Commentary: 'Liberty or death' question gets tougher

Tuesday, March 23, 2010 at 10:45pm
By Bradley Harrington

If you think the House of Representatives' March 21 vote to pass the so-called "Affordable Health Care for America Act" (AHCAA) was a major leap down the road to serfdom for the United States, you would be correct.

But if you think the AHCAA's passage means the battle is over, you've got another thing coming: "State lawmakers and attorneys general already are lining up to challenge its constitutionality and wage an outside-the-beltway war against it in the courts" ["Health care reform fight shifts from Congress to the courts," Fox News.com, March 22].

The AHCAA, a gargantuan, 1,990-page mass of mind-cracking, virtually unreadable gobbledygook is already being challenged by more than three dozen state legislatures and by 11 state attorneys general as of this writing. Most of the challenges center on the health care requirement clause which, to "ensure shared responsibility," mandates that all individuals obtain coverage or pay fines, under the threat of jail, of up to 2.5 percent of their income.

The White House, as you would expect, is pooh-poohing such challenges, asserting its confidence in the Supreme Court to justify the AHCAA on the grounds of the Constitution's commerce clause.

Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli, however, has a contrary view: "If a person decides not to buy health insurance, that person by definition is not engaging in commerce. If you are not engaging in commerce, how can the federal government regulate you?" How indeed?

Nor is resistance to the AHCAA limited to the governing bodies of the states, for most of us individual citizens, disgusted with the blatant ramrod-style power-tactics employed in its passage, are fed up as well — and Tea Party leaders, now intent on running the Democrats who voted for it out of Congress, are finding a massive groundswell of grassroots support for that endeavor.

For make no mistake about it, folks, this issue is about far more than the mere subjugation of health care; it is much wider and deeper than that. It is nothing less than a federal takeover of your right to engage in free trade as you please with whom you please, which means: it is an assault on your fundamental liberty to exist and function as a human being, which means: an assault on your right to live your life for your own sake, without the good you might be doing for others acting as a justification for your continued existence ("ensuring shared responsibility").

That whirring sound you hear? That's the Founding Fathers spinning in their graves as they witness the devolution of America, once the "Land of the Free," into Amerika, "Land of the Insured at the Point of a Gun."

Despite the fact that passage of this bill proves the federales now regard the 10th Amendment of the Bill of Rights as fiction and "representative" government "for the people and by the people" as a joke, however, not all is lost as of yet: Well over half of the states of the union are rising up in virtual rebellion and revolution is brewing in every corner of the country.

How long are the rest of you going to sit on your butts while the sweet, sickening chains are wrapped around you? Will you wait until the federal slavers tell you where you can work next? Or where you can travel? Will you finally rebel then? Or will you wait until they toast the 4th Amendment as well? How about the 2nd? How about the 1st? At what point do you finally recognize a raw power-grab when you see it happening right before your eyes?

Better stop and think about it; consider your words and actions carefully indeed. For, if you decide to wait until the jack-booted thugs are kicking in your doors — well, by then, I'm afraid, it's just too late.

Or do you prefer to die as boot-licking sycophants, wearing your chains?

 

Bradley Harrington is a former United States Marine and a freelance writer who lives in Cheyenne, Wyo.

 

 

Filed under: City Voices

218 Comments on this post:

By: dooley on 3/24/10 at 1:31

You forgot to add that Bradly Harrington is also a sore loser Republican. I am not interested in a damned thing he has to say .

By: eastnashville37207 on 3/24/10 at 3:44

Well looks like Drooley likes the Nanny State. According to his statements he needs a nanny.
What most people disregard is that 80% of the American People did not want this.
Drooley believes in abortion, killing babies, death panels, murdering the elderly.
Wait till Drooley needs medical attention and has to stand in line for over 1 year for medical attention.

By: dargent7 on 3/24/10 at 6:03

What's with these Republican stats? "80% of Americans didn't want this"....b.s., pal.
Orin Hatch was on MTP and said it was about 58%. Either way, 31 million were not insured before yesterday. That's 10% of all Americans.
Another thing: stop the inflammatory rhetoric: "abortions, death panels, killing the eldery"....you sound psychotic and a follower of Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann, two twits who have several screws loose.

By: bfra on 3/24/10 at 6:10

d7 - Don't forget the twit that just plain lies. Posting info that public records (based on SS#s & birth certificates) disputes. I don't get the point!

By: sidneyames on 3/24/10 at 7:03

By: eastnashville37207 on 3/24/10 at 3:44
Well looks like Drooley likes the Nanny State. According to his statements he needs a nanny.

Yeah, east, your description is correct. These "teat" suckers need a sugar daddy or sugar mommie to get them by. AND to get them "buy".

what's next? Oh uncle sammie boy will want us to all wear black horn rim glasses so we don't get too wrapped up in cosmetic appearances with our designer glasses. And then it will go to "Uniforms" and cloth shoes with rubber soles. We'll all eat rice and some fat little Mao will tell us when to have babies and when to breath.

Oh, I'm negative. Got to stop that. Have a great day and D7, go back and read my response to your late afternoon diatribe. Remember buddy cakes, when D7 dishes it out to sidiot, then sidiot throws it back 3-fold. You are a mean little (and I mean very little) man. You can pick your nose all you want to. But you remember I told you that if you are vulgar and ugly with me, I'll be vulgar and ugly with you, O.K. Boy?

Have a nice day. I'm going to work for 3 days. Vacation from D7's rife-rafe!

By: sidneyames on 3/24/10 at 7:04

P.S. D7, spew on that! Oh yeah, skunks don't spew! They spray!

By: dargent7 on 3/24/10 at 7:10

Gotta love these Republican loosers. 31 uninsured Americans, 45,000 die each and every week. All these numb nuts want is war, war, and more wars.
According to cousin "Bradley", the USA can invade any country it chooses, spending $4 billion a month over 7 years, yet foam at the mouth if money is spent here at home. Republicans just do not possess the DNA to care about unfortunate Americans. They get their boners helping the Iraqis, Yemen, Georgia, and Isreal.

By: bfra on 3/24/10 at 7:13

Sidiot/twit - When you air your personal linens on a public forum, it like a smoking gun, follow the residue or smell. You should realize that and stick to truths.

By: Kosh III on 3/24/10 at 7:28

"it is an assault on your fundamental liberty to exist and function as a human being, which means: an assault on your right to live your life for your own sake,"

You mean like the successful assaults against gay people, taking away their fundamental right to live, work and marry?
What fraking hypocrisy. The right is just autocracy cloaked in nice rhetoric.

By: dargent7 on 3/24/10 at 7:42

bfra and K-3 are a little hot under the collar this mornining.
Sidiot is her usual vampire, blood-sucking self.

By: gdiafante on 3/24/10 at 7:50

Don't blame them Darge, these Conservatives are nuts. I've never heard such fantastic (as in absurd) rhetoric and hate from the right than I have in the last two days.

By: dargent7 on 3/24/10 at 8:04

Gd: The GOP is at least going to wake up SCOTUS with all the lawsuits over ObamaCare. If those over stuffed shirts handed GW Bush an election he lost in 2000, they'll probable rule yesterday's reform bill unConstitutional.

By: bfra on 3/24/10 at 8:08

d7 - I am perfectly calm this AM, just get tired of reading lies, which insults the intelligence of all posters on the forum. The repubs just can't get over the Bush failure "Big Time"!

By: gdiafante on 3/24/10 at 8:08

Probably, they won't be happy until all the sick and poor are dead. Just as long as it doesn't put any burden on them.

They make me sick.

By: bfra on 3/24/10 at 8:11

Wonder if the School Board is repub? They didn't trim any FAT, just the little guys in their latest budget.

By: BenDover on 3/24/10 at 8:12

"31 million were not insured before yesterday"

Nor are they insured today, either.

If we're losing 45,000 people each and every week you'd think Obama wouldn't have pushed off all the benefits of the program for 4 years. By your numbers Obama's bill lets 9,360,000 people die before the first benefit of the system kicks in... all the while we are sacked for tax, after job-killing tax; assuring a large segment of the population that was insured won't be able to afford it anymore.

By: dargent7 on 3/24/10 at 8:12

I think SCOTUS is reconsidering the ruling on Anna Nichole Smith's breast implants. Or allowing unlimited "campaign contributions" to Congress, ie., bribes, tampering, pandering, influence peddling.
Oh, yeah, they'll wrap their minds around ObamaCare.

By: dargent7 on 3/24/10 at 8:15

Bend-O: You're drinking crankcase oil again. I listened to Obama yesterday and many provisions kick in THIS year.
But, you think we "won" in Iraq and will "win" in Afghanistan, so what's the use talking to a freshly painted wall dry?

By: bfra on 3/24/10 at 8:16

Ben - Rulings aren't made with a wink of the eye, except when it came to putting Bush in the WH, after he lost!

By: gdiafante on 3/24/10 at 8:21

The SC is a joke, especially after ruling that corporations can buy elections.

By: bfra on 3/24/10 at 8:24

I am sure the SC figures into those pay-offs also!

By: rldavenport@com... on 3/24/10 at 8:31

D7 and friends: You can believe Obama if you want to, but the stats that he and devotees like you spew out like 45,000 die every week because they don't have health insurance, etc. are nothing but bold-faced lies. But then again, you libs don't believe you have to document your claims with evidence. You just throw numbers against the wall hoping they'll stick. If you believe the taxes in Obamacare will only affect those who make $250,000 or above, then you're drinking the kool-aid.

The truth is that Obama and his cronies have no idea how they're going to pay for this insanity, but then that doesn't matter to libs either. The only thing that matters to libs is making everyone dependent on the government so they can stay in power.

You can also forget the lie about conservatives not caring about the unfortunate, but then you turn a blind eye to the millions of conservatives who help the unfortunate here and abroad with their money, their time, and their hands. You only want to spew your vile hatred of those with whom you disagree instead of looking at the facts and discussing issues with people with any sort of rationality. You can call me names all you want, but name-calling doesn't prove anything.

In the meantime, enjoy the sunshine today!

By: bfra on 3/24/10 at 8:36

rid - Didn't see in "facts" in your comment, only opinion - Yours!

By: bfra on 3/24/10 at 8:41

Support Will Continue Rising The Washington Monthly's Steve Benen foresees "the Republican nightmare coming to fruition -- the country gets a better system, Democrats get a victory, the president looks like a hero, and the country is pleased with the results." He writes, "As more of the country learns that GOP scare tactics were baseless, and hears about the new benefits that kick in this year, the polls will likely improve further."

By: Blanketnazi2 on 3/24/10 at 8:51

major leap down the road to surfdom? lol......

By: Captain Nemo on 3/24/10 at 8:59

It looks like eastnasty has blown a fuss again.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_dnHz8QkkiaI/RbwxETaseVI/AAAAAAAAAAk/dctTtRHn5Q4/s400/ComingSoonToTheWeatherChannel.JPG

By: Dragon on 3/24/10 at 8:59

I'm surprised that the resident liberals see no problem with the Federal government assuming a new (unconstitutional) power to require its citizens to purchase products or be punished. Wouldn't they just as easily require people to purchase GM cars or buy houses? The same rationalization would apply.

By: bfra on 3/24/10 at 9:02

Nemo - Reminds me of our local weather forecasters.

By: Captain Nemo on 3/24/10 at 9:04

Jesse Venture interviews eastnasty about the government controlling the weather.
http://media.al.com/scenesource/photo/jesse-ventura-conspiracy-theoryjpg-e0656503e902da46_large.jpg

By: Captain Nemo on 3/24/10 at 9:10

rldavenport adds the serfdom magic to its collection of paranoids obsessions
http://www.screenhead.com/funny/SERFDOM23232323.JPG

By: Blanketnazi2 on 3/24/10 at 9:18

no, Dragon. the same rationalization does not apply.

By: bfra on 3/24/10 at 9:18

Don't know what their complaint is, it couldn't get any worse, faster than when the bush invaded the WH with the SC's help.

By: Loner on 3/24/10 at 9:20

The NCP is paying for Bradley Harrington's drivel?

If so, they deserve to go belly up.

By: gdiafante on 3/24/10 at 9:21

The government isn't "requiring" anyone to buy anything. Those who don't will be taxed. Just like those people who don't have children are still taxed to fund public schools, or those who don't drive are taxed to fund roads.

And I also think it's a stretch to cite the Commerce clause as the reason it's unconstitutional. People don't seek medical treatment in different states? Go ask people at Vanderbilt where they're from.

Sounds to me like posturing and grasping...but with a clear mentally deficient court, you never know.

By: house_of_pain on 3/24/10 at 9:27

If they trot out the "Chewbacca Defense", it's all over.

By: Captain Nemo on 3/24/10 at 9:29

Speaking of serfdom
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_qUFDMUpk9jE/Shm75fZn37I/AAAAAAAATYM/cDoskB1WvpE/s400/img_89bc4cab75_western_media_gaza_cartoon.jpg

By: Captain Nemo on 3/24/10 at 9:30

We are required to but auto insurance, why not health insurance.

By: Dragon on 3/24/10 at 9:31

By: gdiafante on 3/24/10 at 9:21
"The government isn't "requiring" anyone to buy anything. Those who don't will be taxed. Just like those people who don't have children are still taxed to fund public schools, or those who don't drive are taxed to fund roads."

I disagree. The text of the legislation mandates coverage with a tax as a consequence of non-compliance. It would have been constitutional if they had applied a tax to everyone with a waiver or rebate for those who are insured.

By: jvh2b on 3/24/10 at 9:34

I realized something today...

Ya know how the conservatives don't mind spending billions on govt killing people, yet don't want the govt helping people, then claim they spend lots of money helping the unfortunate, etc etc??

THEY WANT TO BE ASKED TO HELP!! They don't want to anonymously know they are giving to help their fellow man, they want the benefit of feeling superior and having people ASK for their help!! Just don't hurt yourselves while patting yourselves on the back now.

By: bfra on 3/24/10 at 9:35

Nemo - Citizens are required to buy some auto insurance. That doesn't seem to apply to all people, per se!

By: Dragon on 3/24/10 at 9:38

As written in the Senate bill that Obama signed into law:

‘‘SEC. 5000A. REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE.
‘‘(a) REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE.—An applicable individual shall for each month beginning after 2013 ensure that the individual, and any dependent of the individual who is an applicable individual, is covered under minimum essential coverage for such month.

‘‘(b) SHARED RESPONSIBILITY PAYMENT.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—If an applicable individual fails to meet the requirement of subsection (a) for 1 or more months during any calendar year beginning after 2013, then, except as provided in subsection (d), there is hereby imposed a penalty with respect to the individual in the amount determined under subsection (c).

So, yes, the government is requiring you buy insurance.

By: dargent7 on 3/24/10 at 9:39

I wonder how Bend-O and "ridavenport" would of handled the civil rights movement and legislation? Around 1966, I'm sure they were in their prime...racist, ego-centric, mysoginist, White Power, hood wearing fools.
Those good 'ole boys sure as hell didn't take a 'cotton to equal rights for blacks any more than now for uninsured Americans.
Because there's minorities in that uninsured pool.
ObamaCare will stand the test of time.

By: Captain Nemo on 3/24/10 at 9:40

I know bfra. The last car that ran into the back of me did not insurance or drivers license.

By: dargent7 on 3/24/10 at 9:41

Dragon: Please, PLEASE itemize for all of us the infractions, unconstitutionality, amoral, illegal legislation the civil rights movement incurred.....I'm quite sure you remember the arrests, hoses, dogs, Klansmen gone awry during the marches?

By: bfra on 3/24/10 at 9:42

Dragon - What is subsection (d) & (c), as it notes an exception?

By: Loner on 3/24/10 at 9:43

If the feds can force us to pay FICA taxes, which are actually premium payments on our federal retirement and disability insurance policies, and it passes constitutional muster, then paying a tax , which is actually the premium on a health insurance policy, will also pass the legal tests.

By: gdiafante on 3/24/10 at 9:44

You're wrong Dragon.

http://healthcarereform.nejm.org/?p=2764

By: bfra on 3/24/10 at 9:44

Nemo - Luck has it, I haven't had that problem, but my son and a friend have. One didn't have ins. or lic., the other ran and hasn't been found yet.

By: bfra on 3/24/10 at 9:48

g - Thanks! Dragon must like to cherry pick.

By: Captain Nemo on 3/24/10 at 9:49

Dragon for hire
http://www.cit.griffith.edu.au/~anthony/icons/dragons/dragon_unemployed.gif