Joel (of The Ultimate Answer to Kings) presents us with a selection of choices to bypass the
miasma boondoggle clusterf**** that pretends to be compulsory public health care (but is actually redistribution of wealth) in this country!
Well, by now that’s got to be a subject near and dear to just about everybody. You could do it the way I have…but not even I suggest doing that, and this article lists numerous excellent reasons why it’s a bad idea.
But there apparently are ways to live an Obamacare-free life, and some may even be legal. The linked article lists several possibilities.
Of course you may or may not have to pay that tax, or fee, or tax, or whatever it is, punishing you for not allowing the government to help you with your own money. But there may even be (legal, or at least unlikely to get you shot) ways around that.
stolen copied in it’s entirety, thanks, Joel! Love the graphic!)
(just a reminder, Guffaw is a libertarian!)
(from FDR’s Second Bill of Rights)
- The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
- The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
- The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
- The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
- The right of every family to a decent home;
- The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
- The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
- The right to a good education.
…Now before I waste too much of your time, let’s establish who I’m talking to. If you believe that we live in an evil, imperialist nation from its founding, and you believe that it should be “fundamentally transformed”, lend me your ears. If you believe that the free market is the source of the vast majority of society’s ills and wish to have more government intervention into it, I’m talking to you. If you believe that health care is a basic human right and that government should provide it to everyone, you’re the guy I’m screaming at. If you think minorities cannot possibly survive in this inherently racist country without handouts and government mandated diversity quotas, you’re my guy. If you believe that rich people are that way because they’ve exploited their workers and acquired wealth on the backs of the poor, keep reading. Pretty much, if you trust government more than your fellow American, this post is for you.
…Everything that modern liberalism accomplishes is accomplished at the barrel of a government rifle. You do not trust in the generosity of the American people to provide, through private charity, things such as clothing, food, shelter, and health care, so you empower the government to take from them and spend the money on wasteful, inefficient, and inadequate government entitlement programs. You do not trust in the personal responsibility of the average American to wield firearms in defense of themselves and their families, so you seek to empower the government to criminalize the use and possession of firearms by private citizens. Every time you empower the government, you lose more of your personal liberty — it’s an axiomatic truth. (Sufficient Reason)
WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!
The difference between conservatism and liberalism (e.g. progressivism, socialism, communism, fascism) is that
liberals conservatives statists force their agenda on all through the implied (and sometimes direct) government violence against citizens.
Ultimately, this argument is NOT about liberal versus conservative, it’s about statism versus liberty!
Thus endeth the rant…
h/t Jeremy N. Choate
N.Y.P.D. has begun sending out the following form letter to registered legal owners of (now illegal, under NY State law) firearms.
AND, there is a push in Congress for the passage of a ‘general warrants’ measure, to make it easier to search homes of legal gun owners to determine if there firearms are ‘stored safely’. (as they already do in Massachusetts!, unwarranted…)
These ‘general warrants’ were proposed by the N.S.A.(!), for the express purpose of (legitimizing actions already taken in) bulk (telephone) data collection. You know, to keep us ‘safe’.
WASHINGTON — THE framers of the Constitution declared that government officials had no power to seize the records of individual Americans without evidence of wrongdoing, and they embedded this principle in the Fourth Amendment. The bulk collection of Americans’ telephone records — so-called metadata — by the National Security Agency is, in our view, a clear case of a general warrant that violates the spirit of the framers’ intentions. This intrusive program was authorized under a secret legal process by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, so for years American citizens did not have the knowledge needed to challenge the infringement of their privacy rights. (NYT Opinion Pages, November 25, 3013)
…Each of these proposals represents real and meaningful reform, which we believe would have fulfilled the purpose of protecting our security and liberty. Each was rejected by the committee, in some cases by a single vote. (IBID) (emphasis Guffaw)
Nothing was mentioned about limiting governmental power of these proposed ‘safety’ measures to just wiretapping.
How many times in recorded history have governments given power back to the people, after having first usurped it? I’ll give you a hint – NONE, without benefit of revolution.
I could probably list about 75 ‘safety’ measures taken by the government ‘for our benefit’ since ‘Dan Cooper’ hijacked a plane for ransom on my birthday in 1971, beginning the steady erosion of THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL CITIZEN. But what would be the point?
I’m pretty certain most of my readers tend to agree with me on liberty issues, or they wouldn’t be my readers. So, I’m preaching to the choir, yet again.
Do YOU see a pattern here? I f’n DO!
h/t Random Nuclear Strikes
(Yeah – I’m shocked, too!) :-P
That is a turnout increase of 300%. If voter ID was intended to suppress votes, it is failing as spectacularly as HealthCare.gov.
Now hers’ the SHOCKING PART!
h/t CNN !
First of all, vigilantes were members of committees of vigilance (plural). There is no such thing grammatically as a single vigilante. The movie Death Wish notwithstanding.
Second – the article spends 85% of the time NOT focusing on Mr. Goetz’ marijuana bust, but on the previous crime, case and aftermath! If it had been you or me, we wouldn’t even have made the papers.
After the LAX shooting, a former flight attendant weighs in on a possible solution.
My two cents?
First of all, the TSA routinely violates the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, and needs to be disbanded, immediately.
Have they halted any terrorist attacks on airlines? NO!
Secondly, what do the ‘authorities’ do when confronted with a shooter? Respond, with shooters.
ALL CITIZENS WHO ARE NOT PROHIBITED POSSESSORS SHOULD HAVE THE FREE CHOICE OF ARMING THEMSELVES, ANYWHERE. THIS INCLUDES CIVILIAN TSA EMPLOYEES (until they are disbanded).
I know, it’s a paradox.
I’ve recounted here before how the JFK assassination changed the direction of my life. The short version is with a family history in law enforcement, and being a 6th Grader interested in being a cop at the time of the assassination, I was primed to evolve into an investigations career. I spent many years as a private investigator and researcher, and have made a lifetime study of this crime.
I was fortunate enough to visit Dealy Plaza on November 22, 1992 (the 29th Anniversary) and to meet and speak with Jean Hill (The Lady in Red) and Penn Jones, Jr. (Forgive My Grief), as well as to walk the crime scene and take photographs. Along with about 300 others that day.
My understanding is the City of Dallas is selling tickets (!) for the capacity crowd today. Crime scene as tourist trap (see Ford’s Theatre).
There are those who believe The Warren Report as gospel, that Oswald acted alone; and those who believe the FBI, Secret Service, CIA, Army Intelligence, anti-Castro Cubans, pro-Castro Cubans, the military industrial complex, Lyndon Johnson and the entire road cast of Cats are responsible. Or some amalgamation, thereof.
My best guess, based on the physical evidence, is there was more than one assassin. As to the puppetmasters, pick-a-card. Certainly there are many accessories-after-the-fact who participated in obfuscation to cover their own incompetence, at the very least. And perhaps elements of them were compartmentalized conspiratorial elements before the crime. We’ll probably never know.
Hell, they still question whether or not Napoleon was poisoned, and the official Secret Service account of Lincoln’s killing neglects to mention his co-conspirators. It’s neater that way.
Some things to ponder:
The United States is promoted to the rest of the World as a beacon of liberty and not a banana republic. At least it used to be. Between Fourth Amendment abusers (like the TSA, NSA et al)
sometimes I wonder. And we should be able to protect the Chief Executive, or minimally determine what happened to him if we were unable to do so.
Not doing so is contrary to what’s left of this Constitutional Republic.
h/t Jean Hill, Penn Jones, Jr., Harold Weisberg, House Select Committee on Assassinations, et al
(and Happy Birthday to Dave the
Genius Mechanic! And many more, my friend!)
The MSM has been ruminating, of late, regarding the NEXT Presidential Election. Keep in mind in 2014, it’s the Congressional (off year) election, making the Presidential Election THREE YEARS AWAY (2016) from now!
The reason for all this undesired attention? Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of State, former Senator, and former First Lady of the Presidency and Governorship (of Arkansas) is making noises about running! After she promised she wouldn’t, of course.
And as the last presidential election was all about electing a Black Man – as though that were some kind of qualification – this one is being countenanced about electing a Woman. Same counter-argument. Of course, we all know that all Blacks think the same and all women do, too. A slam-dunk, right? Tell that to Governor Sarah Palin.
“A woman will get us out of wars, because their’s is the gentle gender.” Just ask Margaret Thatcher, Indira Gandhi and Golda Meir.
So, with regard to qualifications, exactly how does Ms. Clinton qualify?
Uh, she was a lawyer, but never renewed her license. At age ~27 she was fired for being a liar and an unethical lawyer in the Watergate Investigation. Whitewater, Wikileaks, Iran, Iraq, Sandy Berger, Benghazi, Vince Foster, any of those names ring a bell?
Her voting record in the Senate – incidentally, how does a disgraced Arkansas lawyer suddenly become a transplanted New Yorker, and get elected Senator? I guess Bobby Kennedy did it, though. And her non-starterhood as the last Secretary of State.
What has she done, lately, aside from unofficially run for office? And, of course, she was the co-President to her ‘husband’ Bill. Scary stuff.
The scariest is the ‘loyal opposition’ Republicans have very few real contenders. And their party is in a shambles. And the other choice, Libertarians, are by nature and definition not confrontational.
What to do?
Heinlein’s Law – They’re ALWAYS someone to vote against!
PS – This just in – the (Democratic Governor-Elect just made Hillary-for-President noises after winning last night. Not surprising as he was a previous
bag man shill supporter of Bill and Hill !)
h/t HuffPo (believe it or not!)
I do, too. But Kent’s “Hooligan Libertarian Blog” offers perspective, along with support.
To wit (in part):
The powderkeg of “troops”Are individuals in America better off that there are US troops all over the planet? Do troops really help “the people”?Think about it.Was Germany better off by having and supporting the Nazi troops? Or, in the long run was the normal, average German made less safe and less prosperous because of “the troops”? (And don’t bother trying to misuse Godwin’s Law on me- I’m on to that game.)
The only ones helped by “the troops” are those who work for that gang of thugs called “government”. Everyone else is harmed. They may think they are benefiting, but only until consequences catch up to them all. At that time the veil is ripped away.
You should go to Kent’s link above and read the whole thing. Blind obedience isn’t thinking, and it certainly isn’t what freedom and liberty are about.
Question Authority. Not just for the exercise, but for the meaning; the agenda.
To keep everybody safe
Paul Joseph Watson
October 21, 2013
After illustrating their enthusiasm for repealing the Bill of Rights, a video shows Americans happily signing a petition to support a “Nazi-style Orwellian police state,” in what easily represents the most shocking footage of its kind to date.
Citing issues with how the government shutdown has impacted the ability of the police to “keep the community safe,” Dice tells San Diegans that there is a need to “increase the Orwellian system.”
“Not a problem,” responds one man as he signs the petition.
“We just want to model it after the Nazi Germany system to keep people safe and secure,” Dice tells another individual.
After signing the petition to “implement the Orwellian police state,” another man responds, “You find the pot of money though,” apparently more concerned about how much a Nazi-style police state would cost than its actual consequences.
“They’re trying to cut the budget by 20 per cent so we just want to make sure that we can model the police state after the Nazi Germany system,” Dice tells another couple who sign the petition, before adding, “Thanks for supporting the police state.”
“We’re going to model it after the Nazi Germany-style police state,” Dice clearly tells another man who signs the petition.
“We need this Orwellian-style system to keep everybody safe,” Dice tells a woman as she is signing the petition, to which she responds, “Yeah.”
Click here for all of Paul’s article. But bring along an airsick bag.
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety” – Benjamin Franklin
(from The San Antonio Express News, courtesy of Live from the Alamo)
We have advocated in the past for universal background checks and an assault weapon ban. Incompatible with the Second Amendment? Not if the concept of “guns in the wrong hands” has any meaning.
I had a thought upon reading this. What if we promoted universal background checks for anyone who wished to establish religion and freely exercise it, or speak freely, or publish, or peaceably assemble or petition the government for redress of grievances? And ban certain kinds of rapid dissemination of published material. Incompatible with the First Amendment?
After all, isn’t there a concept of “words in the wrong hands”?
How far do you think we’d get? Questioning the inviolability of The First Amendment? We’d be tarred and feathered and pilloried and spat upon and run out of town on a rail. Then hanged, drawn and quartered and the pieces arrested!
Of course there are “common sense” controls on The First Amendment! Laws against libel/slander, inciting riots, yelling fire in a crowded theatre. And there already are “common sense” controls on The Second Amendment. Laws against armed robbery, armed rape, armed mayhem, armed murder.
Mr, President, Mr. Blumberg, and Mr. King – leave me and my rights alone! If I do something wrong, arrest me.