Health Care- Now(Passed)

reply to post by whatukno


Ah yes, but the "Commerce Clause" is expressly to regulate interstate commerce, which implicitly forbids federal regulation of intrastate commerce. Actually, the expression regulates commerce "among the several states", which I admit is rather loose and open to interpretation. They seem to have applied the freer version, regulating private commerce across state borders, rather than the stricter view which would be commerce between the states themselves.

Over time, they've loosened that up even more, applying it to intrastate commerce on the theory that interstate commerce is somehow affected by commerce that is entirely contained within a state. That's a reach, but the government generally does as it wishes, until and unless the people jerk it up short.

So then, according to a median stricture of usage, the clause would be applicable to insurance companies doing business in another state, but since states regulate insurance within their borders via licensing boards, that would be open to legal challenge if anyone cared to challenge it, statewise.

I doubt that happens, but time will tell.

I'm with you on the insurance industry being a scam. I know I'LL never buy into it again. A government run insurance company, euphemistically called a "public option", would be no different, except in where the money goes, and in the alleged power to force victims... er, umm, I mean customers, to purchase through force of law.

Either way, I'm not buying in to it via a private company OR a "public" company, and I'm not paying any sort of fines or taxes for exercising my rights to life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness.

Of course, there's no doubt at all that there will be hell to pay in my own little corner of the world when it comes to a showdown of force. I've drawn the line that says "this far and no further", and will back it up with all means necessary if that time comes. That said, it's a sure bet that when the dust settles, I'LL be among the bodies on the ground.

That's how far I'm willing to go over principle, all the way to death. I've said it, and will stand by it. I won't start the fight, But I won't back down from it either. That's mostly why I'm putting it out on ATS, so that when I die over it, someone will know WHY I was willing to die, and the spin meisters can spin it any way they want.

At least SOMEONE will know.

reply to post by nenothtu


See, now that's a bit excessive. I mean really, I don't think they are going to come to your house guns drawn and force you to sign up for insurance. They certainly aren't going to gun you down for refusing to buy the public option.

Where was the right when the Patriot Act was implemented? If that hunk of BS legislation can pass the constitution, certainly the Health Care Reform can.

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by nenothtu

 

See, now that's a bit excessive. I mean really, I don't think they are going to come to your house guns drawn and force you to sign up for insurance.

They certainly aren't going to gun you down for refusing to buy the public option.

Where was the right when the Patriot Act was implemented? If that hunk of BS legislation can pass the constitution, certainly the Health Care Reform can.

No, they will come to arrest me for not going along with the program, and refusing a tax charged for exercising my rights. I tell you right now, I will not pay the "penalty" nor be arrested. I accept neither financial penalty nor jail time for asserting my freedom to do as I will with my own health.

Haven't abortion activists been fighting for years for a woman's right to "do as she wants with her own body"? Didn't blacks fight in the 60's to overthrow unjust poll taxes? I don't see a difference.

You may see it as excessive, I say SOMEONE has to stand against this, and have stated how far I'm willing to carry my stand should it become necessary. In the end, I'll maintain what freedom I have left, or I will die in the attempt.

This far, and no farther.

As far as the "patriot" act goes, I was right there screaming against it. The argument that I allegedly wasn't is getting a little tiresome. The "patriot" act was the final straw that caused me to see the Republican party for what it had become, and leave it. I have liberal friends around here who can verify that, as they were fairly amazed at my stand when it happened, and who were amazed at how vocal I was against it. I had been a card-carrying republican for 40 years, and left the party after a long chain of abuses, capped by that unpatriotic monstrosity.

In that incident, I saw exactly how far verbal protest got me. Same goes for a long string of abuses by both parties both before and since then. Bailouts, cap-and-tax, government run health care, If there's money to be scammed, or power to be gathered, the American people are voiceless in DC. This is but the latest in a long chain of "abuses and usurpations" all over again.

I care nary a whit whether tyranny comes from the right or the left, it's still the same rough beast, and it's time for us to refuse to be steamrolled by it.

When my time comes, I'm willing to put it all on the line, and will most certainly do so alone. Folks have become confused and divided by the machinations of the halls of power. If it's left to that trajectory, they will be enslaved as well. Not enough folks left to stand together to the end, so I'll be making mine alone.

Americans have become soft and pliable, and think that one can always "talk his way out of a fight". That doesn't work when the opposition isn't listening, and by opposition I don't mean "left" or "right", I mean that monolithic monstrosity that the US government has become. In such cases, one can talk himself into slavery, or death, no other options are presented. I've already made my choice as to which it will be for me.

This far, and no further.


[edit on 2009/11/11 by nenothtu]

I agree with the above post. What was this country founded upon? Freedom, of course. Thomas Paine once said " give me liberty or give me death!"

I will say this- If the government wants to tell me what to do with my self by making me do something that is unconstitutional, then they can come to my house and try to pin me down and shove it down my throat...by I wont go down withouth a fight. This legislation is wrong, and it is pushing a very dangerous envelope.

reply to post by Realtruth


Funny you keep bringing up the Constitution since the founding fathers also faced a healthcare revolution.

Mr. WEHRMAN: Yes. Well, a group of angry sailors of about 20 rode out to the inoculation hospital. It was built on islands to keep infection down. They rode out with buckets of tar and torches and they burned the place to the ground. It had been empty for a bit, but it will still cause considerable shock and distraction.

CONAN: Andrew Wehrman, why would people down a perfectly good, brand new hospital?

Mr. WEHRMAN: They burned it down because they didn't have access to health care, to smallpox inoculations. The town built the hospital. It was built privately by four gentlemen, one of whom was Elbridge Gerry, who would become a future vice-president of the United States.

npr

So, the National Quarantine Bill really puts states in control of quarantines. And it says that the president has the responsibility to aid the states in their quarantine regulations. But then, in 1799, they passed this Marine Hospital Act which is a federally regulated system of marine hospitals. They tax sailors to build these hospitals, and they're built in a couple dozen port cities. And some of them are built by the federal government, run the government. Some are just funded and then run by individual towns. It was a hybrid sort of system. But that is where the Public Health Service and the Office of the Surgeon General later in the 19th century. It grows out of that marine hospital system.

And the first hospital in Texas was a military hospital at the Alamo in 1806, and they gave small pox inoculations to the town's children and to the garrison's children. And it was - eventually, allowed the town's people to actually use the hospital for a peso a day which was about a day's wage.

When the Marine hospital service was reorganized, it was headed by a supervising surgeon, which is now known today as the Surgeon General.

reply to post by nixie_nox


Interesting that all the medical facilities you mention in that post are military ones.. The government has a long tradition of telling soldiers and sailors what to do, while they are in the service. That's just the way that works.

Not so for civilians, and you'll notice that nowhere in instances of civilian use of those facilities were they FORCED to participate in the system.



[edit on 2009/11/11 by nenothtu]

reply to post by nenothtu


And when they decide there is no way to enforce the "tax penalty" and don't come after you, then you will accept this.

Then the next piece of legislation will come around, you will bitch and moan about "this far and no further" and again they won't haul you off to some imaginary gulag.

So on and so forth. Instead of doing something about it you will rant online with no action and show that it's all just words on a computer screen.

Sorry I'm just not buying it. I do my part and tell my congressmen what I think about their legislation. They may not listen, but I still participate. When there is an election I research the candidates, I find out and vote my conscience and while it's not perfect, it's still the best system short of just putting me in charge of the whole enchilada.

But keep ranting, cause your not going to do anything about it, they aren't going to come after you, they aren't going to take your guns away, they aren't going to force you to drink the cool aid. But keep ranting, after all it is your right to do so.

Me, ill research the facts, decide for myself, and vote the way I want to. But that's just me. I still have some faith in the system.

Originally posted by whatukno

And when they decide there is no way to enforce the "tax penalty" and don't come after you, then you will accept this.

Of course. In that event, I will have to accept it, since we have no say in it at all, other than refusal to comply. On the other hand, If I'm not forced to comply, then I really have no quarrel, do I? That's a victory, as far as I'm concerned. The rest of you can allow any thing to happen to you that you'd like to allow.

Then the next piece of legislation will come around, you will bitch and moan about "this far and no further" and again they won't haul you off to some imaginary gulag.

Maybe. Depends on whether they back down first or not, as they are bound to do in your scenario above. If they do, I'm good with it. If not, I'm ready to do whatever I have to.

So on and so forth. Instead of doing something about it you will rant online with no action and show that it's all just words on a computer screen.

No action? You obviously aren't privy to my history. That's cool, I actually kind of prefer it that way. It always surprises the opposition when they expect 'no action'.

Sorry I'm just not buying it.

Good. I've got nothing to sell anyhow.

I do my part and tell my congressmen what I think about their legislation. They may not listen, but I still participate. When there is an election I research the candidates, I find out and vote my conscience and while it's not perfect, it's still the best system short of just putting me in charge of the whole enchilada.

As do I. It really doesn't take up all that much time to get ignored, though. I still manage to find the time to get on the internet for my daily inactivity, and bitchin' and moanin' sessions.

But keep ranting, cause your not going to do anything about it, they aren't going to come after you, they aren't going to take your guns away, they aren't going to force you to drink the cool aid. But keep ranting, after all it is your right to do so.

Oh, I will, just because I can! Who said anything about guns being taken away? trying to add fuel to the fire or something? or is it just an attempt at misdirection?

Me, ill research the facts, decide for myself, and vote the way I want to. But that's just me. I still have some faith in the system.

As do I, even though my faith in the system has been betrayed time and time again.

Your disdain for my opinion and "lack of activity" are apparent, even though you know not where I've been or WHAT I may have been "active" in, or how and to what extent I may have been "active".

I think that says more about you than it does about me.

[edit on 2009/11/11 by nenothtu]

reply to post by nenothtu

As do I, even though my faith in the system has been betrayed time and time again.

Who's fault is that? Certainly not the system, the system didn't force you to have faith in them. You had faith in them of your own free will. And it got crushed time and again, it's not the system's fault you didn't know the game.

Your disdain for my opinion and "lack of activity" are apparent, even though you know not where I've been or WHAT I may have been "active" in, or how and to what extent I may have been "active".

Don't misconstrued my lack of caring for lack of understanding.

Originally posted by whatukno

Who's fault is that? Certainly not the system, the system didn't force you to have faith in them. You had faith in them of your own free will. And it got crushed time and again, it's not the system's fault you didn't know the game.

Well, THAT'S pretty clearly out in left field, and goes way out of the discussion at hand. Not a problem, though. I understand the infantile need to lash out when one has no legitimate answer to the topic at hand. I see it in the kids around here all the time.

Don't misconstrued my lack of caring for lack of understanding.

I believe you have that bass-ackwards. Clearly you lack understanding, but that shouldn't be misconstrued for a lack of caring. If you truly had a lack of caring, you wouldn't have bothered to attempt to take on my statements.

Not my fault if you found yourself in over your head, without any pertinent responses or legitimate answers.

reply to post by nenothtu

Not my fault if you found yourself in over your head, without any pertinent responses or legitimate answers.

What legitimate answer do you want when you are advocating and alluding to the violent resistance to a duly elected government? When your argument went off of the facts and started into the realm of Dillinger and Southern Secession it lost all relevance to the topic at hand.

I mean if you want to debate the legal ramifications of specifics in the Health Care Reform debate, I would be more than happy to. If you want to debate the violent resistance to a system that you feel is unfair, than I will be as absurd.

Frankly the issue of the fines in the bill are pretty irrelevant. As the bill is not yet law, it's not even halfway through congress. I can understand your point in not wanting to pay either the Insurance mobsters or the government for health care, but I can't understand the lunacy of wanting to shoot it out with local authorities because of it.

Originally posted by whatukno
I can understand your point in not wanting to pay either the Insurance mobsters or the government for health care, but I can't understand the lunacy of wanting to shoot it out with local authorities because of it.

I appreciate the honest answer. It's quite evident that you really DON'T understand, and never will.

I almost envy that child-like faith in the government. It's really not a matter of WANTING to shoot it out with anyone. It's a matter of standing for what one believes is right. It's a matter of refusing to be forced into paying the insurance racketeers. It's a matter of standing up for what little freedom there is left, the freedom to do as we will with our own bodies. It's a matter of drawing the line, and standing firm whatever comes.

To be perfectly honest, I'd be much happier if it never came to that.

[edit on 2009/11/12 by nenothtu]

reply to post by nenothtu

I almost envy that child-like faith in the government. It's really not a matter of WANTING to shoot it out with anyone. It's a matter of standing for what one believes is right.

It's not a matter of faith in the government. Please do try not to be so demeaning. It's a fact of I don't feel that violence is the first route I would think to go to in order to solve my problems with the government.

Really, it never turns out that one man with a gun brings down the government, those people are often looked upon as nutcases and lunatics. Change in a government this size comes slowly from within, and certainly not through the use of violent force.

More often than not change in this government comes through the form of lobby groups that have more influence over our representatives than the people do. Might I suggest that instead of your plan to go out in a blaze of gunfire with some local police department that really work for the state, to try and get together with PACs and Lobby groups you believe in. They really have more power than the individual, and you won't have to worry about the gun charges and attempted murder stuff either.

It's posts like yours that worry me. Cause it's posts like yours that tend to someday end up on MSM with a bad photo and a sad story.



[edit on 11/12/2009 by whatukno]

Originally posted by whatukno

It's a fact of I don't feel that violence is the first route I would think to go to in order to solve my problems with the government.

It's a matter of assumption on your part that escalated resistance is the first route. It's not. So far, however, protestations, pleadings, and discussions don't appear to be working, and the governmental juggernaut lumbers on. The next step is a steadfast refusal to comply.

Really, it never turns out that one man with a gun brings down the government, those people are often looked upon as nutcases and lunatics. Change in a government this size comes slowly from within, and certainly not through the use of violent force.

It's not about bringing down the government (at no point have I mentioned a gun, other than to question why you brought one up. Why DO you keep bringing them up?) It's about standing on principle. That is, of course, something that the government, and apparently wide swaths of the population, know nothing about. The government has had several years, decades, in which to show signs of change. It has not. Change is not coming, only continued exponential governmental growth, with concurrent increasing stricture on the citizenry in order to protect (from the citizenry) and finance (also from the citizenry) that overgrown government.

Worry not though. In the end, I will be as dead as it gets, and thus rendered defenseless, you may proceed to paint me as any brand of lunatic you like.

More often than not change in this government comes through the form of lobby groups that have more influence over our representatives than the people do. Might I suggest that instead of your plan to go out in a blaze of gunfire with some local police department that really work for the state, to try and get together with PACs and Lobby groups you believe in. They really have more power than the individual, and you won't have to worry about the gun charges and attempted murder stuff either.

Lobby against lobbying? Now THAT'S a novel approach! I'll tell you what, I hereby hand off the political machinations to you. I'm old, and tired of it now. It's been a good run, and I'm done with it. May you get better results, or at least DC's attention.

Again with the guns! I tell you again, I don't plan on any shootouts at the OK Corral. Local police will NOT be coming after me, many of them are my friends, and, being local, NONE of them are federal, as in IRS. As it stands currently, the IRS will be administering the penalties for failure to comply and buy their insurance. They are the governmental mob's Enforcers in this matter.

I'm not the least bit worried about "gun charges" (what a Constitutional oxymoron!) or "attempted murder stuff". You would have to be in possession of the one, or have attempted the other for any such charges to stick in a conviction. I'm well aware that one can be CHARGED with anything, evidence or not, but still today, at least some sort of vestigal evidence has to be presented in court for the charges to result in a conviction.

No doubt they can manufacture whatever evidence they want, but I'll already be dead, so what do I care about that? No sir, no way are they going to allow me to live through this. It would set a bad precedent.

It's posts like yours that worry me. Cause it's posts like yours that tend to someday end up on MSM with a bad photo and a sad story.

Worry not, I seriously doubt that you'll ever be subjected to the news of my demise on any news channel. It's just not going to be that spectacular a thing, and I promise the government will have a vested interest in keeping it quiet.

reply to post by nenothtu

Again with the guns! I tell you again, I don't plan on any shootouts at the OK Corral. Local police will NOT be coming after me, many of them are my friends, and, being local, NONE of them are federal, as in IRS. As it stands currently, the IRS will be administering the penalties for failure to comply and buy their insurance. They are the governmental mob's Enforcers in this matter.

Dude, if they didn't go after all those Democratic appointees, what makes you think they will care about you?

Really, if you don't like the legislation get together with the groups that are against it. They are organized and know how to throw political weight around.

As for me. I like annoying my congressmen. To me writing them, emailing them, calling them is great fun.

This is very scary stuff. They are completing the plan they have had for many years in my opinion. Unless we stand up this will continue.

reply to post by whatukno



Does bothering the congressmen ever help? Have you ever talked to one w hen you call? I called to ask my congressman not to vote for FISA. His secretary told me she'd let him know and they sent me some standard letter.

He voted for FISA. Lame.