Or, more racist blatherings from the Left.
Some Marxist Moonbats just don't get it. The country we want back is the one where people were free and the government was limited. You know, the one where the Constitution was the law of the land, people were self-made, and government was viewed with a wary eye.
The following media morons wouldn't know the Constitution if I spanked their spoiled asses with it:
Frank Rich, writing in the New York Times "The Rage is Not About Health Care", which I expounded on in my Sunday post, below. Summary of Rich's opinion: Those opposed to the grandiose vision of the Left are racists.
Joan Walsh, writing in Salon, "What's the Matter with White People" alleging that opposition to the Progressive ideals such as Obamacare is rooted in white racism. NOT. The "other people" that we think would be the recipient of government redistribution of income could be anyone, including whites. Were Joan and Frank Rich separated at birth?
Colbert King, writing in the Washington Post, "In the faces of Tea Party shouters, images of hate and history" suggesting that Tea Party protesters against the health bill are the equivalent of racists protesting the integration of Little Rock's Central High School in 1957. It appears that Mr. King is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. He has been held hostage by the Democratic Party so long that he forgets that it is the Democrats who fought to keep Blacks enslaved, dominated the South and Blacks after the Civil War, and have used government welfare to further subjugate Blacks from the 1960's onward. Pity the fool.
Ray Hanania, writing at Huffington Post (I know, hardly even qualifies for "media"), "Opposition to Obama Health Care Reform Driven by Racism, Not Fear of Increasing Debt" alleging the usual liberals' tired arguments that opposition to the Progressive ideal is grounded in racism. Somebody give this guy a real job so that he can see something outside of his mother's basement.
Frank James, writing at National Public Radio (a grandaddy of left-wing fruit-loopery), "Health-Care Protests Bring Out Racist, Homophobic Slurs" alleging that opposition to Obamacare is rooted in "free-form hostility some Americans feel towards the political ascendancy of people who don't look like them or who have a different sexual orientation." No, it's because I cherish my right to choose my health care and to be free from paying for yours.
For some effective rebuttals to the above nonsense, read responses by Pat Sajak, Andrew Breitbart, and David Paul Kuhn.
Beware the man flashing the race card. He is the true racist. And usually from the Left.
Remember in November.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Frank Rich: Racist, Marxist, Moonbat
My commentary is based upon this Frank Rich op-ed, "The Rage is Not About Health Care." I had originally thought to title my commentary, "Frank Rich is symbolic of what is wrong with this country", but decided that if Frank can resort to hyperbole, false characterizations, and name-calling, that I would keep to the high road and call a spade a spade.
Frank starts out describing the "apoplectic" reactions of Karl Rove and Rep. John Boehner, R-OH, to the so-called health care bill. Frank needs to get out a little more. If he would spend some time outside his ivory tower, he would realize that Rove and Boehner represent the feelings of at least 60% of the population. The majority of the populace do not want the health care bill and are not being represented by their elected officials in Congress. To elitist Frank, non-representation is not a concern because our liberal betters know what we need.
Next Frank goes on the defensive for those miscreant congressmen who voted for Obamacare. It is not enough for Frank to make the outrageous statement that death threats are being made. (Actually a few death threats aren't surprising. Remember that the Left actually cheered for a movie about President Bush being assassinated.) Frank has to add a sinister element to the public displeasure with the Obamacare supporters. "Civil rights hero" John Lewis, "openly gay" Barney Frank, and "black representative" Emanuel Cleaver are cited by Frank as targets of public anger over Obamacare. I, and the vast majority of people protesting Obamacare, don't care if John Lewis, Barney Frank, and Emanuel Cleaver are orange, straight as Pat Robertson, and bonafide patriots. Obamacare is the socialist camel's nose under the tent of liberty and free people are not happy about it.
Frank compares Obamacare to Roosevelt's New Deal, Johnson's Great Society, and the Civil Rights Act. He concludes that, compared to these ideological rips in the fabric of our society, Obamacare is no big deal. Frank is flat-out wrong. The New Deal is known to have prolonged the suffering of the American people through the Great Depression and has laid waste to trillions of dollars of earnings.
Social Security alone, aside from the pillaging of the social security trust fund for runaway government spending, currently removes some twelve percent of earned income from the economy under the guise of old-age income security. Add on the medicare tax from Johnson's Great Society, and another three percent of earned income is removed from the economy. Total removed from the paychecks of working American's for social security programs: 15.3 percent of earned income. And workers from age 16 on will not see a dime of benefit until at least age 62.
Johnson's Great Society, aside from adding a health care tax to everyone's earned income, made fathers an endangered species. What does a child need a father for when there is Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), United States Department of Agriculture food stamps, Housing and Urban Development Section 8 housing, utilities assistance, free medicaid health insurance, free college tuition, and subsidized (nearly free) daycare? Generations of children do not have relationships with their fathers because the state has made fathers unnecessary. Why should a mother keep a pesky father around when the state will pay her to get rid of him? I know this from experience, having been a family law attorney for over fifteen years.
Other highlights of the Great Society include the Model Cities Act. Remember Detroit, Michigan? The liberals don't want you to remember, because Detroit is a nearly-dead city and was a prime recipient of assistance under the Model Cities Act. Watch this video by Steven Crowder. Oh, and of course we have Affirmative Action. Affirmative Action has been perhaps the most racist legislation enacted since slavery was outlawed in this country. Affirmative Action is so contrary to the egalitarian, rise-on-your-own-merits heritage of this country that it has created an environment in which the able are marginalized for the benefit of underqualified minorities. The most visible result of Affirmative Action and the damage it has caused our Republic are the Marxist occupants of the White House, Michelle and Barry Soetoro. Forget qualifications, or even the requirement that a presidential candidate be a natural-born citizen, just vote for Barry because he is black.
That leads me to the Civil Rights Act. Noble purpose, bad execution. This camel's nose has led to protected classes for everyone but white males. In creating special protections for every minority class in existence, the only true minority left in this country is the white male.
So, if Obamacare is hardly as consequential as the New Deal, the Great Society, and the Civil Rights Act, Frank can keep it. Frank's purpose in mentioning the FDR and LBJ era programs is based upon his mistaken belief that these are popularly recognized as "good" government intervention and that anyone who opposes them is a racist troglodyte.
No, free people in this country are resistant to Obamacare and other liberal/progressive/socialist/Marxist programs for reasons that a pampered, pseudo-intellectual, Francophile turd like Frank cannot begin to understand.
First, opposition to Obamacare is about taxation. Four years of taxes before real implementation begins. Not to mention the fact that all working Americans already pay a health care tax for medicare that most of us don't receive. Not to mention other stealth taxes such as the ten percent tax on tanning salons that Frank blithely referenced in his article. Frank would be screaming if a ten percent tax were levied upon his income in addition to the taxes he already pays. If Frank were residing in my home state of the People's Republic of the Other Washington, I would use the referendum process to target his sorry ass for extreme taxation just as his liberal cohorts target the working-class producers of this country to finance their utopian oppression.
Second, opposition to Obamacare is about representation. Representation as in paying attention to the wishes of the electorate, not the fat-ass op-ed columnists who pronounce what is best for American from the offices of their morally and financially bankrupt newspapers. The American people are overwhelming opposed to Obamacare and were not represented by our traitorous senators and representatives.
Third, and most importantly, opposition to Obamacare is about the Constitution and liberty. Frank could care less about the Constitution. True Constitutional scholars recognize that the federal government cannot control state governments and that forcing individuals to purchase a product (such as health insurance) is unconstitutional. Lightweight intellectuals like Frank cite the Commerce Clause. Frank does not recognize the potential for abuse of the Commerce Clause, which could be used to require him to wear a pink tutu and slippers while writing his column, as his column does enter into interstate commerce. My health care, in my state of residence, is not an interstate commerce issue and is further protected by the Tenth Amendment.
Further, the liberty of a free people is being infringed by Obamacare. Aside from having to pay for the health insurance of other people, which is in itself an infringement upon my liberty, I have the right to determine what health care I want, if any at all. It is an impermissible infringement upon my liberty to force me to purchase health insurance or to pay a tax for not purchasing health insurance. If I want to pay a private doctor, a clinic, an insurance company, an HMO, or the local hospital for my health care, that is my right.
I hope that Frank has a fortified place to hide as he continues to side against freedom-loving Americans who are not going to have infringements to their liberties thrust upon them by an oppressive socialist regime. I do not advise that anyone throw bricks or any other solid building materials at Frank. This is not out of concern for Frank, whose demise could be filed under "civic improvement", but out of my concern that freedom-loving Americans will get better use out of saving such materials for building their bunkers.
The revolution is coming.
Remember in November.
Frank starts out describing the "apoplectic" reactions of Karl Rove and Rep. John Boehner, R-OH, to the so-called health care bill. Frank needs to get out a little more. If he would spend some time outside his ivory tower, he would realize that Rove and Boehner represent the feelings of at least 60% of the population. The majority of the populace do not want the health care bill and are not being represented by their elected officials in Congress. To elitist Frank, non-representation is not a concern because our liberal betters know what we need.
Next Frank goes on the defensive for those miscreant congressmen who voted for Obamacare. It is not enough for Frank to make the outrageous statement that death threats are being made. (Actually a few death threats aren't surprising. Remember that the Left actually cheered for a movie about President Bush being assassinated.) Frank has to add a sinister element to the public displeasure with the Obamacare supporters. "Civil rights hero" John Lewis, "openly gay" Barney Frank, and "black representative" Emanuel Cleaver are cited by Frank as targets of public anger over Obamacare. I, and the vast majority of people protesting Obamacare, don't care if John Lewis, Barney Frank, and Emanuel Cleaver are orange, straight as Pat Robertson, and bonafide patriots. Obamacare is the socialist camel's nose under the tent of liberty and free people are not happy about it.
Frank compares Obamacare to Roosevelt's New Deal, Johnson's Great Society, and the Civil Rights Act. He concludes that, compared to these ideological rips in the fabric of our society, Obamacare is no big deal. Frank is flat-out wrong. The New Deal is known to have prolonged the suffering of the American people through the Great Depression and has laid waste to trillions of dollars of earnings.
Social Security alone, aside from the pillaging of the social security trust fund for runaway government spending, currently removes some twelve percent of earned income from the economy under the guise of old-age income security. Add on the medicare tax from Johnson's Great Society, and another three percent of earned income is removed from the economy. Total removed from the paychecks of working American's for social security programs: 15.3 percent of earned income. And workers from age 16 on will not see a dime of benefit until at least age 62.
Johnson's Great Society, aside from adding a health care tax to everyone's earned income, made fathers an endangered species. What does a child need a father for when there is Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), United States Department of Agriculture food stamps, Housing and Urban Development Section 8 housing, utilities assistance, free medicaid health insurance, free college tuition, and subsidized (nearly free) daycare? Generations of children do not have relationships with their fathers because the state has made fathers unnecessary. Why should a mother keep a pesky father around when the state will pay her to get rid of him? I know this from experience, having been a family law attorney for over fifteen years.
Other highlights of the Great Society include the Model Cities Act. Remember Detroit, Michigan? The liberals don't want you to remember, because Detroit is a nearly-dead city and was a prime recipient of assistance under the Model Cities Act. Watch this video by Steven Crowder. Oh, and of course we have Affirmative Action. Affirmative Action has been perhaps the most racist legislation enacted since slavery was outlawed in this country. Affirmative Action is so contrary to the egalitarian, rise-on-your-own-merits heritage of this country that it has created an environment in which the able are marginalized for the benefit of underqualified minorities. The most visible result of Affirmative Action and the damage it has caused our Republic are the Marxist occupants of the White House, Michelle and Barry Soetoro. Forget qualifications, or even the requirement that a presidential candidate be a natural-born citizen, just vote for Barry because he is black.
That leads me to the Civil Rights Act. Noble purpose, bad execution. This camel's nose has led to protected classes for everyone but white males. In creating special protections for every minority class in existence, the only true minority left in this country is the white male.
So, if Obamacare is hardly as consequential as the New Deal, the Great Society, and the Civil Rights Act, Frank can keep it. Frank's purpose in mentioning the FDR and LBJ era programs is based upon his mistaken belief that these are popularly recognized as "good" government intervention and that anyone who opposes them is a racist troglodyte.
No, free people in this country are resistant to Obamacare and other liberal/progressive/socialist/Marxist programs for reasons that a pampered, pseudo-intellectual, Francophile turd like Frank cannot begin to understand.
First, opposition to Obamacare is about taxation. Four years of taxes before real implementation begins. Not to mention the fact that all working Americans already pay a health care tax for medicare that most of us don't receive. Not to mention other stealth taxes such as the ten percent tax on tanning salons that Frank blithely referenced in his article. Frank would be screaming if a ten percent tax were levied upon his income in addition to the taxes he already pays. If Frank were residing in my home state of the People's Republic of the Other Washington, I would use the referendum process to target his sorry ass for extreme taxation just as his liberal cohorts target the working-class producers of this country to finance their utopian oppression.
Second, opposition to Obamacare is about representation. Representation as in paying attention to the wishes of the electorate, not the fat-ass op-ed columnists who pronounce what is best for American from the offices of their morally and financially bankrupt newspapers. The American people are overwhelming opposed to Obamacare and were not represented by our traitorous senators and representatives.
Third, and most importantly, opposition to Obamacare is about the Constitution and liberty. Frank could care less about the Constitution. True Constitutional scholars recognize that the federal government cannot control state governments and that forcing individuals to purchase a product (such as health insurance) is unconstitutional. Lightweight intellectuals like Frank cite the Commerce Clause. Frank does not recognize the potential for abuse of the Commerce Clause, which could be used to require him to wear a pink tutu and slippers while writing his column, as his column does enter into interstate commerce. My health care, in my state of residence, is not an interstate commerce issue and is further protected by the Tenth Amendment.
Further, the liberty of a free people is being infringed by Obamacare. Aside from having to pay for the health insurance of other people, which is in itself an infringement upon my liberty, I have the right to determine what health care I want, if any at all. It is an impermissible infringement upon my liberty to force me to purchase health insurance or to pay a tax for not purchasing health insurance. If I want to pay a private doctor, a clinic, an insurance company, an HMO, or the local hospital for my health care, that is my right.
I hope that Frank has a fortified place to hide as he continues to side against freedom-loving Americans who are not going to have infringements to their liberties thrust upon them by an oppressive socialist regime. I do not advise that anyone throw bricks or any other solid building materials at Frank. This is not out of concern for Frank, whose demise could be filed under "civic improvement", but out of my concern that freedom-loving Americans will get better use out of saving such materials for building their bunkers.
The revolution is coming.
Remember in November.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Quote of the Day
“The harsh fact of the matter is when you’re passing legislation that will cover 300 million American people in different ways, it takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people.”
Rep. John Dingell, D-MI, same dumbshit who compared town hall protesters to members of the Ku Klux Klan, responding to reporter's question as to why it would take four years to implement coverage under the Health Care Bill just signed by Obama.
I actually heard the audio of the question and Dingell's answer on Neal Boortz's radio show. Dingell casually answered as if there was nothing unusual at all about having to "control the people." A revealing moment.
Remember in November.
Rep. John Dingell, D-MI, same dumbshit who compared town hall protesters to members of the Ku Klux Klan, responding to reporter's question as to why it would take four years to implement coverage under the Health Care Bill just signed by Obama.
I actually heard the audio of the question and Dingell's answer on Neal Boortz's radio show. Dingell casually answered as if there was nothing unusual at all about having to "control the people." A revealing moment.
Remember in November.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Quote of the Day
You must understand the difference between literal and figurative speech. Most of us who know that Obama is the Antichrist are speaking figuratively. Obama is racist tyrant whose mind is dominated by paranoid delusions and megalomaniacal fantasies. He despises white America. He wants to enslave white Americans make them bow to him. What emotions do you think were behind his comment, "This is what change looks like?" I think it was Race Hate and he was reveling in the accomplishment of getting white people to vote for their own enslavement. He might as well have said, "This is what Chains look like!"
- rfk, Washington, USA, 24/3/2010 19:31
Comment left in response to this article "Almost a Quarter of Republicans think Obama 'May be the Anti-Christ' as 14 States Sue over Healthcare Reforms'.
WARNING: The above Daily Mail article was the editorialization of a befuddled British Mushmelon whose mental health condition was treated with socialized medicine.
- rfk, Washington, USA, 24/3/2010 19:31
Comment left in response to this article "Almost a Quarter of Republicans think Obama 'May be the Anti-Christ' as 14 States Sue over Healthcare Reforms'.
WARNING: The above Daily Mail article was the editorialization of a befuddled British Mushmelon whose mental health condition was treated with socialized medicine.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Repeal It or Feel It
Message to the Congresscritters regarding Obamacare.
Thanks to the Baron at Gates of Vienna for the image.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
