Ammo For Sale

« « Keep your pets restrained | Home | Time and the Brady Bill » »

Creating a dependent class

One of the issues with the health insurance bill is the hysterics of the opposition to it. It’s not tyranny. It’s not comparable to Nazis. Sure, I don’t like it. But I’m not going to call everyone a bunch of commie symps and throw bricks through windows (real helpful, Mike). I’m going to voice my opposition and vote the bums out. Except that I can’t really do that because my bums opposed the bill. But you get the point. Ratcheted rhetoric is not how you win.

Lamar Alexander was on the radio this morning and said that part of the means of paying for the bill was to increase the fees and interest charged on students loans. Kinda funny, given the demographics of those who voted for Obama and supported the bill. They get to pay for some of it, at least. Also, in the increasing nationalization of industry, seems effective July 1, only the feds will be in the student loan business.

And we can’t afford it. Cash strapped states can’t afford it but I’m sure a federal fix for that is coming, which leads to my real opposition to the bill. Aside from my moral objection from congress mandating that I have to purchase goods and services, the US is creating a dependent class along with a vast entitlement program. That, in addition to the fact we can’t afford the two entitlement programs we already have. Yes. I see the pattern. A government creating a dependency on a significant portion of the population. This, folks, is the issue. And they’ve done it before with Social Security and Medicare. They’re creating a group beholden. A group that will vote a certain way or risk losing benefits. Another lobby group rivaling the AARP can spring from this and be a player under the guise of preventing what I talked about earlier from happening. But still complicit in the dependence.

Chicago is in the White House, boys, and it’s running the Chicago playbook.

And the Republicans have a lot of political capital invested in this. The rhetoric started before a lot of the bill’s details were known. If it turns out the masses like the bill, that’s going to be a tough pill for the Republicans to swallow come election time.

34 Responses to “Creating a dependent class”

  1. JKB Says:

    Oh, the kiddies will be paying in more ways than one. First off, now they won’t have the choice of skipping healthcare insurance during their healthy years. No, they’ll be looking for that couple of grand a year to subsidize the old, the infirm and those with existing conditions. That was the plan in the first place, get the young who don’t use a lot of healthcare to buy into the plans. So, that trip, car or house downpayment, that’s going to pay for some strangers addiction.

    Also, keeping kids on mom and dads plan until they are 26? That’ll keep the boomerangs in check.

  2. Jay Says:

    I don’t think you’re right about the loans, really. You’re still free to take out a student loan from anybody who will give one to you.

    What happened, as far as I know, is that the subsidized loans are being federalized. Even if you don’t think it’s a good thing, you certainly can’t claim the system that it’s replacing is good. Under the current system, banks loan out the money to students, and the government guarantees the loan. That’s right: the bank collects interest and makes a profit, but there is ZERO chance that they wont get their money back, because the loan is guaranteed by the federal government.

    That’s silly, of course. If the bank wants to collect interest and make a profit, they’ve got to take a risk! The government should not be guaranteeing a private loan like that.

  3. Burke Says:

    I can’t “vote the bums” out. In fact, I have no bum in office to represent me in this regardless of which side I wanted. My current representative is “Vacancy” since my representative resigned. If you notice, the roll call only adds up to 431.

  4. Adam Celine Says:

    i haven’t broken any windows, but i won’t denounce those who do. this idea of voting in the other criminal gang in november as retribution – not really been much help the last few times it’s been done.

  5. The Inconvenience Says:

    I just want to throw my support behind those chucking bricks. At first I thought it was childish, but I suppose this is a matter of escalation of force. Would you rather people shoot the enemies of liberty? First you try reason, then you notch it up.

    For the Record, I find MV to be something of a blowhard. I grow weary of his “hey look at what I wrote to this guy!” posts.

    But all that said, Sam Adams would have approved of this long before hijacking the bold moves of the BTP and translating them into sending tea bags to your congressmen and showing up to rallies with cardboard pitchforks.

    You can’t support SA and not the brick throwers. The SoL burned down the governor’s house. They assaulted and degraded tax collectors. Hell, the Health Care bill just passed is more offensive than what sparked the BTP. No one even had to buy the tea, only the ship’s master would be required to pay the taxes.

  6. Sebastian Says:

    Why the fuck are you talking about shooting anyone, or throwing bricks and destroying private property when you have the power to get involved and help change your government?

    The founders had no representation in Parliament, who declared absolute authority to impose on the colonies. They did not have the option to “vote the bastards out,” and the chief bastard got that position not through election but through inheritance.

    Losing an election is not grounds for a revolution. You might not believe this, but the American Revolution is historically unprecedented. There’s no reason to believe if you roll those dice again that the result is going to be the same. It could, and probably will be, much much worse.

    Ultimately this is childish. It’s a way to let out your anger and feel better about yourself for standing up to something. Our founders gave us a system for dealing with problems like this. The problem is, we’re not using it. No, we’re being children, bitching, moaning, throwing tantrums, and letting the opposition control the mechanisms of our country and undermine them. It’s time to get serious.

  7. Shootin' Buddy Says:

    “Ultimately this is childish. It’s a way to let out your anger and feel better about yourself for standing up to something.”

    Shhh, someone may call you a Republican or something.

  8. ATLien Says:

    Why the fuck are you talking about shooting anyone, or throwing bricks and destroying private property when you have the power to get involved and help change your government?

    Last I looked i don’t have barrels of cash to use to run for office or be a lobbyist. Two problems in this country.

    Sorry, but i tend to want kill politicians as traitors when they bribe other politicians’ votes with MY money. That wasn’t Pelosi’s money that bought votes from Iowa, or Stupak, or others who voted “yea”.

    The system is set up now so that both parties have their own visions utopia that involves banal tyranny, complete with an election process the encourages rich sociopaths to run for seats in government.

    We need to tear it down and rebuild it, and if you get in the way Sebastian, we’ll burn your ass down, too.

  9. The Inconvenience Says:

    Sebastian:

    During the ConCon, George Mason decried the fact that is wouldn’t be possible for one representative to cover 3000 people. Today that number is 750,000.

    I’m not advocating a revolution. I’m well aware of the unlikeliness for an outcome as agreeable as the first AmRev. That said, it doesn’t change the fact that SoL tactics worked then if only to get the government to show its ugly head, and just may work now. I don’t engage in them myself as I left the Corps to go to law school and work within the system. But I won’t speak out against those bold enough to engage in more radical action.

    This isn’t the founder’s republic and to say that those mechanisms are in place to handle this by simply “voting the bums out” simply just aren’t showing themselves to be true in practice. The evils of redistricting are prime evidence of that.

    That said, my representative DID vote against this. So are you telling me that I should keep on with the same tactics and accept violations of my liberty as well as that of my young daughter because a bunch of people on the other side of the country have thought my liberty is not as important as their enrichment? Thuggery is thuggery and violence against the individual is unacceptable regardless of the political system it is engaged under.

    Chucking bricks through windows generally gets little done, but it makes your voice heard because your message is changing. Instead of, “Gee whiz, please leave me alone,” the message is that those running around shouting DROM are starting to prove their threats aren’t idle.

    Our enemies already think we’re nuts, will they begin thinking us rational and leave us alone because we’re playing by their rules? That’s already being tried and proven unsuccessful. Again, I don’t engage in these tactics, yet I’m on the MIAC report several times over.

  10. The Inconvenience Says:

    ATLien:

    Different tactics, same team. I wouldn’t advocate threatening friends unless you don’t want anyone sharing your fighting hole some day. I still don’t advocate shooting people, despite whether or not they deserve it. Chuck the bricks before you shoot. After your break the glass, talk again. You’re spirit will appreciate the moral high ground when they come for you.

    Equally, I wouldn’t go around advocating threatening anyone on the internet. It makes you sound like an internet tough guy, which I suspect most III’s are.

  11. Main Stream Media Says:

    Those who dictate to us from on high are absolutely willing to send people dressed like ninjas armed with machine guns to my house if I don’t follow thier illegal dictates, that is how far they are willing to go. If we aren’t willing to go at least as far as those we oppose, we have already lost.

  12. Phelps Says:

    Why the fuck are you talking about shooting anyone, or throwing bricks and destroying private property when you have the power to get involved and help change your government?

    Do we? Do we even have legitimate elections any more in the era of ACORN and the Chicago thugs? Does getting involved matter when Congress is using parliamentary chicanery to bypass the results of elections?

    The ballot box failed here, in Pennsylvania. The jury box has failed, because the judges will never let a jury touch this issue (since it is “purely a matter of law”). This is one last ditch at the soapbox (and yes, vandalism is much closer to political speech than political violence) before we head for the ammunition box.

    It’s hysterics to call this tyranny? It’s just a tax, right? Like the Stamp Act? The Sugar Act? The Townshend Revenue Acts? The Sons of Liberty were formed in direct response to the Stamp Act.

  13. Nate Says:

    oops, the last comment was mine. I want to own my comments.

  14. The Inconvenience Says:

    Correction:

    the message is that those running around shouting DToM are starting to prove their threats aren’t idle.

  15. Yu-Ain Gonnano Says:

    That said, it doesn’t change the fact that SoL tactics worked then if only to get the government to show its ugly head, and just may work now.

    Yes, but they took those actions essentially knowing it would lead to the start of the shooting.

    The fact is, the only thing that will happen from this is that the police will arrest the vandals, they will go to jail and absolutely nothing will happen thus confirming the congressmen’s belief that they are doing the right thing.

    Good luck with that.

  16. Sebastian Says:

    We need to tear it down and rebuild it, and if you get in the way Sebastian, we’ll burn your ass down, too.

    I’m not sure I want you tearing it down before I understand what you’re going to rebuilt it with, and what you’re going to do to all the people that elected this government in the first place. You can’t solve that problem without doing something awful. Pretty clearly, however, you seem to be willing to do something quite awful in that regard. So why are you any better than a communist who believed in purging their opponents in the name of making a New Man?

  17. Sebastian Says:

    Inconvenience:

    We have many on our side of the issue that think because everything is fine and dandy in their district that means they have an excuse for inaction. I don’t think that’s the case. If you have ten dollars, you can help out a campaign in a district that is competitive. The Left have traditionally been very good at playing this game, and we’re not. They are better organized, better funded, and more motivated.

    On the right, the only exception is guns and religion, and the Left has largely capitulated on that for now while they work on removing liberty in other ways. The problem we’ve had is that we aren’t working as hard as the other side. There’s nothing wrong with the Republic. We’re losing because people who love liberty love to do nothing about it, and often make the perfect the enemy of the good.

  18. Sebastian Says:

    Just using one example, in my district we’re stuck with Nancy Pelosi puppet Patrick Murphy. He was a vote for Health Care, and voted for the Slaughter Rule when it came up (though, they didn’t use that).

    We ended up stuck with him because money poured into other districts in order to flip mine from R to D. That was the case for every district around here too. The only one they couldn’t knock off was Gerlach.

    We can play this game too. If you’re in a safe district, donate to a candidate in a district that’s in play. There are plenty of good candidates out there. Then once they win, that’s not the time to stop paying attention. That’s what we did in 1994, and then we got 4 more years of Clinton, 8 years of Bush, a fiscally disastrous Republican Congress, and now this bullshit.

    If you like liberty, there’s no point where you get to just cruise and enjoy it. You have to fight for it, and it seems to me if you’re so willing to appeal to the cartridge box, making some appeal to the soap box, ballot box, and wallet aren’t too much of a sacrifice to ask.

  19. cargosquid Says:

    Of course, it escaped them that, because they TELEGRAPHED what they want to do, the leftists can now do ANYTHING and the SSI will be blamed. They will become the scapegoat for any acts of terrorism.

    The advice of, “If you shoot at an enemy, kill him. Or he will kill you.” still stands. One does not wound tigers safely.

    If this had been coordinated, and the expectant amount of support had actually been, you know, real…then it might have had an impact. But this is just minor, random vandalism. If you’re going to commit civil disobedience, make it worth something. MLK got things done because he went big. And coordinated it with the Black Panthers. The THREAT of violence can work better than actual violence.

  20. Sebastian Says:

    For those like Phelps who want to say we don’t have free elections (in which case, we’ve never had free elections, since we, at one time, denied the franchise to all manner of people for reasons of gender and skin color), I’ll repeat here what I’ve repeated elsewhere. I would posit that the blueprint for just revolution is found in our Declaration of Independence. Tell me how many of these things are true:

    Is he forbidding state government from passing laws?

    Is he demanding state legislatures be abolished?

    Convening congresses in far away places for the sold purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures? (well, OK, this one is close)

    Has dissolved Congress repeatedly?

    Cancelled elections?

    Limited the right to travel and move?

    Implemented laws to frustrate function of the judicial branch?

    Made judges dependent on his will by raising and lowering their salaries?

    Erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance? (OK, this one they’re definitely guilty of, and this is what health care is)

    Garrisoned our cities and communities with soldiers?

    Taken control of the military away from the civil powers?

    Cut off our trade with all parts of the world?

    Imposed taxes on us without our consent?

    Deprived us of trial by jury?

    Abolished common law?

    No… he hasn’t. We have maybe one or two of the list, and maybe could add one for the health care thing. But it doesn’t even come close if you’re willing to be honest and set aside your emotional reaction (which I can sympathize with) to the fact that we don’t want to live in an Obamacare world.

  21. cargosquid Says:

    Sebastian,

    Absolutely right. Hopefully we have persons that can get elected and have the honor and courage to return us to a freer nation and repeal a lot of things……naaahh.

  22. Phelps Says:

    Is he forbidding state government from passing laws?

    Yes, medical marijuana laws being the most prominent.

    Is he demanding state legislatures be abolished?

    No, just powerless, which is the same thing.

    Convening congresses in far away places for the sold purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures? (well, OK, this one is close)

    The weekends and midnight votes, yes.

    Has dissolved Congress repeatedly?

    You can have this one. Until December at least, when this one will be one to watch for.

    Cancelled elections?

    No need to cancel them when you plan to steal them.

    Limited the right to travel and move?

    Yes, TSA.

    Implemented laws to frustrate function of the judicial branch?

    In small ways, but the groundwork had already been done with the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

    Made judges dependent on his will by raising and lowering their salaries?

    Not yet, wait until they cross him on HCR.

    Erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance? (OK, this one they’re definitely guilty of, and this is what health care is)

    Garrisoned our cities and communities with soldiers?

    Yes, by transforming the police into paramilitary forces.

    Taken control of the military away from the civil powers?

    Yes, by transforming the alphabet soup federal agencies into paramilitary forces.

    Cut off our trade with all parts of the world?

    You can have this one.

    Imposed taxes on us without our consent?

    Isn’t that this entire fight?

    Deprived us of trial by jury?

    Yes, in eminent domain and asset forfeiture.

    Abolished common law?

    Yes, in countless ways.

    So, do we need to fill out the entire list, or is 80% enough?

  23. Yu-Ain Gonnano Says:

    Waaaaah, if you people won’t vote the way I like, I guess I’m just going to have to start being violent to get it! -IIIper

    And yes, vandalism is violence. When you steal my stuff you steal from me the part of my life that produced it. When you destroy my stuff you destroy the part of my life that produced it. And I’ve never heard a libertarian argue that doing something by proxy made it not as bad.

  24. Nate Says:

    Waaaaaah, if you guys won’t vote the way I like, I guess I’ll just vote for the other team -Prag
    When is it time to yell “we won’t back up anymore” in the prag world? Shooting is NOT justified yet, but rattling our sabres is justified.

  25. Yu-Ain Gonnano Says:

    Waaaaaah, if you guys won’t vote the way I like, I guess I’ll just vote for the other team -Prag

    Dude, that’s called a democratic republic. If your problem is that we have one of those and not a IIIper dictatorship we’ve got a different issue.

  26. Yu-Ain Gonnano Says:

    As for stepping back: I would love to see what the IIIpers do when the police (otherwise known as jack booted thugs) show up on Mike and other’s doorsteps to arrest them for their crime of incorrect “political speech”. Will they start shooting as they claim, or will they take another step back and proclaim “Here, but no further.”

  27. Nate Says:

    No that’s called playing a game.

  28. Phelps Says:

    As for stepping back: I would love to see what the IIIpers do when the police (otherwise known as jack booted thugs) show up on Mike and other’s doorsteps to arrest them for their crime of incorrect “political speech”. Will they start shooting as they claim, or will they take another step back and proclaim “Here, but no further.”

    Funny, the prags are the ones that would love to see it. I guess there’s comfort in knowing that you won’t defend your freedom, as opposed to hoping that you’ll have the strength.

  29. Phelps Says:

    Dude, that’s called a democratic republic.

    It’s only a republic if there’s an honored constitution. Without it, it’s simply a democratic tyranny.

  30. Yu-Ain Gonnano Says:

    No, I’d love to see it because I don’t think ya’ll have the balls to actually do it.

  31. RosieRac Says:

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/24/fbi-investigates-possible-threats-directed-house-democrats/

    “The FBI is also investigating a separate incident at the home of Virginia Rep. Tom Perriello’s brother. Perriello’s office confirmed that a line to a propane tank on a gas grill was cut at Bo Periello’s Charlottesville home on Tuesday. Tea Party activists had posted the address online thinking it was the congressman’s home, telling opponents to drop by and “express their thanks” for his vote.”

  32. Yu-Ain Gonnano Says:

    It’s only a republic if there’s an honored constitution.

    By that standard we’ve never been a republic. The whiskey rebellions had an army sent to be used on U.S. citizens in 1790 because he though a tax on property was good social discipline. Andrew Jackson flat out defied SCOTUS in the 1830s with Indian removal. Jim Crow completly violated the rights of blacks after the civil war. The 2A has been infringed since at least the 1930s.

    When was this magical time when we were last a republic?

    Look, the .gov is doing a lot of shit I don’t like, but it’s doing it because we the people generally want it to. Now that sucks, but it’s not the governments fault for doing pretty much what we’ve asked it to do. The gov’t isn’t the problem. *We* are.

  33. The Inconvenience Says:

    Great, I’ve accidently waded into a prag-threeper fight. You guys are all idiots.

  34. Phelps Says:

    Look, the .gov is doing a lot of shit I don’t like, but it’s doing it because we the people generally want it to.

    Actually, the only reason that this is happening now is because they have drifted from “things we don’t like” to “things the People don’t like.”