I assume people saw Jimmy Carter’s remarks calling the anti-Obamacare demonstrators “racist.” I thought I’d point out that on CNN, he was quoted as saying, “they wave signs in the air that said we should have buried Obama with Kennedy, those kinds of things are beyond the bounds.” Carter intentionally lied, of course, to make it sound like evil resistors were implying murder. The signs clearly said, “Bury Obamacare with Kennedy.” But no one in the media called this to the carpet.

Fred Solop, a Northern Arizona University political scientist, said the incidents in New Hampshire and Arizona could signal the beginning of a disturbing trend.

“When you start to bring guns to political rallies, it does layer on another level of concern and significance,” Solop said. “It actually becomes quite scary for many people. It creates a chilling effect in the ability of our society to carry on honest communication.”

He said he’s never heard of someone bringing an assault weapon near a presidential event. “The larger the gun, the more menacing the situation,” he said.

Policies by force, or by majority tyranny, which are created, accelerated, and funded by wealthy special interests and mega-corporations with monetary interest in the policies, are called “honest communication.” If you think that the majority of the population understands the nature of government and its powers, think again. And this came from a political science academic that teaches your kids.

According to the demented, crank leftists like Hale Stewart at Huffington Post, rejecting this concept amounts to ”fear mongering and stupidity.” He goes on to set the stage for the necessity of this “counseling” by comparing it to estate planning and living wills concerning his elderly clients (he is a tax attorney). The numbskull doesn’t even consider the fact that an individual choosing (important word) to seek counsel from an attorney, doctor, family, etc., does so voluntarily, and with a specific result in mind. That is a far cry from what will become the government’s mandatory two cents when you have some self-interested, psychobabbling bureaucrat breathing down your neck and forcing his “expert” advice on you, giving out prescriptions for how to live or die. Anytime the government wants to “counsel” anyone on anything, it is a very bad sign; one that suggests authority and manipulation, with the end goal being able to control the outcome, which, in this case, is life or death, care or no care.

The attempt to impose health hegemony has triggered people to dust off their inner rebel and take a stand. As Obama gets more and more frustrated that his Communist “change” isn’t embraced by us productive people, all the media can focus on is that reactionary right-wingers (whatever that means) are misinterpreting the health care plan, spreading false ideas about it, and generally just getting the whole thing wrong. To be generous, here, let’s just grant them that as being true and look at this health care resistance in a really simple context.

Forget about whether or not euthanasia is part of the plan, or an unavoidable consequence of the plan, or in fact, let’s call the whole talk about that nothing more than an exaggerated outcome of government-managed care. Forget about all the micro-arguments about who and what the plan will cover. Let’s focus on a few main points that seem to be glossed over in favor of going around the guts of the issue.

1) Government cannot ever contain costs. This is supposed to be one of the main reasons for the establishment of the ObamaCommuCare system. However, since the beginning of the modern state, no government anywhere has been able to contain costs on anything. First, there’s an unlimited supply of funding due to that rotten concept known as taxation. With unlimited buckets to empty into the trough, there’s no motivation to rein in outrageous costs. Two, there’s no profit and loss element in government accounting that will properly indicate the efficiency or inefficiency of its socialized system. Government is not run like a business and therefore it cannot isolate any particular sector and micro-manage its costs. Plus, cost containment is a two-edged sword – a business looks at revenues in balance with its cost-cutting procedures because it is impossible to look at them as if they exist in separate worlds with separate purposes. The revenue and expense worlds are closely related, and combined they produce a profit or a loss. Managing both ends plays a role in the end result. Three, politicians benefit personally – by increasing wealth and power – from dishing out special favors and services, and this serves to increase costs because the drive to personally enrich themselves is far greater than their need to have their constituents like them. So you have 535 different individuals acting in their own best interests, unlike with a private business where most managers and executives have a stake in cooperating to initiate a cost-effective structure.

2) Any formerly private – and costly – services that become “free” to the consumers of that service will necessarily be in much higher demand, thereby causing massive shortages which will result in an unavoidable rationing of health care. The current system of third-party payment already encourages people to misuse and abuse services they don’t have to pay for, especially in the case of managed care. In the current system, people run to the emergency room for anything and everything, they scarf down “free” prescriptions at an amazing rate, and they clamor for more and more privileges from a system that has trained them to depend on it like it’s a food line. A system sold as “free” – and the citizen advocates of this nonsense do believe it is free to them – will attract the most dependent and irresponsible people who don’t need the health care, squeezing out those who are prudent and do need it. Additionally, remember that the Redistribution Kings who have planned the socialized health care system already intend on using it as a scheme for the purposes of redistributive justice.

3) Last, and most important: most of these people resisting this idea are doing so because they just don’t want the government owning and running their health care system. Whether they are traditional conservatives, statist Republicans, FOX News warmongers, or fair-weather liberty types, they don’t want their lives run by the Post Office, Part II. People don’t want bureaucrats rolling dice to determine the level or type of medical care they can receive.

Pelosi, if you are going to attempt to dumb down your disgusting propaganda to appeal to the lowest-IQ masses, at least hire a better writer next time.

St. Louis County police arrested six people after the forum in Mehlville, including a Post-Dispatch reporter.

The back-and-forth between factions in the crowd created a contentious atmosphere inside and outside the forum. The event attracted several hundred people. They included members of the movement opposing President Barack Obama’s policies and groups who came to show support for the president’s proposals.

U.S. Rep. Russ Carnahan called for a “calmer, more civil” or “spirited” debate on socialized health care. That means he wants his subjects to step up and lob softballs so that he can feed them the standard reply, and then they should quietly go away being satisfied with his bullshit response. These people are so arrogant that they are shocked, shocked! to get this level of resistance. As I said in this blog post, these self-aggrandizing powermongers cannot handle this level of resistance. They did not have a strategy for handling the response that has evolved from their health care scam.

On another note (from the story), here’s what’s wrong with much of the tea bagging that’s going on (Tea Bagging Lite).

Dana Loesch, a blogger, radio talk show host and St. Louis Tea Party activist who was at the Mehlville event, said, “Last night, it was a whole different scene. That’s not what this should be about.”
 
Loesch said Tea Party supporters generally haven’t caused any problems. They’re loud, they’re frustrated, but if Congress would allow for more debate on health care, people could have their questions answered, she said.

Mr. Loesch, with all due respect, people don’t want “more debate,” and there is much more to this than getting your “questions answered.” Figure it out already. This is not about putting up a show to be noticed by your rulers. This is not about organizing peaceful complaints about The System. People do not want this crazed, inhuman, devastating socialized health care rammed down their throats. They don’t want it, period. They don’t want their personal health put into the melting pot for others to control, deny, and approve. Anything less than full-on resistance means that this country, as a whole, will have taken one more step toward the annihilation of individual liberty. Forget debate, forget writing your congressman, forget asking questions, forget standing around and just “peacefully” holding signs. This program will destroy every American’s future while it will enrich powerful special interests, and of course, none of the lawmakers who want to destroy our ability to live healthy and free will be subject to the very plans they have designed for us. People do not want this and the only way to stop it is to keep saying no and reinforce that with actions. The actions are such that you don’t let them do it to you.

But it’s not a matter of just giving both to whoever comes in. Supplies are expected to be limited, so the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has two different lists for who should be first to get the seasonal flu shot and who should be first to get the swine flu shot.

I thought there’s no rationing when the government nationalizes medical care? Eventually, of course, they want to stick us all, and against our will.

What did the arrogant Dingell say about the protest? He stated: “This meeting has been heavily infiltrated by folks who wish to make trouble.” Damn right Dingell, but not in the way you mean it. Get with it Dingell: you and your wealthy, ordained colleagues have pushed on a major tipping point – one that affects our overall well-being and our ability to live out our lives in a healthy, independent, and strong manner. Pushing on tipping points has its consequences. How dare you think otherwise. Let us be optimistic that Amercians have only just begun to fight.