Liberty Maven

The House Democrats released their latest attempt at a health care bill yesterday. Feel free to read all 1990 pages of it here in PDF form. I’ve been perusing it all day long because I, apparently, enjoy pain. So much pain that I’m starting to feel sick. Man, they better pass this bill soon or I may die.

Well, that’s what they want you to think. I want to know why the debate is now all about whether or not there should be a public option and little else? This shows us how Obama and his fellow looters are now firmly in the lead on this debate. The argument is no longer about whether we should have the government more involved in health care, but whether the government should provide health care.

The question is no longer “why are we doing this?” Instead, the question is “how do we do it?”

If Pelosi has her way, this is how:

The new House proposal is similar to one drafted by Democrats months ago. It requires Americans to buy health insurance by 2013 or pay a fine, creates a government-run program similar to Medicare to compete with private insurers and lets 15 million additional people enroll in Medicaid by easing eligibility requirements.

But in an effort to make the bill more appealing to moderates in her party, Pelosi altered some of the fine print. The proposed government-run “public option,” for instance, would negotiate for how much to pay doctors and hospitals rather than relying on government-set rates, as Medicare does.

Echoing concerns raised by his Republican colleagues, Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan said the bill’s heft, at 1,990 pages, indicated how it would expand the government’s role in health care: “Families will face higher taxes,” he said.

Replacing the above word “higher” with “astronomical” would be more honest. One need not read past page 4 (3d) to find the most offensive words to free market liberty loving Americans:

“initiates shared responsibility among workers, employers, and the Government; so that all Americans have coverage of essential health benefits.”

The word “initiates” should be replaced with the more honest word, “forces”. This phrase is a pure unadulterated call for socialism. When you force someone to share, it’s no longer sharing. It is theft, well-intended theft, but theft nonetheless.

Why do we get put in jail if we steal money to give to the poor yet it is perfectly fine for the government to do it without repercussions? I suppose the answer is: they own the jails.

Why do we get put in jail if we murder someone yet it is perfectly fine for government troops to kill people?

Are government humans more special than civilian humans? They seem to be able to operate outside the scope of morality.

The bill would establish a new federal government department inappropriately called the “Health Choices Administration” with the “Health Choices Commissioner” at the head. I can’t wait for their ad slogan to come out: “The Health Choices Administration: Be Nice, we can choose whether you live or die!”

Under this bill the Health Choices Commissioner has the power to regulate a new “market” they call the “Health Services Exchange”. This is the so-called new “free market” where the government public option health care is to compete with private health insurers. Yet somehow this is supposed to allow private insurers to compete on a level playing field? Please.

This bill becoming law would signal the end of private health insurance. It is only a matter of time before the public option will be the only option.

The government owns the jails now. The government tells you what you can put in your body. With socialized medicine the government is just continuing its assault on individual liberty. There is no “I”, only “We”.

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h

“The State is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else.” — Frederic Bastiat, French economist of the 19th Century

“How did I go bankrupt? Two ways. Slowly, and then all of a sudden.” — paraphrased from “The Sun Also Rises” by Ernest Hemingway

“May you live in interesting times.” — a proverbial Chinese curse

• Retained, and in some cases expanded, all the Bush-era policies — the wars, the PATRIOT Act, warrantless spying, REAL ID, imprisonment without due process, extraordinary rendition, etc.
• Begun to extend the already existing foundations for a future socialist state with things like direct government ownership of businesses, the health care bill, cap and trade, and a host of other measures big and small

Put the Bush and Obama policies together, sprinkle in a couple more terrorist attacks, and one or two more state-caused financial calamities, and you have a recipe for . . .

• The destruction of American liberty
• The blossoming of a Leviathan State

Read the signs . . .

We are living through a Statist revolution.

Statism is a mindset that prefers coercion to cooperation. Statists love the State because they are blind to its fundamental nature . . .

• The State is a monopoly that you cannot easily fire, replace, or even control
• Everything the State does relies on coercion

If you decide that . . . Read More »

Each of Walter E. Williams’ weekly syndicated columns are fantastic, but the most recent one (entitled Lying Propaganda) is particularly worth your time.  He refers to Michael Moore’s upcoming movie (”Capitalism: A Love Story”) and decides it’s a good idea to put out a bit of “defensive mental preparation“, as it puts it, in order nip in the bud the simple lie that we have a system of [pure] capitalism in this country and that such a system is the source of the world’s troubles.

There has never been a pure free market capitalistic system just as there has never been a pure communist or socialist system, where there is government ownership of the means of production and each individual has equal access to society’s resources. However, we can rank economies as to whether they are closer to capitalism or closer to communism or socialism. If one ranked countries according to whether they were closer to the capitalistic end of the spectrum or the socialistic or communistic end, then ranked countries according to per capita GDP and finally rank countries according to Freedom House’s “Map of Freedom in the World,” he would find a pattern that is by no means a coincidence. The people in those countries closer to the capitalist end of the economic spectrum have far greater income and enjoy greater human rights protections than those toward the socialist and communist end.

According to the London Telegraph article, Moore’s film features priests who say capitalism is anti-Christian by failing to protect the poor. This is pure nonsense and revealed as such by asking, “If you’re an unborn spirit, condemned by God to a life of poverty but allowed to choose the country in which to be poor, would you choose a country near the communist end of the economic spectrum or the capitalist end?” If you chose the United States, you’d find that according to the government surveys, the typical “poor” American has cable or satellite TV, two color TVs, and a DVD player or VCR. He has air conditioning, a car, a microwave, a refrigerator, a stove, and a clothes washer and dryer, and whether he has health insurance or not, he is able to obtain medical care when needed. Try to find that in Cuba, Russia, China or North Korea. If we buy into the nonsense of Moore’s priests, the world’s poor people are incredibly stupid. Whether fleeing legally or illegally, their destination country is likely to be closer to capitalism than their departure country.

Go read the whole article here.

A professor teaching a computer security class I had in college stood up in front of the class one day and said, “Today we are going to discuss the salami attack or salami slicing. Does anyone know what a salami attack is?” I laughed at the juvenile thoughts that entered my mind. In my college-aged stupor little did I know it was the perfect term for what the United States has been experiencing since the early 20th century.

From Wikipedia:

Salami slicing is a series of many minor actions, often performed by clandestine means, that together results in a larger action that would be difficult or illegal to perform at once.

Today Obama is taking it to new levels. He’s acting like the proverbial kid in a candy store or perhaps saying he’s like a fat man at a deli counter is more appropriate. Our government has been salami slicing it’s way toward a socialist and fascist hybrid I call socio-fascism for the last 100 years or so. Certain administrations were worse than others, but it’s not too hard to believe that the Obama Presidency will go down in history as the one that signaled the final slice in the socio-fascist incrementalism pie.

For America to turn the corner and get “better” things are going to have to get a lot worse. People are still dreaming of government-sponsored comfort and Obama is doing his best to deliver. Government words and statistics are attempting to mask the hard economic pain reverberating through America. We need to see beyond this feel-good facade and find the truth.

We are a spoiled-rotten coddled nation of eternal victims with a codependency on government. Government is an abusive spouse who promises unicorns but only ever delivers blunt trauma to the head.

Perhaps the turn-around will come when the “green shoots” become nothing more than “green shits”, when everyone realizes the government is the source of the problem rather than the solution.

It’s time to refuse the government’s salami.

A few weeks ago a new match-making site for freedom-loving people called Ron Paul Singles was in the news. Some news outlets used it as another opportunity to marginalize Ron Paul. Others seemed genuinely curious about how a 70+ year old politician’s name could play cupid.

While this rather unimportant news item was brought up on CNN and other outlets another type of “date” was swept under the rug because if it became common knowledge the health care debate may be quite different. Admittedly, I went for a low-brow ridiculous play on words to get to my point but here it is:

In many states there are requirements (mandates) that force private health insurance companies to pay for certain procedures.

Those on the Right complaining of socialized medicine don’t realize that we already have socialized medicine. Those on the Left defending the so-called “public option” don’t realize how much money can be saved by simply abolishing health care mandates. Doing so would help restore the free market in health care and help lower costs.

I’m tired of both sides of the debate missing the fundamental point. The Left and the Right need to realize we haven’t had a free market in health care for approximately 30-40 years.

The health care system is broken and needs “fixing”. The government does not have the answer. On health care the government should not lead, it should not follow, it should just get the hell out of the way!

There is no such thing as a government solution. The government only causes more problems.

To understand how ridding ourselves of health care mandates can reduce health care costs please watch Shelly Roche (bytestyle.tv) give details in the video below. This is the kind of information people need to hear when they accuse others of “just complaining and not offering solutions”.

Author’s Note: Hello all.  The editors of Liberty Maven have graciously agreed to include me as a contributor to this fine site.  As they are always on the ball with breaking news, it may be a challenge to keep up with valuable content.  So, for my first post, I’d like to start with a rhetorical, philosophical open letter that I wrote directed at all those who think that more government regulation will solve all of our nation’s ills.  I hope you enjoy it!

—————————————

I’ve gotten some feedback on the subject of deregulation, and the effect of greed.  Many are quick to demonize it, but I think we all need to slow down and take a look at what greed really is, before we admonish the “greedy”.

Interestingly, greed, is one of the 7 deadly sins, so we should strive to not be greedy, right?  Well, greed is defined in several different ways, but the most unbiased true definition (not relating to material wealth – I’ll explain why this is important in a moment) of greed is: An eager desire or longing; greediness; as, a greed of gain.  Is this not merely an extension of self interest?  What is self interest?  Self interest is defined as personal interest or advantage.  Everyone acts in ways of self interest, some more than others.  The reason is because life is a competition, like it or not.  You cannot beat the self interest out of anyone, and that is the paradoxical nature of self interest, i.e., greed.  To clarify my point, allow me to give several examples.

1. Early in life, we play games.  The object of a game is to win.  The desire to win is an act of self interest.  Yes it is fun to play, but winning and losing is part of the game, and the desire to win is part of human nature.  If the true object of the game is only to have fun, why do we keep score?  Why do we play at all?  Can we not find more fun and productive things to do if the object is “fun”?

2. When we go to school, we get graded on our performance.  We strive to get good grades based on our performance, and to gauge how we are faring against our peers.  Some learn faster, or in different ways, than others.  It is in our self interest to get the best grades possible, so that we not only know we are learning, but to ensure that our future will be bright, by being accepted into higher educational facilities which boast better educational practices than others.

Read More »

We liberty lovers went into a bit of withdrawal last week when Freedom Watch aired a “best of” show. Yesterday it returned in stellar form with guests Ron Paul, Daniel Hannan, Lew Rockwell, Tom Woods, Peter Schiff, Shelly Roche, and Tom Palmer  (CATO) joining Judge Napolitano.

Ron Paul and Daniel Hannan united in a one two punch fighting for liberty. They spoke about nullification, secession, and then compared Europe and America on the road to socialism. Another topic that they and the other guests discussed was protectionism. Peter Schiff seems to believe the U.S. need not worry too much about protectionism. Tom Palmer disagrees. Woods and Rockwell delve into the prospects for liberty in our lifetime.

Another excellent show. Watch it below.

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h

Quote of the Day: “A centralized democracy may be as tyrannical as an absolute monarch.” — James Anthony Froud (1818-1894) British author and historian Source: Short Studies on Great Subjects, 1872

* Banks
* Insurance companies
* Car companies
* And, as we reported yesterday, they now fund the majority of state government expenditures

But it isn’t just companies and state governments. The Feds want to nationalize YOU too.

It’s important for our new members to know that Congress is weaving a net that will ensnare all of us in a centralized database that could not only track where you go and what you do, but also . . .

What YOU spend on health care, and the kind of treatment YOU receive.

This scheme started with the so-called REAL ID Act, which would standardize state drivers’ licenses to make a de facto National ID card. You’ll need this card to cash a check, hire a baby sitter, board a plane, or engage in countless other activities. You’ll need it TO BE A PERSON.

Now that may not sound so different from today. You already need a driver’s license and a Social Security number to do many things. But your drivers’ license isn’t centralized at the federal level, and that makes all the difference. Here’s why . . .

The federal government has a huge problem with the Medicare program. They’ve made trillions of dollars in promises they can’t keep. But they have a plan to control costs . . .

* All of us will have REAL ID cards, issued by the states, but tracked in a centralized database
* The Feds will then force us to have electronic medical records too (this process is underway now)
* Your electronic medical records will be connected to the centralized REAL ID database
* The government will then start dictating which medical treatments you can receive and which you cannot

This last stage in the process is also being planned now. The supposed purpose is to protect us from ineffective treatments, but the real purpose is to control costs. In effect, the politicians will turn the entire country into a giant HMO. Do you want your health care needs being dictated by the same Keystone Gang who passed . . .

* The misguided lead regulation?
* And the self-defeating fossil fuels bill?

Well, here’s where all the threads tie together to create a net that will eventually strangle you. Twenty two states have refused to comply with the first step in this disaster scenario, the REAL ID Act. But how long do you think they’ll hold out now that . . .

Read More »

Another wonderful week of Freedom Watch with Judge Andrew Napolitano is in the bag. Attempts to unite Ron Paul and Daniel Hannan were met with technical difficulties, but both appeared on their own to great effect. Especially Hannan who had a quite eloquent answer to a question from the Judge about Constitutional responsibility. Watch that clip isolated here.

Or if you prefer to watch the whole darn show (and why not?) watch it all below.

Lew Rockwell, 2010 liberty loving candidate RJ Harris, Cody Willard, Free State Project founder Jason Sorens, Peter Schiff, and twitter-maven Shelly Roche also join the Judge.

Remember, all episodes are posted at http://freedomwatchonfox.com/ as soon as they are available. You can also find upcoming guest and topic lists as well as the latest news about the show there.

The cruel beauty of having Barack Obama as President is how he can be used as an almost black and white litmus test for partisan nepotism (or hackery as some call it). Dip your favorite lawmakers (or special interest groups) in the testing solution and they come out pure red, pure blue, or some shade of purple. Here are a few examples:

Barney Frank: Under Bush he clamored for more transparency. Under Obama he’s mum on transparency = Pure Blue Partisan Hack.

Neo-con Tea Party Enthusiasts: Some under Bush supported the bailouts. Under Obama they scream for his head because of the bailouts = Pure Red Partisan Hacks.

Antiwar Obama Fans: They wanted to impeach Bush for getting us into the Iraq War on lies. They are oddly less enthusiastic about protesting Obama for relocating more and more troops to Afghanistan = Pure Blue Partisan Hacks.

Ron Paul: Under Bush denounced the Iraq War as unconstitutional. Under Obama still denouncing foreign interventionism = Pure Purple Principled Non-partisan.

Playing the game of partisan nepotism is quite easy. The rules are merely to compare the actions (and reactions) of various individuals and groups to the policies of George W. Bush in the past and Barack H. Obama right now. No doubt there are many other examples. Feel free to leave your own in the comments.

The goal of this game is to lose by showing your purple pride, revealing that you are a principled non-partisan. You believe in the rule of law and don’t change your views just because your team is in the lead. Sadly, I’d say that most Americans are either purely red or purely blue. Sometimes when you win, you really do lose.

Read More »