BO’s ‘Lessons Learned’?

(Actually, More Lessons Ignored)

PatriotPost.us
By Mark Alexander · Nov. 14, 2013

“The origin and outset of the American Republic, contain lessons of which posterity ought not to be deprived.” –James Madison (1819)

As the list of Democrats distancing themselves from Barack Obama and his so-called “Affordable Care Act” continues to grow, Obama imparted this remarkable observation:

“When we buy IT services generally, it is so bureaucratic and so cumbersome that a whole bunch of it doesn’t work or ends up being way over cost. … Once we get this particular website fixed they’re going to be some lessons learned we can apply to the federal government in general.”

Evidently, Obama is conjunctionally challenged when he says, “it doesn’t work OR ends up being way over cost.” The correct conjunction in this case is, of course, “AND.”

However, his claim that “cumbersome bureaucracy” is to blame is entirely accurate, and that is true across the full spectrum of our government’s bloated bureaucracies. Other key Obama administration officials agree.

Obama’s former White House Chief of Staff (SecDef and CIA director), Leon Panetta, offered this keen insight on the cascading failure of O’Care: “You cannot rely on the bureaucracies to do this kind of work. They don’t have the capabilities to get this done.”

Obama’s former chief economic advisor, Larry Summers, notes that, as a result of the O’Care failure, “a shadow has been cast on the government’s competence.”

Of course, our Founders cast that long shadow on government competence when they forged our Constitution’s limits on the powers of the central government. Those limits notwithstanding, any question today about the constitutionality of socialist government programs is dismissed in the now-infamous words of Vermont Democrat Patrick Leahy, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee: “Nobody questions that!”

Despite Obama’s assertion to the contrary, there are few new lessons to be learned from the compounding failure of his signature endeavor to nationalize health care. Those lessons have been taught and re-taught ad nauseam, ever since the earliest adoption of Marxist doctrines by governments and the inevitable failures that followed. (See “the USSR.”)

As 20th century philosopher George Santayana concluded in his treatise, “The Life of Reason”:

“Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

There is nothing to be learned from the second kick of a jackass, except possibly in the case of those who are too dullard to remember the first. Socialist government centralization schemes are destined to fail, and Obama can apply that to the “federal government in general” right now.

Such schemes collapse under the pressure of bureaucratic ineptitude, or “Ineptocracy,” which is defined as:

“a political system of government where the incompetent are elected by the unproductive in return for goods and services redistributed from the competent and productive, until the former so outnumber the latter that the system collapses”. (See “Democratic Party Platform”)

To put the current state of bureaucratic ineptitude into perspective during this week in which we observe Veterans Day, consider the following:

The time lapsed from the date O’Care was passed, 23 March 2010, to the date Healthcare.gov was to be operational, 01 October 2013, is 3 years, 6 months and 10 days. For comparison, from the date of our entry into WWII to the date of Germany’s surrender is one month LESS than Obama and his Leftist NeoCom cadres had to make their website operational. Obama had more time than it took for our nation’s industrial surge ahead of the invasion of North Africa and Italy, D-Day, the Battle of the Bulge, the race to Berlin, and all while fully engaged on a second war front in the Pacific.

Notably, generations of American veterans have given their lives honoring their oaths to “Support and Defend” our Constitution. It’s long past time that our entire nation demanded that its political leaders honor their oaths!

And here is some additional data for perspective.

The health insurance exchanges processed only 106,000 signups in October, and fewer than 27,000 of those were through the 36 O’Care exchanges. However, there were 1,687,600 background checks for firearms purchases processed through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. (Apparently NICS software is working just fine.) Though Obama wants folks clinging to government welfare, American Patriots know that the Second Amendment is the supreme insurance policy – by a 15:1 ratio!

For BO’s administration to make its 5-million signup goal by the end of open enrollment in March, they will have to sign up more than 45,000 people each and every day.

Unfortunately, there were 392,000 signups for Obama’s expanded Medicaid coverage, ensuring explosive growth in state liabilities to fund that “entitlement.” Notably, taxpayers across the nation will feel that pinch immediately because states have balanced budget requirements and can’t print their own money.

While there are no old lessons to be learned from the continuing failures of nationalized health care, there are two very significant contemporary lessons.

The First lesson from the ObamaCare failures:

Given the omnipresence of open mikes and video recordings around our Beltway-based politicians, if one lies today about something one said on any earlier day in office, that politician can expect to get caught in that lie. In the case of Obama, who just can’t shut up even when his staff has pleaded with him to stick to his tele-prompted shtick, his incessant lies have turned what was once a credibility gap into a great chasm.

While BHO has been busy spinning new lies to cover his old lies about folks keeping their doctors and insurance plans, we came across a recorded exchange from a 25 February 2010 conference between Obama and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor. In that meeting, Cantor called Obama out on the cancellations:

“One of the promise you ought to make is that people ought to be able to keep the health insurance that they have. Between 8 and 9 million people may very well lose the covers that they have because of the construct of this bill. That’s our concern. I don’t think that you can answer the question in the positive that people will be able to maintain their coverage, that people will be a will see the doctors they want in the bill that you’re proposing.”

Obama responded:

“The 8-9 million people that you refer to who might have to change their coverage would be folks who … would find the deal in the exchange better, would be a better deal, so yes they would change coverage because they have more choices. Let’s just be clear about that!” (They will get a better deal, which apparently cancels out their cancellation.)

Yes, let’s do be “clear about that.”

New York Post and Daily Beast editorial writer Kirsten Powers, an Obama defender who occasionally stumbles upon hard truths, saw her insurance cancelled. Of the Demo claims that cancellations are good because those former policy owners will receive better coverage at a lower price, Powers protests:

“My blood pressure goes up every time they say that they’re protecting us from substandard health insurance plans. There is nothing to support what they’re saying. I have talked about how I’m losing my health insurance. If I want to keep the same health insurance, it’s going to cost twice as much. There’s nothing substandard about my plan. All of the things they say that are not in my plan are in my plan. All of the things they have listed – there’s no explanation for doubling my premiums other than the fact that it’s subsidizing other people. They need to be honest about that.”
[so....it's not the unconstitutional redistribution scheme that bothers her but the lack of up-front transparency about it.]

Of course, most of Obama’s other adoring editorial page editors and syndicated columnists are not ready to “be honest about that,” and continue to question whether Obama actually knew that he was lying – apparently in deference to a kinder, gentler interpretation of the word “lie.”

The New York Times referred to Obama’s “you can keep it, period” lies as an “incorrect promise.” (Our friend Byron York at The Washington Examiner conducted a LexisNexis database search of the Times over the decades. “Never in that time, until today,” he reports, “did the paper use the phrase ‘incorrect promise.’”)

Editors of Obama’s hometown paper, the Chicago Tribune, wrote, “The American public is having a credibility-shattering debate about the president: Did he not bother to learn the details of the law before he told us we could keep our doctors and our insurance, or did he know the truth and flat-out lie?”

Safe to say it is a “flat-out lie,” and eventually, even Obama’s most unflinching supporters will have to admit it – or tumble headlong into the same credibility chasm.

Even that notorious finger-wagger, Bill Clinton, endeavoring to put some distance between his ambitious wife and O’Care (an idea she promoted when she was “First Lady”), was careful not to accuse Obama of an outright lie. Clinton, no stranger to bald-face lies, said, “Even if it takes a change to the law, the president should honor the commitment the federal government made and let ‘em keep what they got.” (Memo to Bill: The “federal government” did not tell that lie! Barack Obama told ‘em they could “keep what they got.”)

The second contemporary lesson to be learned from the ObamaCare failures:

Even the best technology security firewalls can be penetrated with the ease with which Chinese hackers have been browsing through classified DoD databases. And by no means would anyone describe the O’Care data hubs as having anything like the gauntlet of security protections at DoD. Those hubs host the mother lode of “private” information for theft or abuse.

While your personal health care files, income tax returns and other personal profile information may not be of interest to the Chinese, they’re certainly of interest to adolescent hackers, and much more ominously, identity thieves and those inside government who collect and disseminate information for Obama’s “enemies list.”

Regarding external threats, Henry Chao, Healthcare.gov’s chief project manager at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), in his congressional testimony this week, said he was unaware of a memo from Tony Trenkle, lead tech officer for Healthcare.gov, warning:
“the threat and risk potential [to the system] is limitless.” When asked if he was surprised he had not seen the memo, Chao responded, “Yeah … I mean, wouldn’t you be surprised if you were me? It is disturbing.”

John McAfee, founder of the world’s largest computer security company, offered this assessment of the scope of the Healthcare.gov security problems: “Glitch is a minor annoyance. This is a catastrophic failure, it is not a glitch. There was no security testing, no quality assurance and no system emigration.” McAfee notes that there are now many sites successfully scamming those who mistakenly believe they’re providing all that personal information to Healthcare.gov.

Compounding the internal threats, it turns out that nowhere within the ACA’s thousands of pages of laws and regulations is a simple requirement that ObamaCare’s so-called “navigators” must pass a criminal background check! When Texas Sen. John Cornyn asked HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius if “a convicted felon could be a navigator and could acquire sensitive personal information from an individual unbeknownst to them,” she responded, “This is possible.”

“Possible”? REALLY?

Oh, and let’s not forget the “inadvertent” technology failures. For example, Minnesota O’Care exchange personnel sent 2,400 Social Security numbers to the wrong person four months ago, and a security audit determined that no corrective measures were in place to ensure that it didn’t happen again.

Obama is now desperate to mitigate the precipitous decline in both his approval and credibility ratings – especially among his own constituents. He will, of course, learn a hard truth during the remainder of his term: Reputation arrives on foot, but it leaves town on horseback.

Undeterred, and speaking to some of his diehard admirers in Florida this week, a state now in third place for insurance cancellations, Obama claimed, “I know health care is controversial, so there’s only going to be so much support we get on that on a bipartisan basis – until it’s working really well… If you just looked objectively at what the Democratic Party and Democratic senators stand for right now, it’s a lot more aligned with what the American people believe and what they care about then what a small faction of the other party is trying to promote.”

He has some great Florida swampland for sale, too!

Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Fortis Vigilate Paratus et Fidelis

http://patriotpost.us/alexander/21656#share

“The Patriot Post (www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/ )”

The Iron Gate that once protected the Presidency

    ~the source of Obama’s presidential ineligibility

     America is one of the most magnanimous nations on earth.  It was so from the beginning, and that fact was inscribed in the Constitution itself.  It provided that if a man met the age and residency requirements, he would be eligible for election or appointment to every office in the land, regardless of where he was born -as long as he was a citizen of one of the states of the union for the prescribed number of years
Everyone who previously had been a subject of one of the colonies became a citizen of their independent sovereign state along with being a citizen of the union of the States of America via their new state citizenship which began in July of 1776 when the Declaration of Independence was ratified.  So every citizen who met the requirements could serve in every office and position in the land, -they could be a representative, a Senator, -even President of the Senate, the Chief Justice, or a cabinet or military officer, and it didn’t matter how they acquired their citizenship, -whether naturally or by naturalization, -whether foreign-born or native born.

But without regard to length of citizenship, one could become Commander-in-Chief of the United States military forces and the American President as long as they were a citizen when the Constitution was ratified.
That was how it was because that was how the Constitution made it to be.  But the Constitution had two built-in timers that started ticking from the time it was ratified.  They didn’t pertain to anyone except those few rare individuals who might one day find themselves with the option of seeking the unique office of the President.
One of those timers involved an expiration situation for all of the male, Caucasian, Protestant, English-speaking citizens of America who were alive when the Constitution was ratified.  They, and their children would all be eligible to serve as President.
The timer that started ticking in 1788 when the Constitution was ratified was a biological timer counting down to death.  The gate that closed when it stopped ticking set a barrier on who could become President after the lives of all living eligible American citizens in 1788 had ended.
When they were all deceased, the iron gate closed and no one could become President unless they were born as a natural American citizen.  An era then ended, the era in which acceptable and eligible male citizens could serve as long as they were alive when the Constitution was adopted.  From that point and forward, “no person except a natural born citizen” could be the President & Commander-in-Chief.
So thereafter, the sons of non-citizen immigrants could not be President (because they were not citizens either), just as the US-born sons of foreign royalty, or foreign representatives or foreign visitors could not be President, -along with Native Americans, Gypsies, Asians and American women.

After the Declaration of Independence was ratified  another timer began ticking and the other iron gate began slowly closing on some of those who weren’t U.S. citizens at birth because their foreign immigrant father was not a citizen.  They drew their nationality from him and so, like him, they were not Americans.
That iron gate was a restriction relating to the nationality of the President.  It barred anyone living who wasn’t a citizen when the Constitution was ratified, -or was born to such a one, (a foreigner).

The timer that began ticking in 1776  involved the naturalization of the children of immigrants, -and whether or not they were naturalized before the Constitution was ratified or after.  It stopped ticking in 1788 upon the ratification of the Constitution by the 9th state, -New Hampshire.  Then the first iron gate closed on the presidential eligibility of  men naturalized after the Constitution’s adoption.

So if a foreigner had emigrated to America in 1771 with a one-year old son, and that son, upon turning 18 in winter or spring of 1788, had done what his father had not done, and had become a naturalized American, then he would have been a citizen of the United States when the Constitution was ratified in June 1788.  By the Constitution’s 2nd allowance to its restriction on the presidency,  -the allowance requiring simply United States citizenship, and not natural citizenship, he, like all native colonists born as subjects of the Crown, would one day become eligible to be the President.

But if his younger brother, (born in America in 1771) who turned 18 in 1789, then also became a naturalized United States citizen (via becoming a citizen of his home state) -he would not be eligible to be President ever because he was not a citizen at the time that the Constitution was adopted, nor was he a natural born citizen.   The iron gate had closed for him, barring any possibility to be President.  His older brother would one day be eligible but he never would even though born in the United States.

That would have been due to his father refusing to become an American, -which required swearing to totally reject all previous nationality bonds to his homeland and its government, along with the pledge to bear arms for the United States and bear true faith and allegiance to the United States and its Constitution.
By refusing to become an American, he and his household remained beyond the jurisdiction of the obligations, duties, and privileges possessed only by citizens.  All of those would be open to him, (and eventually his younger minor son) by becoming an American citizen, which would have automatically naturalized his son via his son’s blood connection to a new-citizen father.

But if the father had emigrated to a State like Virginia, his son, -by being born in the Commonwealth of Virginia, -even though born to a foreigner, would have been by law accepted as a Virginian citizen, -a “son of the soil” (and therefore a U.S. citizen) even though not born to a citizen father).
Even though a “son of the soil” would be a citizen, and be qualified to serve in Congress or on the federal bench, he wouldn’t be eligible to be President if born after 1788 because the iron gate had then closed on all who were not born as natural citizens.
To Congress, the courts, and the executive branch of the government, it didn’t matter where one was born, but to whom one was born.  If one was born to a foreigner then one was not an American.  One was a citizen of their father’s nation, a member of his society and tradition, and if that society and tradition was not American then a child born to such a person was no more an American than his father.
And it didn’t matter that one or more states granted such a “son of the soil” citizenship.  The Congress did not recognize such citizenship for federal purposes until a case of such a citizen being elected to Congress was settled by Congress in his favor, (but the presidency was always off-limits).
By the federal & state constitutions, the rights of such state citizens were protected, and they continued be eligible for all federal offices with the exception of the office of the President which remained off-limits by its unique restriction.  Being President was neither a civil nor a constitutional right, and only those persons recognized as being natural citizens were eligible after the gate of time had closed on the generations of citizens alive when the Constitution was ratified.

Following a Supreme Court opinion a hundred and ten years later (Wong Kim Ark 1898) the federal government was forced to ascribe U.S. citizenship to children of un-naturalized immigrants.  That didn’t change what the Constitution required of candidates for the presidency, but it changed the public’s and the government’s perception of what was required to merely be a citizen.
The misconception arose that merely being born within U.S. borders conferred U.S. citizenship, and worse still, that the U.S. citizenship of all persons born in the U.S. was the same, qualitatively, legally, and constitutionally.  The first two assumptions are correct, but the last one is patently false.

One form of national membership (-assumed to be constitutional since the Wong Kim Ark opinion) is newer than the other, while the other is the oldest form of membership in human history, i.e., natural national membership via a father who was a member.
So presidential eligibility boils down to one primary factor, -a factor over which no one has any control, and that is who one’s father was.  Where one was born is not relevant.    Barack Obama Jr. having no control over where his father was born or to which nation he belonged, was himself controlled by the supreme authority of the Constitution.  At least he should have been.
Unfortunately, he and his corrupt party chose to completely ignore the Constitution, so he illegitimately ran for, won, and usurped the office of the President in violation of the clear prohibition of the Constitution which directs that  “NO PERSON” shall be eligible to the office of the President “except a natural born citizen”, which excludes children of foreigners.
A similar type of travesty would be allowing a U.S. born son of Osama bin Laden or Fidel Castro to have command over a nuclear bomber, or a MIRV equipped nuclear submarine or ICBM.  No crew person who is not a natural born American is allowed anywhere near U.S. nuclear bombs because the absolute loyalty and obedience of children of foreigners cannot be assured.

No sane nuclear nation on earth has any other policy.  There is no room for mistake.  There is no room for subterfuge, there is no room for disloyalty, disobedience, or treason when it comes to such enormously destructive weapons.  The same goes for guarding the President.
Secret Service personnel and Marines entrusted with that responsibility must also be natural  American citizens, -having no direct foreign connection through foreign parents,-which is what the Constitution requires of the President first and foremost, and that is what Barack Obama violates every day that he occupies the presidency.

He is far less eligible to be President than every single one of the important people that work under his command in the field of nuclear weapons control and use.  He is not qualified to give presidential commands to them, nor to even guard himself.  For Obama to have authority over the  nuclear forces of the United States is equivalent to giving control of the Pentagon over to a buck private who’s half Russian.  Experience & qualification; both totally lacking.

He is an on-going fraud and an American travesty.  A living, breathing violation of the United States Constitution.  But the dependent lemming sheeple of the socialist left have done everything in their power to insure that he serves another unconstitutional four years.  Future generations and the fiscal solvency of our country be damned.
Unweaned, dependency populism led by a cool popular, confident, laid-back pot-loving dude is preferable.
Having succeeded, we’re doomed to a future even more bankrupt than what we already are facing.    We’re doomed to ever greater violations of the Constitution, -as bad as or possibly worse than the treasonous ruling by the Supreme Court regarding the unconstitutional health care monstrosity and its totalitarian “individual mandate”.
It’s bad enough that he is unconstitutionally serving as President.  He could do that and serve the country admirably, but instead his actions and inactions are more likely than not to be bad for constitutional fidelity, rule of law, government transparency, individual initiative, personal & corporate freedom, national fiscal solvency, national energy policy, international relations, and the Tenth Amendment limitation on federal power.

Let’s work to ensure that sane and constitutional policies find preeminence again in Washington.  That’s something we’ve never seen in our lifetimes.  What should be normal would truly be revolutionary, and millions of loyalists who support the statist, nanny, Big Brother government wouldn’t like it one bit.

They not only prefer the status quo, they want even more of it, -big government without end clamping on chains of socialist security while robbing the future, -until we find that the track ahead of us is gone and the credit-trestle spanning the gorge where financial solid ground should be is missing. All of that earth (the presumed wealth of the future) was removed in order to shore-up the track we are running on today.
Then, as the whole fiscal house of cards collapses and the pyramid scheme crumbles, as our credit-based-economy balloon deflates, we’ll fall right  into that abyss whose bottom is unknown.

Today’s “leaders” (with enormous assistance from the Federal Reserve) have stuck an IV line into the vein of the future tax-paying public.  Like vampires, they are draining the life-blood out of the body of the American nation of the future.  When that future finally arrives, we no doubt will find that the patient is not only horribly anemic, but may even be comatose.  Better prepare because actual national fiscal responsibility is about the last thing you can reasonably expect from what we call “our government”, -the one that does things it should not do and does not do the necessary things that it should.

by a.r. nash august 2012    obama–nation.com

 

Outrage Toward Obamacare Court Opinion

in response to several PatriotPost.us commentaries

“Judged by the outcomes, the Washington casino is rigged so that no matter which party wins national elections, the federal government gets bigger, hungrier and more dictatorial. With each passing year and regardless of election mandates, more of what belongs to the people is stolen away by government operators and their cronies. Our money, property, privacy, peace, fundamental freedoms and the right to be left alone are their targets. At the current rate of government expropriation, We the People will soon have nothing that isn’t controlled or beholden to the sharpies of D.C.”  (author unknown)

Hopefully, like myself, tens of millions of other Americans will feel and think exactly what you’ve expressed.  Thank you.
And thank you, Chief Traitor Roberts, you disgusting stink bug for fouling the nest of your nation with in indefensible distortion of reality, -one that flies in the face of reason. and language, and validates the marxist position that the federal government possesses unlimited power

.  Now that you’ve outed yourself as just another slimy progressive statist tyranny-defender & enabler in conservative’s clothing, what you’ve done is ignite a prairie fire of opposition to the suppression of individual liberty and the cancellation of the Constitution.
And thanks a lot ex-AG Alberto Gonzolas, who like your former boss and statist president, Bush, for fully vetting another fellow RINO just like you and your appointer.  How does it feel to be a stealth socialist?  -to wear the clothing of conservatism while being a traitor to its principles?  I always strongly suspected that no good thing could come from a Peter Principle slug such as yourself, and now, unfortunately, you’ve proven that suspicion in spades.
This is the result when an incompetent, insightless electorate can’t see incompetence and insincerity even when it’s looking them right in the face.  They blindly elect them as leaders and instead of putting on the brakes they just apply the accelerator pedal even harder.   Straight toward the fiscal cliff!  AN

President Obama said that he believes the U.S. Constitution, that protects Americans from government tyranny “is fundamentally flawed,” and essentially said in a 2001 Chicago NPR interview that the Constitution should not so much “protect” people, but “provide” for them” thereby turning it into a wealth redistribution welfare document.  Sharon Sebastian

“and plans to establish a civilian militia as well funded and powerful as the U.S. military under the oversight of the White House”
I’ve not been a reader of conservative websites for more than a year and half, but in that time, I’ve never read any exposition of the thinking behind that emphatic statement, from whence it came and of what political persuasion it was born.  Nor for what end it would be used.  There has to be a whole lot of fire somewhere in Obama’s mouth to have openly said something so unbelievably anti-American.  A federal police militia?  To use against whom?  Only American citizens, because a few isolated would-be terrorist are not the target of such martial power.  How is such a force any different in essence than the Revolutionary Guard in Iran, or Saddam Hussein’s special police/military forces?  Just how tyrannical must Obama’s imagination envision him being in some unimaginable future scenario in which freedom-loving citizens need to be suppressed?  Would-be tyrants establish loyal martial forces solely with the plan to make them useful in the future.  What kind of future was Obama imagining when he envisioned such a force under his direct command, and not under the command of someone who had sworn allegiance to protect, and defend the Constitution and not him?  Do you not hear echoes of the Nazi party which required of all Germans that they swear an oath of allegiance, not to Germany or its constitution, but to Hitler personally?  How would the command structure of the Nazi Brown Shirts, and SS have been significantly different?  The SS was Hitler’s personal army, not under the command of the military?  Is that what Obama had in mind?  AN

Wickard v. Filburn granted the federal government nearly absolute power over what we do in our own lives on our own property.  Now the Supreme Traitors have become the Tweedle Dee to that previous court’s Tweedle Dumb and have canceled all American freedom only in the opposite direction by assume full authority to regulate, not what we do, as Wickard did, but what we don’t do.  So now Americans are slaves to the federal authorities in regard to both.  Washington’s power is hereby unlimited.  I sure hope that Mitt Romney grasps the full portent of this decision and gets off his ass and does what he had farmed out to Ron Paul, which is to have a clue as to what the Constitution is all about.  His ignorance has gone on long enough.  If he doesn’t wise up, we will be condemned to repeat the past because we sure as hell will remain ignorant of it.  The American people can’t do his thinking for him.  Another blind shepherd will end up leading the sheep off a cliff, and that’s where we’re headed.  Our only hope is that the stealth treason of our government and media is met by a greater stealth resistance in the ballot booth.  AN

Chief Traitor Roberts has revealed himself to be above the law.  What law?  The Constitution and the principles it embodies.  How did he justify his treason to the Constitution?  By assuming the authority to do that which no man has the right to do, which is to bastardize the meaning of fundamental words crucial to the framework of all government.  Lincoln said; “If you call a dog’s tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?  Four, because calling a tail a leg does not make it so.”
Roberts choose to defy the basic immutable law that no one has the right to fundamentally alter the laws of the nation by simply perverting the meaning of a simple word.  Giant ships are steered by discreet rudder gears on which the direction of the ship is dependent.  Roberts and his liberal allies smashed the gear that has always existed and replaced it with a socialist gear, a gear that declares that punitive penalties are taxes, and that taxes are penalties.  No difference says the brain-dead imbeciles masquerading as the highest and wisest minds in the entire judicial establishment, when in fact they are political bozos who consider the Constitution to be as sacred as a doormat.  Now how do we go about removing the knife from our back?  Only by securing the power to flush the toilet that Washington DC has become.  AN

Even though no one has yet brought up the issue of misfeasance and criminal action taken by those who promoted and facilitated a policy that surely must be in violation of at least one law, is no one going to bring up the subject of criminal charges?  When will everyone stop pretending that an entire chain of command could have been populated by people as stupid as baboons?  No one is that stupid.  There was no “flawed” execution, or incompetent planning.  The did exactly what they intended to do and that entailed not doing a whole list of things that they knew they should have done.   Then those who pointed out the truth were pressured to shut-up and keep the conspiracy secret.  The criminals were in charge of the prison, -the foxes were guarding the chicken coop.  The good shepherds were in fact wolf shepherds with malevolent intent.  Either that or they were the stupidest people that every lived.  But even the Peter Principle can’t explain that magnitude of stupidity, so it must not be the real explanation.  Since the AG remains opaque, there is only one other possibility and it follows the course of deliberate sinister intent. AN

You completely missed the point.  There is no TAX!  It is a penalty.  Government may be able by contorted illegitimate logic to penalize the citizens of each and every state for what they do if it’s something they should not do, but the federal government has no authority to penalize people for not doing something, for not entering into an expensive contract just because some statist political group wants them to be a part of something they don’t want nor need.  What next?  Can the federal government penalize us for not smoking, -which reduces their cigarette taxes?  Why not?  They now can penalize for what you do and also for what you don’t do.  Either way you are their slave.  How does that saddle fit you?  No so comfortably?  Too bad, you better get used to it because you’ll be wearing it for the rest of you life, as the government rides you all the way to your grave.  Thank you Big Government!  Where would we be without your saddle and bridle to keep us in line and obedient to your every dictate.  Escapees from Soviet tyranny must be in shock to see such totalitarianism imposed by a Court established to defend the rule of law and the principles of individual liberty, but which has now again done just the opposite.  AN

Fed Up in Philly PA
Saturday, June 30, 2012
Our Country’s and a lone Veteran Patriot’s Obituary, June 2012

We Americans became so apathetic and squeamish, fat and lazy, caught up daily in our big screen TV’s, Hollywood stars, nice cars, social media and other feel-good niceties, that in the end, we did nothing about the creep of autocratic Socialism into America.

We were all spellbound sheep following the communist’s pied-piper to our country’s and constitution’s demise.

Our younger generation was brain-dead, unmindful of the freedoms they lost and continued to lose after the fall of Capitalism and freedom on June 2012.
Most everyone else had cowered, secluded themselves, and accepted without a fight America’s new fate, without the will to really fight.

For me, I was getting older and tired, and was just a lone veteran and patriot who loved his country and constitution; but I could not continue to fight the monstrous dictatorial government on my own. And sadly, no one else did what was needed to reverse its devastating course.

With little support to change course, I had to ‘sign off’ once and for all. I could not do it on my own – my resistance to the policies thrust down once free American’s throats, and passed into law by the authoritarian government people elected in 2008, was just too much for one patriot to bare. I too became the “model, conforming” citizen like everyone else. I decided to live out the rest of my years the best I could for my family, until my coming passing.

At this time past, I wept for our country and its future, I weep for future generations, I weep for my children, grand-children and future generations; but I especially weep for the men and women who gave up their lives over the past 236 years, all for what we have finally become this year, 28 June 2012, a Socialist Nation.

I am hopeful a new generation reading this has woken up, recalled and contemplated what it was like to be in free-America, during past generations before freedoms stolen away, forgotten decades ago, and perhaps, just perhaps, took the courage, and ACTION, we did not to do something about it. If you haven’t, perhaps now is the time. Take matters into your own hands, for we did not, and we got what we deserved.

I tried, I really did. I am so, so sorry!
Sincerely,  Once Free-American Patriot, Veteran, Brother, and Father

Mac in Phoenix
Saturday, June 30, 2012

Dear Patriot, Try to keep your fingers limber, maybe you could re-load our guns.  There are still an army of patriots here, make no mistake.

There will come a time when these bastards – like Obama and his vile ilk – take a last wrong attempt to usurp power that was never intended by our forefathers.

I happen to think they’ve already passed that threshold, but I’ll see what November brings.  Until then – stock up on ammo.

The Chief Pariah of the S.C. was probably one of the traitors that ruled for unlimited government power of eminent domain take-overs, and unlimited EPA power by declaring CO2 a pollutant.  Now he has personally pulled a skunk out of a hat by ruling that something that is clearly unconstitutional and unAmerican under one description is perfectly legal under a different description, -and Big Brother can choose at their own lawless discretion how they label it so as to make a sows ear a silk purse.  Words can mean whatever Congress decides that they mean, and the Chief Traitor is just fine with such perversion of basic laws of language.  Can someone in his position be that dumbass?  That is less likely than that the same people got to him that got to the the hierarchy of the judiciary in Georgia.  Some one by hook or crook convinced everyone up and down the chain to turn their backs on the law and precedent and reverse their own previous leaning.  How else could the party that didn’t even appear in court be ruled the winner?  AN

Appleby

I read the decision, and I swear there were so many pirouettes in that thing that the Sugar Plum Fairy would have screwed herself into the ground before she got to the end. If Daddy had read this — he knew the Constitution up, down, back, forth and sideways, not to mention inside out–he would have bust a gusset.

What this thing is saying is that the government cannot force us to buy things, it can only make your life a living hell until you do. Wait for the same kind of “tax” to apply to those light bulbs we don’t want to buy, and gradually upon the Prius and Volt we aren’t driving, the Energy Star refrigerator we didn’t buy, the solar panels we don’t have on our roof, and the other products and services made by government cronies that we do not patronize.

JD| 6.28.12

Definition 3: Conservatives treat causes. Liberals treat symptoms.
Explanation 3: Liberals see that the poor have little money, so they give them money. But the reason that the poor have little money is that they are unproductive. Giving them money doesn’t make them more productive; in fact, it has been shown to discourage them from being more productive, making their income worse. Income disparity isn’t impacted in any positive way by post-income redistribution, unless one believes in trickle-wherever, which the Left decries (except when using it to justify “stimulus”). In general, liberals paper over symptoms of problems and condemn conservatives for not doing so. Conservatives, by contrast, see the liberal policies as the causes of problems, and know that removing the policies will remove the need to deal with the symptoms.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 68 other followers