Tag: social engineer

Best argument…

About why what the left has been doing to us for the last century, whether you think it was meant to do good or not, is wrong, was made by Glenn H. Reynolds, he of Instapundit fame, here:

The Constitution of the United States was supposed to create a federal government limited to the comparatively few powers specifically enumerated therein, mostly in Article I, Section 8. The idea was that the federal government would address subjects that really needed to be handled on a national level. The states would do the rest, or people would take care of matters on their own.

As James Madison wrote in the Federalist No. 45, “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.”

To underscore this arrangement, the Tenth Amendment provided that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

This division of powers was intended to protect freedom by limiting the scope of the powerful national government. It was also intended to reduce the extent of corruption in the federal government. The powers most likely to encourage corruption were left to the states.

Our forefathers understood that the bane of every system of government was the abrogation of power at the highest/ federal level that would encourage the type of corruption that turned Europe into freedom lacking the shit hole it was then and to many extents in far worse ways, is today. Obamacare is just the latest step on the road to full blown government control of everything.

Yeah, the cultists that love Marx’s dumb idea will vehemently disown marxism, but the end goal, even if many amongst the masses aren’t bright enough to see that yet, and the politicians that push it deny that’s the intent, is full blown state control of everything and everyone. Maybe not direct control of all aspects of life like we saw in the USSR, but then again, when you have a government with not just the power to pick winners and losers, but a justification to do it all that is seen as noble – social justice – that it hides behind, and a justice system that enforces that power and agenda, you pretty much get the same with the veneer of legitimacy and democracy.

Obamacare was just another step in that direction. One that was set up to allow the political class to basically define healthcare to be whatever government decided it was whenever it wanted, by basically completely destroying the limitations the constitution placed on the federal government. The bonus plan I believe is that even if it were to fail this dastardly constitutional challenge, they hoped it would it would come too late and with such pain that it all but set up the system to allow them to achieve the real goal: a single payer system.

Look, I do not for a second believe that the left hasn’t spent the last half century passed law after law to increase the power & control of the federal government on healthcare system to make it better. Sure, that’s what they told us, but the intent has always been a government controlled system. But as long as the one we had worked well, they where never going to sell the public on this idiotic notion we all could see fail everywhere. Hence the massive and idiotic mountain of regulations and mandates, coupled with the bull about healthcare being a ‘right”, which have brought the existing system to the brink of implosion. And like they did when their regulations caused the recent economic disaster – they chose double down on even more meaningless regulation, while not just keeping the fundamental underlying problem that they want to use the lending industry to social engineer, but expanding on it – this is just more of the same.

The game is to overload the system till it brakes and people HAVE to accept the government controlled single payer system they want. Obamacare took the next step, and as Reynolds put it, basically decided to make the case that there should be no limits on what the federal government wants to do if they claim it is for the welfare of people and to regulate commerce or some such nonsense. Have no doubt that next step was the plan:

There are always arguments about the precise scope of delegated powers, and such arguments have regularly come before the Supreme Court. But it is one thing to argue about the precise extent of limits to enumerated power, and it is another thing entirely to deny their existence.

And there you have it in a nutshell. The left doesn’t care right now: they hold the reigns of power, and their guy is pretty blatantly willing to do whatever to push their power to new heights. What can go wrong? After all, this is about doing a good, nay great, thing. Healthcare is a right, and we should all get it for free! Never mind that there is nothing that’s free, ever. So here we get the left, perplexed that even some of the leftists on the SCOTUS is weary of this dangerous usurpation of power, but the problem is a simple one with dire consequences.

Will the court be willing to remove the “almost” and let Congress do anything it wants under the commerce power? I don’t know, but if it doesn’t go along with Obamacare, don’t blame Donald Verrilli. Instead, blame — or, rather, credit — the Constitution.

Be afraid. Our media is doing us a disservice not pointing this out too. But what’s new? Obamacare isn’t even about healthcare: it is about removing any limitations from the feds. While you might have no problem with that today because your team has the reins of power, think about what it means when they don’t. Of course, the left has figure that once they take power they won’t ever lose it again, but then again, even the Supreme Soviets learned that lesson eventually.

Any way you spin it..

I am sure that the usual suspects in the LSM have to be heart broken by the results of this USA Today poll about whom Americans blame for the depressed economy. Here is how the USA Today writer tries to salvage the day:

Most Americans blame Wall Street for the nation’s economic predicament — but they blame Washington more.

And in the democracy that fancies itself the capital of capitalism, more than four in 10 people describe the U.S. economic system as personally unfair to them. A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken last weekend, as the Occupy Wall Street protest movement completed its first month, found that:

Oh hell! Only 4 out of ten people are good enough to believe the left’s idiotic talking points. Erm, that’s not entirely accurate either. The author is seriously embellishing. It’s a poll, and it’s a poll conducted by a member of the LSM, so I am sure the questions where seriously skewed to illicit the response they wanted, and even then, the numbers are far worse for the “Blame Wall Street” class warriors as the next statement shows:

•When asked whom they blame more for the poor economy, 64% of Americans name the federal government and 30% say big financial institutions.

So 64 out of 100 say blame government. Only 30, or 3 out of 10 – not the 4 this author would like you to believe unless you want to talk the 6% that voted “present” into the later group out of desperation – blame those evil corporations. And that’s despite the following revelation:

•Only 54% say the economic system is personally fair to them; 44% say it is not.

I will stress how funny I find it that the economic system seems to be the fairest to people that work hard and avoid the usual pitfalls, short-cuts, and bad decisions that lead to economic problems. There are exceptions of course, but they are just that: exceptions.

The last reported pair of statistics makes me wonder. This author hopes to confound people by again combining the results in such a way that it leads one to believe the opposite of what the study finds. Here you go.

•78% say Wall Street bears a great deal or a fair amount of blame for the economy; 87% say the same about Washington.

I feel that you have to interpret this obscenely weird cobbled result, which otherwise adds up to numbers over 100 as the result of 2 sets of questions. Obviously the first part deals with a question where they illicit people to lay blame on Wall Street, but it looks like they are combining two buckets, fair amount and great deal, to achieve that higher, close to 8 in 10 if you want to go there. However, if you assume they did the same and combined those 2 buckets like they did for the wanted the high answer for, when added up based on a question directed at D.C, the amount is 9 out of 10 blaming D.C. the most. No way to spin it: most Americans understand the root of the problem.

I wish they had asked people if they thought letting government write more regulation to address the problem so many see with Wall Street would put an end to the problem or just make it worse. My guess is when the problem is posed showing this relationship for what it is, all but the dumbest would think that handing government – the people that have wrecked the economy according to the majority – even more power, will not fix things. Some people seem to get it, even if you have to read through the nonsense to see it.

“You see the frustration that there’s some serious things wrong with capitalism in America, but you also see the conundrum — how do we change it?” says Terry Madonna, a political analyst and polling expert at Franklin and Marshall College in Lancaster, Pa. “This crisis coincides with a huge debate over the role of government.” He says some of the 64% who place primary blame on Washington fault it for too little government regulation, while others blame it for too much regulation.

First off, the problem isn’t capitalism at all, but government trying to subvert capitalism to the onerous beliefs one group of ideologues have that it’s government’s job to level the playing field, social engineer results so we all cross the finish line at the same time, and that it is an injustice that life isn’t fair to some people. I could add how obvious it is that the people life is the least fair to tend to be the ones that do the dumb things, but I expect that to be obvious.

And yes, the big problem we have is that the same ideologues that feel government should pick winners & losers, to make life fair, are never going to understand/accept that the best way to roll this problem back is to roll back the power and ability of government to rig the system, so those “evil rich” whom now have to come to the politicians to buy privileges – look at who gets excluded from travesties like Obamacare for example, and by whom – from them, can’t do that anymore, by drastically reducing government and the power of what government can do.

As we can see the usual suspects are already advocating for giving the politicians even more power over who wins and who doesn’t, and they will be the ones complaining the loudest when this has exactly the opposite effect that they are hoping for. Queue the next crisis due to social engineering followed by politicians promising to fix it all if they are given even more power.