being known.

Changes By Administrative Action

1.) Employee reporting: The IRS announced that, contrary to statutory language, it was delaying the ACA requirement that employers must report to their employees on their W-2 forms the full cost of their employer-provided health insurance. (March 29, 2011)

2.) Medicare Advantage patch: The administration ordered an advance draw on funds from a Medicare bonus program to provide payments to Medicare Advantage plans to temporarily forestall payment cuts called for in the ACA that could have led to cuts in benefits and an early exodus of MA plans from Medicare. (April 19, 2011)

3.)Tax credit subsidies for some people under 100% FPL and for unlawful immigrants: The ACA provides refundable tax credits to U.S. citizens with incomes between 100 and 400% of poverty, but IRS regulations give credits to citizens below 100% FPL in some cases. Also, Section 36B of the ACA grants credits to some non-citizens with low-incomes only if they are themselves lawfully present in the U.S. and cannot obtain Medicaid coverage. IRS regulations contradict the statute and allow subsidies if “the taxpayer or a member of the taxpayer’s family is lawfully present in the United States,” and “the lawfully present taxpayer or family member is not eligible for the Medicaid program.”  (August 17, 2011)

4.) Subsidies may flow through federal exchanges: The IRS issued a rule that allows premium assistance tax credits to be available in federal exchanges although the law specified that they only would be available through an “Exchange established by the State.” (May 23, 2012)

5.) Extension of credits to people receiving employer-sponsored coverage. Section 1511 of the ACA instructs the Labor Department to issue regulations requiring businesses with more than 200 employees to automatically enroll their employees in any health benefits plan offered by the employer. Section 36B correspondingly denies credits to employees covered by an employer plan. IRS regulations contradict the statutory language and allow credits to taxpayers when they are automatically enrolled in employer minimum essential coverage. Treasury implicitly acknowledges there is no statutory authority for its regulatory change. (May 23, 2012)

6.) Delaying a low-income plan: The administration delayed implementation of the Basic Health Program until 2015. It would have provided more-affordable health coverage for certain low-income individuals not eligible for Medicaid. (February 7, 2013)

7.) Closing the high-risk pool: The administration decided to prematurely halt enrollment in transitional federal high-risk pools created by the law, blocking coverage for an estimated 40,000 new applicants, citing a lack of funds. The administration had money from a fund under HHS Secretary Sebelius’s control to extend the pools, but instead used the money to pay for advertising for Obamacare enrollment and other purposes. (February 15, 2013)

8.) Doubling allowed deductibles: Because some group health plans use more than one benefits administrator, plans were allowed to apply separate patient cost-sharing limits to different services, such as doctor/hospital and prescription drugs, allowing maximum out-of-pocket costs to be twice as high as the law intended. (February 20, 2013)

9.) Small businesses on hold: The administration said federal exchanges for small businesses will not be ready by the 2014 statutory deadline, and instead delayed until 2015 the provision of SHOP (Small-Employer Health Option Program) that requires exchanges to offer a choice of qualified health plans. (March 11, 2013)

10.) Employer-mandate delay: By an administrative action that is contrary to language of the ACA, enforcement and reporting requirements for the employer mandate were delayed by one year until 2015. (July 2, 2013)

11.) Self-attestation: Because of the difficulty of verifying income after the employer-reporting requirement was delayed, the administration it would allow “self-attestation” of income and eligibility by applicants for health insurance in the exchanges. (July 15, 2013)

12.) Congressional opt-out: The administration decided to offer employer contributions to Members of Congress and their staffs when they purchase insurance on the exchanges created by the ACA, a subsidy the law doesn’t provide. (September 30, 2013)

13.) Delaying the individual mandate: The administration changed the deadline for the individual mandate by declaring that customers who purchased health insurance by March 31, 2014, would avoid the tax penalty. The law says they would have had to purchase a plan by mid-February to avoid penalties. (October 23, 2013)

14.) Insurance companies may offer canceled plans: The administration announced that insurance companies may reoffer plans that previous regulations had forced them to cancel. (November 14, 2013)

15.) Delaying the online SHOP exchange: The administration first delayed for a month and later for a year until November 2014 the launch of the online insurance marketplace for small businesses that originally was scheduled to launch on October 1, 2013. (September 26, 2013) (November 27, 2013)

16.) Exempting unions from reinsurance fee: The administration gave unions an exemption from the reinsurance fee. To make up for this exemption, non-exempt plans will have to pay a higher fee, which will likely be passed onto consumers in the form of higher premiums and deductibles. (December 2, 2013)

17.) Extending Preexisting Condition Insurance Plan: The administration extended the federal high risk pool until January 31, 2014 and again until March 15, 2014 to prevent a coverage gap for the most vulnerable. The plans were scheduled to expire on December 31, but were extended because it has been impossible for some to sign up for new coverage on healthcare.gov. (December 12, 2013) (January 14, 2014)

18.) Expanding hardship waiver to those with canceled plans: The administration expanded the hardship waiver – which exempts people from the individual mandate and allows some to purchase catastrophic health insurance – to people who have had their plans canceled because of ObamaCare regulations. The administration later extendedthis waiver until October 1, 2016. (December 19, 2013) (March 5, 2014)

19.) Bay State bailout: More than 300,000 people in Massachusetts gained temporary Medicaid coverage in 2014 without verification of eligibility, with the Obama and Patrick administrations using a taxpayer-funded bailout to mask the failure of the commonwealth’s disastrously malfunctioning website. (January 2014)

20.) Equal employer coverage delayed: Tax officials will not be enforcing in 2014 the mandate requiring employers to offer equal coverage to all their employees. This provision of the law was supposed to go into effect in 2010, but IRS officials have “yet to issue regulations for employers to follow.” (January 18, 2013)

21.) Employer-mandate delayed again: The administration delayed for an additional year provisions of the employer mandate, postponing enforcement of the requirement for medium-size employers until 2016 and relaxing some requirements for larger employers. Businesses with 100 or more employees must offer coverage to 70% of their full-time employees in 2015 and 95% in 2016 and beyond. (February 10, 2014)

22.) Extending subsidies to non-exchange plans: The administration released a bulletin through CMS extending subsidies to individuals who purchased health insurance plans outside of the federal or state exchanges. The bulletin also requires retroactive coverage and subsidies for individuals from the date they applied on the marketplace rather than the date they actually enrolled in a plan. (February 27, 2014)

23.) Non-compliant health plans get two year extension: The administration pushedforward by two years the deadline requiring health insurers to cancel plans that are not compliant with ACA mandates. These “illegal” plans can be offered until 2017. This extension prevented a wave of cancellation notices from going out before the 2014 midterm elections. (March 5, 2014)

24.) Reducing cost sharing reductions. The ACA calls for out-of-pocket maximums to be lowered for enrollees with incomes between 100-400% FPL (Sec. 1402), but the provision proved unworkable for those 250-400% of FPL in combination with prescribed actuarial value requirements. The law was changed through regulation to apply to only those 100-250% of poverty. (March 11, 2014)

25.) Delaying the sign–up deadline: The administration delayed until mid-April the March 31 deadline to sign up for insurance without penalty. Applicants simply need to check a box on their application to qualify for this extended sign-up period. (March 26, 2014)

26.) Canceling Medicare Advantage cuts: The administration canceled further scheduled cuts to Medicare Advantage. The ACA calls for $200 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage over 10 years. (April 7, 2014)

27.) More Funds for Insurer Bailout: The administration said it will supplement risk corridor payments to health insurance plans with “other sources of funding” if the higher risk profile of enrollees means the plans would lose money. (May 16, 2014)

28.) Exempting U.S. territories: Despite earlier administration claims that “HHS is not authorized to choose which provisions [of the ACA] might apply to the territories,” HHS waived six major requirements – such as guaranteed issue, community rating, and essential benefit mandates – that were causing serious disruption to health insurance markets covering 4.5 million residents of U.S. territories. (July 18, 2014)

29.) Failure to enforce abortion restrictions. A GAO report found that many exchange insurance plans don’t separate charges for abortion services as required by the ACA, showing the administration is not enforcing the law. In 2014, abortions were being financed with taxpayer funds in more than 1,000 exchange plans. (Sept. 16, 2014)

30.) Risk Corridor coverage: The Obama administration plans to illegally distribute risk corridor payments to insurers, despite studies by both the Congressional Research Service and the GAO saying a congressional appropriation is required before federal agencies can make the payments. (Sept. 30, 2014)

31.) Transparency of coverage: CMS delays statutory requirements on insurance companies to disclose data on the number of people enrolled, disenrollment, number of claims denied, costs to consumers of certain services, etc. (Oct. 20, 2014)

32.) Tax penalty pass: Taxpayers who filed returns based upon inaccurate subsidy data they received from the federal government will not have to repay the government if they received too large of a subsidy, the IRS ruled. (February 24, 2015)

Read Full Post »

A majority of Americans in 2009 knew that Barack Obama’s “Affordable Care Act” was a sham and did not want it to become law.

Proof positive of this, in addition to polling at the time, was that the “Ted Kennedy Seat” in the Senate went to a Republican candidate from nowhere (Scott Brown). According to exit polls, this special election in Liberal Massachusetts turned out to be a referendum on Obamacare.

Famously, Barack Obama pushed forward on his vicious power grab and spun many more lies in support of getting it through a reluctant Congress, then controlled by Democrats in BOTH houses.

These lies were and still are very costly, but many Liberals to this day believe the lies (shocking as it it to acknowledge this).

But today we have a new entry in the bright sunshine of the truth courtesy of Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor Jonathan Gruber, one of the original architects of Obamacare (The Hill.com, link).

Are you ready for your medicine, Liberals?

Behold what the rest of us have known all along about the people behind the Obamacare charade and have been screaming as loudly as we can:

Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass.


If CBO scored the [individual] mandate as taxes, the bill dies.

If you had a law that made it explicit that healthy people are going to pay in and sick people are going to get subsidies, it would not have passed.

It is a kind of ecstasy when a fascist admits to his schemes to enslave a nation — so rare, and so sublime.

I say this because political debate is usually a dead-end. I have many friends and family members with whom I’ve tried to make my case, but no progress can ever be made, it seems. The strength of my arguments gives me the winning hand — after all, I’ve got several thousand years of failed collectivist policies to rely on — but they will not yield, so committed are they to their emotion instead of their reason.

So when a member of their own camp admits the truth about various diabolical actions, it is an elixir, because how can Liberals ignore one of their own, who was on the inside?

Let’s end this post with Barack Obama’s commitment to transparency, in his very own words (from WhiteHouse.gov):

My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government.  We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.

Obama playing golf again while America burns

Read Full Post »

The Government Accountability Office (GAO), a non-partisan group, released a report today in advance of Congressional testimony tomorrow detailing how easy it is to commit fraud within the Obamacare application process and to qualify for subsidies that are not deserved.

We all know, and many of us have no trouble facing, the reality that Obamacare is a giant Ponzi scheme — perhaps the biggest in human history.

It will bankrupt our nation and we won’t have access to preferred doctors and hospitals along the way. Thanks Barack Obama!

From the Huffington Post [link]:

Congressional investigators using fake identities were able to obtain taxpayer-subsidized health insurance under President Barack Obama’s law, according to testimony to be delivered Wednesday.

GAO said its investigators concocted fake identities using invalid Social Security numbers and falsely claiming citizenship or legal residence. In other cases, they made up income figures that would disqualify them from getting subsidies.

Among the findings:

—Contractors processing applications for the government told the GAO that their role was not to ferret out potential fraud.

—Five of six bogus phone applications went through successfully. The one exception involved an applicant who refused to provide a Social Security number.

—Six online applications were snagged by an identity checking system. But investigators just dialed a call center and all six were approved. That seemed to be an open pathway to coverage.

—The GAO also tried to check the reliability of counselors providing in-person assistance. In five out of six cases, investigators were unable to get help. In the final case, the counselor correctly told the undercover investigator that their stated income would not entitle them to subsidized coverage.

I find the call center end-run particularly revealing: here we have healthcare.gov actually working in a few cases to reject the fraudsters, but a quick call to a call center and the fraudsters all got approved anyway.

Do you know what that is?

That is Barack Hussein Obama chasing sign-ups even at the expense of the integrity of the system.

Such are the tactics of a world class Marxist bureaucrat who knows that the more people he can put on the dole, the more he and his ilk can cling to power through patronage and impoverishment of the citizenry (and the illegal immigrants).

Who cares if fraudsters and tricksters receive tax-payer funded subsidies?

No mr. Obama.

If you voted for this man, are you happy with your choice?

Do you think America can survive this?

Read Full Post »

Today’s short post on Obamacare and how it is harming us all: the “vast majority” of signups on healthcare.gov had been previously insured.

Of the people who had actually enrolled in a new plan in 2014, the vast majority had been previously insured. Another way to say that is that for all of the talk about 7-million this and 8-million that, Obamacare’s expansion of coverage to the uninsured was smaller. <source>

This confirms what we have known all along: Obamacare is not about insuring the uninsured; it is about the central power taking control of each of our bodies and how we care for ourselves. It is a naked power grab by a Marxist who is hellbent on putting our nation back into a feudal society, circa 1100 AD, where a King ruled through fear, intimidation, and selective enforcement of edicts, and where impoverished peasants prayed to god that they might curry favor with this or that petty bureaucrat.

In just a few months, tens of millions of citizens will be dumped by their employer-based plans and shoved onto government exchanges where they will find worse insurance that costs them more money.

Barack Obama’s plan continues, and if you are a smug Liberal thinking that all of this is in the service of something good I suggest you get you and your family ready for the pain that is coming straight at you.

One day in the future you are going to tell me that I was right, that you should have listened, that you fell victim to your fantasies and now realize just how wrong you were. That Obamacare is not like the NHS in England or the systems in any other countries you so naively believe have been a model for the monstrosity that we now have here. That your wife and children are NOT getting the care they need, when they need it. 

But it will be too late, in more ways than one.

Obamacar Hindenburg

Read Full Post »

Supreme Allied Commenter Basharr turned me onto this one:


Read Full Post »

I got up close and personal with the Liberal mind last weekend — lunch with a talented and bright family member (let’s call him “Dan”) who is an Obama supporter and a proponent and defender of Obamacare (“talented / bright” in the same sentence as “defender of Obamacare”? I know, it doesn’t seem to add up, but that’s why the country is in the mess it’s in).

The conversation turned to Obamacare, which I had hoped to avoid, but there it was, and away we went. Things stayed cordial, which was a relief, although I suffered a great deal because I had to hold back a great flood of rhetorical intensity so as to protect relationships all around.

In the end I was left with even more respect for how Barack Hussein Obama hijacked a Great Nation. This is because he saw so clearly that Democrats / Liberals who sought payback for the Bush years were astoundingly ripe to be recruited (read: used) into supporting just about any alternative to the existing health care system, even a terrible one, or a diabolical one based on lies and smoke and mirrors. And not only did he see this advantage, he hung onto it, through the Wall Street disaster, which he ignored, and through the Scott Brown Senate victory (the Ted Kennedy seat went Republican for fear of Obamacare).


I now see that such a gamble was no gamble at all, and well worth it to him: central government control over peoples’ bodies and health was the ultimate Great Leap Forward for a young Marxist wanting to stifle freedom in the most free nation ever to grace the face of the earth.

And so I heard the following arguments from Dan:

  • Many other countries have “better health outcomes” than we do here in the USA, and that therefore our pre-Obama health care system had to be fixed with the ACA;
  • The unconstitutional, unilateral delays in ACA implementation are merely “the way politicians always phase things in, particularly legislation with uncomfortable changes”;
  • The notion that Barack Obama is a Marxist, or a man whose policies are influenced by his many Marxist mentors, professors, and family members, is a laughably nutty notion and not worthy of serious consideration;
  • Some people’s health insurance costs are going down because of the ACA;
  • Because I drive on roads and highways, that were paved by the government for my and everyone’s benefit, I must therefore submit to the idea that everything government does is right and good and effective for all the citizens;
  • The Affordable Care Act, while imperfect, is a good solution that can work

Each one of these is easily dismissed (see below), but the overriding point is that no matter how bad the employer-based health insurance model was, the ACA is and will be increasingly far worse. 

The cure is worse than the disease, plain and simple, and this makes Obamacare a moral crime.

This is already readily apparent not only from news reports, but from individual experiences all around us and including ourselves (my wife and I lost our insurance and then were told we could “keep it” for double the price). All arguments against the previous system are literally irrelevant, because to say that the antecedent was terrible is to say and prove nothing about the Frankenstein’s monster that is its replacement.

But one by one we go:

>”Better health outcomes” in other countries?

Is the ACA modeled on health care in any of those other countries?

No, not even one little bit.


>Delays in the ACA implementation are “business as usual among politicians in Washington”? No they are not. Barack Obama has audaciously blazed a new frontier: the selective enforcement of laws, a power that he does not have unless given expressly by statute. He is violating his oath of office. As Charles Krauthammer recently observed, imagine how Democrats will feel if a future Republican president decided that the IRS should not collect capital gains taxes any more because, in his or her opinion, such taxes were “anti-growth and killing jobs”…

This is called lawlessness, a state in which a country can disintegrate rather quickly. The Founding Fathers created a system of checks and balances to censure and curb the recklessness of petty dictators such as the one we have occupying the White House in these sad times, and so Congress must hold the executive accountable for such vicious abrogation of the Constitution. But a Harry Reid Senate will not convict, and a population of voters that is increasingly on the dole is also unlikely to stand up and demand accountability (against their source of the Free Lunch? As if).

>mr. Obama’s Marxist influences and the Marxist ideology inherent in his policy prescriptions are not relevant to discuss? Yes they are relevant, as are the influences and beliefs of every presidential candidate past present and future.

Does Dan think that mr. Obama’s professors and family friends were not Marxists? He is wrong — they were openly Marxist in their political ideology (check out Frank Marshall Davis, to name just one strong influence on the young man), and mr. Obama himself casually admitted in The Audacity of Hope to his association with the “Marxists” in college (a set of connections so strong and undeniable he had no choice but to cop to it as he planned his bid for the presidency).

Does Dan think that Marxism is a Tea Party fantasy and not a real thing in the world? That would be a gravely mistaken fantasy indeed, as the 45 million souls who were starved to death by Mao’s Great Leap Forward (collectivization of agriculture) could attest from the other side of the veil. From the New York Times:

The worst catastrophe in China’s history, and one of the worst anywhere, was the Great Famine of 1958 to 1962, and to this day the ruling Communist Party has not fully acknowledged the degree to which it was a direct result of the forcible herding of villagers into communes under the “Great Leap Forward” that Mao Zedong launched in 1958. <source>

Sounds pretty real to me.

Marx and Mao

One of these men starved 45 million people to death in pursuit of the other man’s political philosophy. Do you know which is which? Does it matter?

Marxism is a real political philosophy and one that has tortured and murdered hundreds of millions of people.

The look on Dan’s face when I mentioned Marxism in the context of mr. Obama was priceless: he shook his head and even put a hand on my shoulder (!!), as if to say my medications would be coming soon, so crazy am I.

But Dan’s reaction is very familiar to me in this late-stage of the American experiment because who among us has experienced the likes of Nazi Germany, or Stalin’s purges, or Mao’s mass-starvation of tens of millions? None of us has. Our entire lives have been essentially sheltered in the bosom of American global hegemony, and  inside the average American mind the history of human atrocity somehow seems to reside not just in the past but permanently in the past — it can’t happen again, and it cant happen here, so there’s no need to be on guard.

If history is any guide (and it should be), this mind-state is ludicrous, and the one that is truly deserving of a friendly hand on the shoulder: it has happened before and can happen again, so perhaps we ought to try to keep eyes and ears open for the slow encroachment of central power.

>Some people are getting cheaper health care?

Maybe from the Easter bunny?

Easter Bunny cheap health care

>Government paved the roads and didn’t screw it up, and so therefore I must submit to the idea that government can manage health care? When you read that sentence you almost don’t need to make arguments to dismiss it, so laughable it is.

The funny thing is, I am seeing this argument more and more in Liberal circles: THE ROADS.

He uses the roads.

He uses the roads.

Garrison Keillor, the host of A Prairie Home Companion, lately has been saying that he is a “tax and spend Liberal and proud of it”, and one of his favorite explanations is that he “uses the roads“.

This line of reasoning — that coordinating the provision of health care for 310 million people is no more complex than paving roads — is so wrong in so many ways that I am going to dedicate an entire essay to it, and by the end of those words, it will lay in ruin forever.

>The ACA is a good solution to the ills of the previous system? My first response to this was to ask “How do you know?”. The imperial president has gutted the implementation of his own law in order to prevent its full damage from being done until after the next series of elections, and so its full effect is impossible to assess. Before you say that therefore I cannot condemn the law on the same grounds, I say: sure I can, because the ill effects are real and being felt RIGHT NOW, and because if the law were going to be helpful mr. Obama would not be scrambling to delay its implementation at every turn.

My second response was to list all the smoke and mirrors that define the ACA: so-called “sign-ups” are unverified and many have never been consummated through actual payment; the back end of the website is non-existent, meaning that insurance companies have no idea who is covered and who has claims to what; more people have lost insurance than have signed up under Obamacare, creating a net loss for Americans, and this will accelerate dramatically as the law grinds down on us in the next few years.

The Worst of All: Liberals Invite and Coddle the Totalitarianism that they Claim To Despise and that Grows Under Their Very Noses

Finally, the most disappointing thing of all when it comes to American Liberals is that they fail to join me on situations where we should be natural allies. I am for freedom and against central government oppression of citizens; for free choices and against Control. Liberals claim to hold these same views and often decry the plutocracy and the immoral and corrupt power of Wall Street firms and the military industrial complex.

And yet, they will stare you right in the eye and defend the Affordable Care Act, which has given (a) insurance companies a license to steal from and wage war against the middle class, fully backed the awesome and fearsome power of the IRS, and (b) waves of government bureaucrats direct control over our health care decisions, starting with the requirement that people buy insurance even though they don’t want it, and including Obamacare star chambers like the Independent Payment Advisory Board, a government body so fascistic that Barney Frank is now against its creation (since he left Congress) (“Barney Frank backs IPAB Repeal“).

How can this be?

They seem to forget that central government control and its inherent abuses led to the American Revolution, and that a cabal of government bureaucrats is one of the scariest things on earth, particularly when led by a megalomaniac leader. They get all agitated when a Republican inhabits the White House, but turn deaf and dumb and blind when a Democrat steps in.

Again the Chinese experience with centrally planned agricultural production:

As the catastrophe unfolded, people were forced to resort to previously unthinkable acts to survive. As the moral fabric of society unraveled, they abused one another, stole from one another and poisoned one another. Sometimes they resorted to cannibalism. <source>

And the megalomaniac leader’s reaction to the scale of human suffering he himself caused was….

At a secret meeting in Shanghai on March 25, 1959, he ordered the party to procure up to one-third of all the available grain — much more than ever before. The minutes of the meeting reveal a chairman insensitive to human loss:

When there is not enough to eat people starve to death. It is better to let half of the people die so that the other half can eat their fill. 

Note the logic of the Marxist’s zero-sum-game: forget any notion that “everyone can eat”, and instead sign onto the notion that half must starve so the other half can barely subsist….a Marxist redistribution lesson of tragic proportion.

So how can American Liberals argue in favor of powerful corporate interests and government control of our lives?

How can they support the growing Leviathan in Washington DC, which is now getting involved in our choices of doctors, health insurance plans, hospitals, and more?

Why are such people so willing to so easily and naively throw away the freedom our forefathers won for us through bloody conflicts?

And when the next Reich is firmly in control of our lives, invited into power by such well-intentioned people, the result and the path chosen will be a Great Shame that will echo through eternity: people who lived free chose the yoke, again, but this time from the loftiest heights humanity ever reached.


Read Full Post »

Older Posts »