The Vulgar Left’s ObamaCare Arguments

Posted on | July 3, 2012 | 38 Comments

by Smitty

<rant>
Regulating commerce; the power to tax. Whatever. Somebody get ahold of Jake Tapper and have him ask that miserable twerp Carney: “How is it not fundamentally dishonest that the Administration cannot make a clear, simple, straightforward case for ObamaCare and just put it out there?” The administration has tacked and jibed over the last 2.5 years with enough agility to make Dennis Connor seem a slouch. Even the heavyweights like Hinderaker get sucked into the petty details of how, with enough mental gymnastics, we can contort ObamaCare into something akin to a policy, and deal with it as such. Fine. Full court press.

Step back though and consider what a fundamentally dishonest enterprise ObamaCare has been. Truly, it represents how un-forthright (forthleft?) Barack Obama and the entire Progressive movement have been. And we all know that, for all the resources they’ve sunk into ObamaCare, they don’t even really give two hoots about it: it’s another brick in the wall leading to single payer.

Let this blog post be a hearty “get stuffed” to the administration and the lying liars that support it. Take your arguments and return them to Hell. If you tried to run a business with your snaky approach to, well, anything, you’d be bankrupt overnight. But we live in an age where craven thieves connected to the aristocracy of pull just get bailed out with fake money issued by an illegitimate government in a decadent age.

Think I’ll let this go while it’s still brief and family-friendly. Get pissed, people, and let’s put the November election past the margin of fraud.
</rant>

Update: linked at The Camp of the Saints.

Update II: linked at Daily Pundit:

If the Strauss & Howe Generations Theory is correct, we are already in a historical process that will culminate in an existential crisis for the United States of America, most likely a Depression-like financial collapse (already in progress), a violent revolution, a global war, or some combination of the three – possibly all of them. I can easily see a pathway to all of them from where we are now.

I think the Internet marks the nadir of Progressivism. Sure financial collapse, but I don’t see how anybody sustains anything like a global war. Even the regional fisticuffs like Afghanistan are a substantial strain.

Category: Health Care

Comments

38 Responses to “The Vulgar Left’s ObamaCare Arguments”

Obamacommiecare and The Vulgar Leftards | ZION'S TRUMPET
July 3rd, 2012 @ 8:23 am

[…] The Vulgar Left’s ObamaCare Arguments […]
Anamika
July 3rd, 2012 @ 8:55 am

What system of HC does your Christian compassion favors to heal the poor?
smitty
July 3rd, 2012 @ 9:02 am

The government is a faceless, emotion-free stack of U.S. Code.
For what reason do you even hint at at an Establishment Clause violation, and mention “Christian compassion”?
If you want to talk about compassion, let’s meet on Sunday, church of your choice.
Bob Belvedere
July 3rd, 2012 @ 9:11 am

But we live in an age where craven thieves connected to the aristocracy of pull just get bailed out with fake money issued by an illegitimate government in a decadent age.

That’s one for the memorable quotation books, along the lines of Orwell’s:

This age makes me so sick that sometimes I am almost impelled to stop at a corner and start calling down curses from Heaven.
SDN
July 3rd, 2012 @ 9:16 am

The same one Christ Himself favored: Charity as a private and personal responsibility of faith.

I defy you or any other Leftard to find a verse in the Bible where Christ called for sending out the legions to compel charity at spearpoint to be redistributed by politicians with as much public fanfare as possible.
The Spot-On Quote Of The Day… « The Camp Of The Saints
July 3rd, 2012 @ 9:19 am

[…] awarded to soon-to-be-award-winning author Chris Smith [aka: Smitty] for this dead-on-balls-accurate assessment: Let this blog post be a hearty “get stuffed” to the administration and the lying liars that […]
ThomasD
July 3rd, 2012 @ 9:43 am

“…even the heavyweight…”

By heavyweight, you mean the ruling class RINOs?

If it was ‘always a tax’ then it was ‘always’ within the Federal government’s purview to dictate personal behavior via the taxing authority. In other words, a Federal police power enforced by the IRS.

Had you asked a ‘heavyweight’ such as Hinderaker, any time before the ruling, if such power was vested in the Federal government he’d have flatly denied it.

But now, with Roberts and the Washington establishment having said just that, the ‘heavyweights’ have no choice but to play along, lest they be seen as ‘outsiders’ the the establishment.

Or, to paraphrase what someone recently said, establishment republicans are more concerned with being establishment, than living in a Republic.
Adobe_Walls
July 3rd, 2012 @ 9:53 am

Good rant, healthy for you.
Adobe_Walls
July 3rd, 2012 @ 10:04 am

“establishment republicans are more concerned with being establishment, than living in a Republic.”

Well said.
Short Term, Smitty’s Right – But Long Term, Stronger Measures Are Needed | Daily Pundit
July 3rd, 2012 @ 10:30 am

[…] The Vulgar Left’s ObamaCare Arguments : The Other McCain But we live in an age where craven thieves connected to the aristocracy of pull just get bailed out with fake money issued by an illegitimate government in a decadent age. Think I’ll let this go while it’s still brief and family-friendly. Get pissed, people, and let’s put the November election past the margin of fraud. […]
rjacobse
July 3rd, 2012 @ 10:43 am

What system of HC does your Christian compassion favors to heal the poor?

I dunno; how about one that doesn’t violate the constitution, impoverish the middle class, degrade the quality of service, and leave the budget deeper in deficit territory?
1bulwetweft
July 3rd, 2012 @ 11:14 am

SDN: Very well said.

rjacobse: Agree with all your points. I would expand your quality of treatment point to include this: treats and respects the individual patient – it’s sick & injured individuals that need treatment, not faceless, nameless masses (the “poor”).
Anamika
July 3rd, 2012 @ 11:28 am

I do see my question sidled the word system with the words Christian compassion. I was also was pointing the tip of the sword at the hypocrites lining the church, and not at a Christ.

I just this morning read Matthew 15,16. Christ’s “system” was love. What that means to each of us is answered in the heart. Beware of the leaven of the “great teachers” of love.

If you want to talk about compassion, let’s meet on Sunday, church of your choice.

I would love to, but i have to cross oceans before I do. Thanks for the offer!
William Quick
July 3rd, 2012 @ 11:54 am

I don’t think nations eschew wars because of the costs involved.

We have fought all our major wars from the Revolution through WWII and Vietnam with not a great deal of concern for the costs – whether financial or political. WWII ran much higher deficits that our current Obama spending. Vietnam destroyed the Democrat hold on the White House. GWB destroyed his own political credibility with Iraq. None of this prevented or even slowed much the warfare.

IOW, if we want to do it, we will – costs be damned.
smitty
July 3rd, 2012 @ 12:18 pm

pointing the tip of the sword at the hypocrites lining the church

So we opt for ObamaCare in lieu of reforming churches?

Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. Matt 23:24
JeffS
July 3rd, 2012 @ 12:54 pm

You don’t “sustain” a global war, at least not with modern weapons — and any global conflict nowadays will involve nuclear weapons, strategic and tactical. There are too many nut jobs and lefties (I don’t repeat myself, but there is a major overlap) out there to think otherwise.

At best, you survive such a global war.
JeffS
July 3rd, 2012 @ 1:02 pm

Anamika follows only the religious teachings of Karl Marx, as expanded upon by his prophets (Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, others) and their own acolytes (Kennedy, Obama, Pelosi, Chavez, Gilliard, Gore, etc).

Any references to accepted holy books of major religions is strictly for her secular purposes, an attempt to argue against said religion by cherry picking quotes, and ignoring context.

That’s a standard rhetorical deception employed by lefties whenever they think they own the moral high ground. Or, in this case, asserts owning the moral high ground.
JeffS
July 3rd, 2012 @ 1:05 pm

Tut tut, Anamika, tut tut!

In “pointing the tip of the sword”, you are engaging in violent rhetoric. For shame, you who preaches love.

Tut tut, Anamika! When will you start using cross hairs on maps? Tut tut!
Adjoran
July 3rd, 2012 @ 3:36 pm

If this taxing power is something “new and expanded,” then of course those who claim that can point to the precedents where the federal courts rejected a taxing power based on the general welfare clause. I’ll be waiting with the crickets.

The taxing power was invoked by Baucus in the Senate hearings as well as by the SG in arguments. Obama and the Democrats always claimed the law was constitutional under both the commerce clause and tax and spending power under general welfare. It was only when conservatives and Republicans began pointing out that it was a tax that Obama took to the hustings to deny it far and wide – before arguing it again before the Courts.

Roberts agreed with our earlier arguments, so now he is some sort of traitor? Frankly, there were several observers who pointed out that Roberts’ historical deference to federal power made him the most likely of the conservative Justices to approve Ocare, not Kennedy. They were correct.
Randy_Rager
July 3rd, 2012 @ 7:07 pm

BWHAHAHAHA!
Micha Elyi
July 3rd, 2012 @ 7:39 pm

It all went decisively nose-down when your grandparents failed to heed the call to impeach Earl Warren.

Jerry Ford is vindicated!
Quartermaster
July 3rd, 2012 @ 7:55 pm

It’s hilarious when nonChristians try to explain Christ. They like to look at the good Samaritan, or the healing and forget about running the crooks out of the Temple.

But, then, Anamika is just another regressive ignoramus when it comes to anything but what they want. ZerO’s HC has nothing to do with care or concern. It’s all about power and control, which, it just so happens, is exactly what Satan is all about as well.
Quartermaster
July 3rd, 2012 @ 8:01 pm

Adj, please show me where in the constitution Congress is given any authority to legislate on the matter. If you show it, without torturing the plain meaning of the document, then you have a case.

Frankly, there is none. None! It’s not found anywhere. It’s not about taxing, or penalties, it’s all about the lack of authority. To put even more simply, it’s all about lawlessness. And that, Adjoran, is what makes Roberts a traitor.

Roberts had his big chance and he shirked his responsibility. It’s time he was impeached, along with Kagan, Ginzberg, the wise Latina, and removed from an office he has shown he has utterly no respect for.
Beto_Ochoa
July 3rd, 2012 @ 8:41 pm

I set about to serve my God
And Witness of The Light
But found myself a suspect
Because I spoke of right
Anamika
July 3rd, 2012 @ 10:44 pm

Dear SDN, you seem upset. Are you a rightard?

Christ’s ideals have never work in practice. Maybe in a small village they could work, but not in cities and most people live in cities nowadays. Doctors want to be as rich as they can, and charity and Christ be damned. The Pharmaceutical industry is as ruthless as Somali pirates, and there is a shortage of cancer medicines, and new antibiotics are not being developed because there is no profit in it. Hospital are so profit oriented and so careless of patient care that 100,000 Americans died in hospitals every year due to errors and preventable infections. Where do you see Christian charity at work in the medical field.

Christ had no legions to command, but modern government can enforce rules, and in Europe they have health care systems that work quite well under government supervision, and at a lower cost than the US.

Don’t be selfish, open your wallet, if you can’t open your heart. ;))
smitty
July 3rd, 2012 @ 10:48 pm

And yet, Marx preached “The Kingdom of God, hold the God.”
Will you still be able to comment when Karl’s hellish ideas result in a second Dark Ages for Europe?
Whom shall you blame?
SDN
July 3rd, 2012 @ 10:57 pm

Still don’t see any verses, dungbat.

And to quote Ambrose Bierce, “The problem with the Christian religion is not that it’s been tried and found wanting, the problem is it’s been found difficult and left untried.”

Much like the free market.
Anamika
July 4th, 2012 @ 1:03 am

Re. Smitty

The reason why the word “Christian” is usually associated with right wing fundamentalist assholes is b/c that’s what Christianity basically stands for. In earlier times liberation theologists and social activists would have been burned at the stake. And probably tortured in secret East European prisons.

You might ask, how did making religion illegal in some nations work out? True, Communism wasn’t exactly the answer either.

Hell, what people in the west called “Communism” wasn’t even communism as defined by Karl Marx — the closest to that ever achieved are the kibbutzes of Israel, which also illustrate the major shortcomings of Marx’s ideas, e.g. they were entirely voluntary and very selective about accepting newcomers as well as rather small in scale.

When coerced, universal, and/or national in scale, those ideas either fail outright or mutate into something else. e.g. Soviet-style socialist tyranny cum corruption or China’s equally tyrannical combination of an all-powerful state and virtually unregulated predatory capitalism (competitive mostly because labor is very cheap due to urban overpopulation).
Anamika
July 4th, 2012 @ 1:24 am

I can clearly say, I don’t follow the right’s ideals or the left’s ideals, or Christ’s ideals. I’ve come to equate ideals with fantasies. We can act without them.
John David Galt
July 4th, 2012 @ 1:27 am

Romney is still campaigning, not on totally repealing ObamaCare, but on “Repeal and Replace” (see, for instance, http://reason.com/blog/2012/07/03/on-health-care-republicans-care-about-po ).

Am I going too far to say he’d better clarify just what he’s going to want to replace it with before he can expect us to vote for him?
Anamika
July 4th, 2012 @ 1:34 am

The New Testament is full of exhortations, prescriptions, and commands based on ideals. Whether they represent what Christ preached or not is anyone guess, but that is all we have to to know him by. All you know about Socrates, you know via Plato. Is there a Socrates to know? Or is it all Plato? “I know, I know nothing”… about Socrates, without Plato. ;))
Garym
July 4th, 2012 @ 2:04 am

Why is this bitch still allowed to comment here?
sablegsd
July 4th, 2012 @ 4:43 am

Everyone, please, stop calling it obamacare.
obamatax. obamataxmegeddon. obamataxpowergrab. obamataxhealthinsurancetakeover. But NOT obamacare.
Adobe_Walls
July 4th, 2012 @ 5:01 am

Point taken.
Pathfinder's wife
July 4th, 2012 @ 11:31 am

…and at least his spokesman is agreeing with Obama that it is a mandate and not a tax (I prefer to call it an instrument of serfdom for a police state, but the Carlin rule of simplicity in language calls for something shorter: a __sandwich, then).

I predict: that somewhere in America today Rick Santorum is laughing his behind off and saying “I told you so!”.
JeffS
July 4th, 2012 @ 1:39 pm

Tut tut, Anamika, tut tut!

Having no ideals is the same as having no standards. Which explains much of your personality.

Tut tut, Anamika! A ship sans rudder is but flotsam upon the sea. Tut tut!
JeffS
July 4th, 2012 @ 1:42 pm

We need examples of the hatred, narcissism, and insanity of the left, as context for what we need to do to maintain our freedoms.

Anamika provides that. And for no charge.
McGehee
July 4th, 2012 @ 3:45 pm

RobertsTax.