NeoRepublica - Peering into the Abyss

03/27/10

Peering into the Abyss

Filed under: National — @ 06:11:29 pm

I have not written lately because what is happening in America right now is terrifying. This week, the Congress passed the Democrat party’s health care reform bill, to summarize: it is a law that imposes mandates on Americans simply because they are alive, increases taxes, and sets out to control the entire health care system. The United States government has now nationalized wide swaths of the US economy and are encircling individual freedom. In the age of Obama, the United States has nationalized, bailed out, and set out to control the financial sector of the economy and this week they audaciously asserted their power by passing a law that requires Americans to purchase a product. They have gone after mortgages, money in general, cars, and our health. Everyday we surrender more to the federal government… and there seems to be no end in sight.

The way that the Democrats rammed this down the throats of Americans was shameful. They lied. They cheated. They bribed. A prime example is when congressman Bart Stupak, who was leading a group of anti-abortion Democrats to vote against the bill, hammered out a compromise with the president which would require Obama to issue an executive order banning the use of federal funds for abortion. Everyone everywhere knows that the executive order has no legal weight, so what is it that really made Stupak change his mind? In my opinion, they bought him. That, or they threatened him. Either way, through stick or carrot they herded the donkeys to vote on a bill that is so terrible, so dangerous to freedom that I believe that America’s superpower status will soon be over because of it.

There are many terrible parts of this new law, the individual mandates being one of them, but there is another part that is equally dangerous to our Republic. The law establishes something called the “Independent Medicare Advisory Board… a 15-person board of independent experts chosen by the president, confirmed by the Senate, and empowered to cut through congressional gridlock.” By design, it seems to be part of the executive branch and it answers only to the president (at least in terms of appointment). The powers of this board are near-absolute when it comes to health care (the government administered portion of it) because they make decisions that Congress cannot revise, ignore, or overrule. This means that the executive branch can now pass laws and reforms that Congress cannot easily overturn, a complete reversal of the ideas that our government was founded on. This board IS the death panel, ladies and gentlemen. These are the rationers, the people who determine which treatments are good and which are bad, and the people in charge of cutting Medicare which will inevitably come to cover a huge percentage, if not the majority, of Americans in the near future.

Now imagine if you live in an impoverished part of Latin America… wouldn’t the idea of emigrating to the United States, where not only can you possibly get a job doing some sort of menial labor but you also get FREE health care courtesy of the US taxpayer? In fact, wouldn’t public housing and public health care be an incentive for people to remain in poverty, especially in the US where poverty is nowhere near as bad as poverty in many places around the world? The US nanny-state that today exists will make immigration a bigger issue and will only perpetuate poverty. This is exactly what the Left wants.

So while the lefties of America are cheering over the passage of the health care takeover bill, most regular Americans feel like they have lost something valuable. They are right. We have lost some of our freedom. Losing that freedom gives many a feeling of emptiness, a feeling of emptiness that comes from realizing that tyranny continues tearing away at America, a feeling of emptiness that I share with those many. Despite that feeling, or rather because of that feeling, we as Americans cannot let up, we must push forward. The vote is still our most powerful weapon, even if in this instance our vote seemed to count for nothing. We can vote them all out. We must. The very existence of our free Republic depends on it. I don’t merely mean the Democrats, I now reserve special ire for the big government Republicans who during Bush inflated government and betrayed our trust. It was the big government Republicans who set the stage for today’s events, for the sheepishness of our people, for the demagoguery of Obamism that we are now subject to. I’m sick of it. It is high time for a renewed revolution in this country, one of ideas… the left’s utopic ideals are the mask of tyranny, the lemmings follow these ideas, and off the cliff we go… the real revolutionaries of today are the ones with common sense, the ones who believe in freedom, the ones who have the guts to stand up to these self-righteous, pompous fools who point their fingers at you, commanding you to buy their product of choice, to stop driving cars because it angers the “earth-spirit,” to not make so much money because it’s bad, to give up your paycheck for the welfare of some lazy leech, to hold your tongue because someone, somewhere might be offended somehow, to give terrorists more rights, to not be Christian while saying that Islam is just misunderstood, to not protest their agenda or else you’re a racist. I say we need these real revolutionaries to stand up and take our country back.

Peering into the abyss, the progressives’ agenda for America, for too long is dangerous and shortly after the health care vote I prayed that no one would take these feelings of powerlessness and turn them into acts of violence. We cannot afford that in our great country. That’s what these Leftists want, to push Americans into a corner and then have us react so that they can finally use our reaction as an excuse to take away the last bit of freedom we have. Don’t give them the pleasure. Vote them out. Call them out on their treasonous, incompetent ideas. Do not shy away from a discussion in public anymore. Speak truth to power. Don’t back down. They’ll call us racist. They’ll call us paid mercenaries. They’ll call us stupid. They’ll call us anything they can think of… but our Republic is dying. You don’t want to think back and regret not speaking up when the time came, and trust me, the time has come.

-AG

8 comments

Comments, Pingbacks:

Comment from: Matt [Member]

· http://conservativehideout.com/wordpress/

Fantastic AG. You sense for the challenges ourselves, as well as the fact that we need to confront them with the truth, are spot on. Welcome back!

Permalink 03/28/10 @ 16:03

Comment from: bn397 [Visitor]

Hey there AG:

I am an Australian who has been living in the US now for five years - I love it and it is rapidly becoming my home.

Now, I have been watching with absolute fascination the Health Care Reform Bill debate and I must admit as to a deep confusion; so deep in fact, that I need someone to explain to me (from a non-democrat perspective) what the problem really is with this particular Bill.

After having reviewed your article and having followed discussions widely, I am led to believe that the problem (from your perspective and others who share your view) is that regardless of the support and benefits that this Bill offers you as an individual and for your family in the event they fall ill, it is in actuality intrinsically negative principally because you perceive it to encroach on your individual Right to choose who should provide you with health care (whether you can afford to pay for it or not); and that it may also encourage additional illegal immigration.

Though no doubt a simplistic overview, is this generally correct? If not, I'd really appreciate your thoughts as for the life of me; I can't really see the negatives at all. As I'm sure you're aware, we have this system in Australia and while by no means perfect, it actually works pretty well.

Many thanks.

BN397

Permalink 03/30/10 @ 12:43

Comment from: AG [Member]

Well, this particular post was not intended to debate the pros or cons of the bill in detail, that has been done ad nauseam in other blogs and in other posts.

I will summarize my personal opposition in three parts, for time's sake:

- Constitutional: In the US, our Constitution was set up to balance the powers of government, but our history has flowed in the opposite direction. From the war powers act to this new bill, the executive branch has been usurping powers from the states and from the other branches, year after year. This leads to engaging in wars that are undeclared, unauthorized intrusions on personal liberties, and undermining of the Constitution. This bill hands the executive branch direct power over the budget with respect to health care (not all of it, but a huge part of it as described in this post). The Constitution set up Congress to have power over commerce, but this body has relinquished its authority over the years. As a person who truly believes that human beings cannot be trusted with power, the Constitution provides an excellent blueprint for dividing up the powers. Blatantly going against our founding document undermines freedom in general. This bill places individual mandates on all citizens to buy a product, the Constitution does not say the government can do this. This is not the start of the slippery slope, we are smack in the middle of a steady erosion of liberty, as described in the Constitution, in this country. This is my first argument against it, one based on principles of government.

- Economic - First we dispel with the notion that this health care bill gives free health care to all. This is not at all the case. The bill places pressure on companies, small to large, to cover their employees. This during a recession. This added cost gets passed on to consumers and hurts smaller businesses. Already, a number of companies have announced that the costs they will incur under the Obama plan will cost billions. Some may argue that this happens in other countries and it works just fine, but this is not the extent of the damage:

With the ind. mandate, ppl's discretionary spending will go down hurting most sectors of the economy while insurance companies will reap the benefits. This marriage of gov't and big business stifles economic growth, and is the opposite of what free markets are supposed to be about. I am pro-free market (I agree with some regulation, but this is a sweetheart deal).

It taxes expensive insurance plans by about 40%, not taking into account that if the affluent wish to purchase expensive plans, that actually helps the less affluent. Coupled with the trickle-down effect of companies passing costs onto the consumer, this bill is essentially a regressive tax on the American people.

To see how effective this plan will be one needs only to look at the state of Massachusetts where a very similar plan is in effect. The touted benefits were supposed to be lower insurance premiums, less emergency room expenditures, and improved care. The reality is that MA has a lack of doctors, the highest ins premiums in the country (of course, if it's mandated, companies will find ways to charge more), overcrowded emergency rooms, higher taxes, and the plan is costing hundreds of millions over estimates... all of this with the federal government giving them billions. You can look all of this up if you are so inclined. Therefore, we can expect the Obama plan to result in about the same... we have the same shortage of primary care doctors across the nation, same issues with emergency rooms, federal subsidies for low-income ppl, same mandates, etc.

All in all, this bill hurts the economy and places an undue burden on all Americans.

- Deficits/Taxes - Since we can expect the costs of this plan to go up, we can expect even higher deficits. As of now the projections look rosy, but the cost of implementing this program will be about $1 trillion. The projected savings are $140 billion in deficit reduction over a decade. But this will not be the case. The downward pressure on jobs will cause a swelling of ppl on gov't care/subsidies, causing higher costs, leading to higher deficits. Furthermore, Medicare is still expected to cost more and more. At best, if the projections are true, then we've just bought ourselves a little bit of time, but not much. This costs more than it saves and these costs will only keep going up.

This means that taxes will need to go higher, in fact, this bill already increases taxes to offset some of its costs.

________________

There are many reasons to oppose this bill, from its indirect and direct funding of abortion to the fact that it will inevitably lead to a nationalized health care model (in the opinion of some, myself included). But the three reasons, with support, listed above are the most immediate and important reasons why I oppose this bill. What I do appreciate is that the bill covers preexisting conditions... but I disagree with the way it does so.

While these are just the cons, there are alternatives to this plan. Some put forward by the GOP, some not. I outlined them in another post, just a few of them, but there are lots more. Anyhow, I hope that this gave you an idea as to why I oppose this bill.

Thanks for reading!
-AG

Permalink 03/30/10 @ 15:12

Comment from: bn397 [Visitor]

AG:

Many thanks for spending the time to respond to my queries (and at some length!): while no doubt abridged, you summarized your points quite nicely!

I guess at the end of the day, in my view, Health Care does need to be massively overhauled in the United States, where it seemingly exists as a system that does not appear to favour your average American citizen.

Whatever one may think of President Obama, he does strike me as an individual who legitimately wishes to do the right thing for the American people and the provision of health care for all is seemingly a resoundingly pure aim [I would have thought].

Unfortunately, this has not come to pass (at this juncture) given the quite remarkable opposition the President confronted when these reforms were laid out in 2009 (and presently) and the significant amendments he chose to make to placate those in opposition. However, it is, at least, a starting point.

While some individual rights need not be touched, I do not see a problem where a Government-elect provides support to its citizens through common and basic social services (ie. education, health care, retirement support, justice…etc.): while those citizens that have the means should contribute to these services, all citizens should “have equal access to public services of his[/her] country”; which, arguably, is not necessarily the case at present (or will necessarily be the case with the Health Reform Bill’s current state). At any rate, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is pretty clear on what individuals should expect as members of a society. I do not think that this is the case for the US Constitution.

Though I am by no means whatsoever knowledgeable of the content of the US Constitution and its first 10 Amendments, I do seem to recall that it is by no means clear on what individuals can expect from their Government other than protecting them from invasions of their person or property.

At any rate, I’ll leave it there and will continue to follow blogs with interest.

Again, many thanks for taking the time out to respond in the detail that you did.

Cheers.

BN397

Permalink 04/05/10 @ 16:15

Comment from: AG [Member]

I agree that Health Care needs to be overhauled in the United States, but what is was passed is not the solution, just recently, the congressional budget office said that our current rate of spending is unsustainable. We need to dispel this myth that American health care is not good, or only favors the rich, for example: my grandmother, years ago, had heart surgery, she is on Medicare and the gov't covered everything (though I'm sure that they underpaid the doctors/hospital). Everyone else in my non-affluent family has health care and we get prompt attention. The vast majority of Americans, when polled, say that they like their health care and their insurers. The truth is that our system is good for most, bad for a few and it for those few that we should reform the system. Instead, the govt has decided to reform a working system for the entire nation and turn it into something that only accelerates our fiscal demise. So I do not agree that we need a "massive" overhaul. I would have rather had an honest increase in taxes in exchange for covering ppl with preexisting conditions and those without, instead we get something that fundamentally changes the character of the nation.

As with the issue of rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights includes things like "no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property" yet our govt has decided to place mandates on individuals and businesses. I did not say that universal health care should not be a goal of society, it is because of the way in which we are now doing it that I and many others oppose this new system. Moreover, that document does not supersede our own Constitution.

America is an experiment in freedom, a unique one at that. Many of us don't want to give up on that dream. We hold true to the idea that in freedom, societies can thrive... and that when a government for the people removes itself from running people's lives and instead focuses on protecting people's rights, we inch every closer to an ideal society... I guess I'm a starry-eyed idealist.

Permalink 04/09/10 @ 11:23

Comment from: bn397 [Visitor]

Hey AG: my apologies for not getting back to you sooner (I travel a little with work!)

Completely agree with you that what was recently passed is likely not the solution: however, what it is, is a start. As previously noted, within a society (I believe) there are some basic services that a citizen should have access to, health care is one of them. (I’m certainly not saying that health care in Australia is by any means perfect – it’s far from it.) However, the system works and as a citizen, it is essentially free of charge and when it’s not, it’s heavily subsidized. Unfortunately for the US, it’s generally recognized that the US has the worst health care system in the developed world: 37 million Americans (around 12 percent) are totally uninsured and thus cannot get health care. (And just reading up on this, the current cost of health care in the US is a staggering 14.5 percent of GDP and rising [in Australia it is eight percent with a public system].

I think it can be very difficult within the United States, at times, to get a real sense of “community” or feeling as though you are part of a much wider society with collectivized goals and ideals – beyond, at times, the rather self-centered emphasis of the rights of an individual. [And do not get me wrong, I also hold true to the inalienable rights of an individual, however, I also recognize that an individual must understand his/her place within a system - and be prepared to contribute to it - in order for that system to function effectively]. Here in the US, I often have heard people saying [for instance] “I am a Texan before I am an American”. How can a society expect to work cohesively with such distorted perceptions of where an individual exists within a society? A system too bent on the rights of an individual can, at times, ultimately equate to anarchy.

The Gettysburg Address, came at a mid-point of the Civil War; a war that was fought for many different things including the rights of States versus the rights of a Federal Government. It was also a fight over the election of Abraham Lincoln who powerfully stated: “A Government of the people, by the people and for the people”. President Lincoln’s election, opposed vehemently by a number of states, ultimately led to the withdrawal of a number of states from the Union. Dare I say it, President Lincoln was a Federalist.

Ultimately, freedom is an ideal that we should all strive towards (I too am a starry-eyed idealist!); however, that freedom should exist within a defined boundary of what a nation-State can and should do for its citizens and what an individual can and should do as part of a nation-State.

Again, my apologies for the lateness of this response.

Cheers AG.

BN397

Permalink 04/22/10 @ 08:57

Comment from: bn397 [Visitor]

Hey AG:

Was just having a bit of a trawl around for some information for you... came on this article from the NY Times from '07 that was based on research undertaken by the World Health Organization around 2000 (I think)... thought you might be interested.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/opinion/12sun1.html

Makes for sobering reading... I do apologize... some of the info I used was a tad dated!

Cheers.

BN397

Permalink 04/22/10 @ 10:56

Comment from: AG [Member]

No worries about the lateness.

You frame this question with the idea "ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." Very noble sounding indeed, but America was founded on the principle of liberty, so the question is: why must we bow our heads and sacrifice this highest of ideals simply because we haven't figured out a way to let there exist a more free health care system? Moreover, a system MUST be "too bent on the rights of an individual," and by definition, this cannot lead to anarchy since everyone has rights and everyone needs protection of those rights through some agreed upon form of government. The opposite is what Americans loathe, systems that start chipping away at fundamental rights for some "common good" be it legitimate or not.

Back to the question of liberty. The Constitution, as you previously stated, is a limiting document, one that does not say that the citizen MUST do something for the state. Therefore to talk about people "knowing their place in society" and "working for the sake of society" is not what our founding fathers intended nor is it what a majority of Americans want. As I wrote before, we are a unique experiment in freedom and we should try to leave it up to the people, not the government, to address some of the problems. The solution for the health care problem would have included less gov't intrusion and more of a free enterprise based strategy. This bill does the opposite on both: heavy govt intrusion and favoring only big insurance companies. We should not have abandoned our principles so quickly. I agree that access to health care is something positive for society, but it is not a human right since we must violate another's rights to make it possible. I say we can do it without gov't mandates, without gov't takeovers, without preferential treatment for some corporations over others. I say that we can do it like we do so many other things, with the free market (limited govt intervention in this sector will absolutely be necessary though, in my view).

In sum, the issue here is the question of freedom. I believe that freedom should be the guiding principle, and in a place where the free market has been able to provide more jobs, nourishment, clothing, dwellings, etc. than the govt, I say that freedom has been doing a much better job then the public sector. The "collective" spirit you speak of exists in a moderated form, and this is a great thing especially considering that the great atrocities and wars in history came from nations and peoples who thought themselves as cogs in some machine, this individualism makes long-term wars less possible, makes mass conscription for such wars less possible, and makes dissent commonplace. We must celebrate the uniqueness of everyone and respect their inalienable rights as much as possible. The idea of balancing rights between the collective and the individual lead to dangerous consequences sometimes... the superior idea is to defend the rights of all and be just. Our sense of being universally American comes from our love of that very system (when it works).

Thanks again for taking time out reflect. I hope your experience in the US is thus far a positive one and continues to be one. Though I'm sure you must miss home.

-AG

Permalink 04/22/10 @ 14:06