It's a new morning, where I sit once again pondering the impending National Health Care Act. Calling it Obamacare really doesn't cut it - as if one mortal man could be solely responsible for such a contrivance. This is a law, formulated within the lobbied bowels of congress and, like most federal laws, once passed it's damn near impossible to undo it. The process of repeal reminds me of the plight of Tolkien's Frodo from Lord of the Rings: slowly losing his mind while trekking over mountains, battling giant spiders, avoiding orc armies and tossing the p-o-s into an active volcano with one of his fingers. It's really much better to avoid passing these things, especially when it will tweak a 2 trillion dollar sector of the economy without a clue as to what will happen, beyond the usual power growth and corporate enrichment.
Let us stroll down memory lane to when this bugger was being put together. The process was guarded like the recipe for Coca-Cola. Very hush hush:
Are We the People really all that interested in government's lawmaking process to deserve to be surprised by this? We usually don't show concern nor do we readily understand the progression that is lawmaking. Typically, we wait until passage is imminent before showing any interest. Then we take sides, of which - written here with complete amusement on my part - there are only two: red and blue and connected at the hip.
The National Health Care Act squeaked through the Senate by a parliamentary maneuver called “reconciliation” - a process designed, according to John Sununu, as "a way to help a reluctant Congress curb spending, reduce deficits, and cut the debt." Now, who'd of thought it would become something OTHER than that for which it was intended? (Maybe every libertarian writer since the advent of pen and paper?) Recall, too, Speaker Nancy Pelosi's advice to members of Congress: to "pass the 2,000 page bill so you can find out what's in it.” Yep, total transparency. So, of course the dolts shouted "yea" more than "nay" and we've been peering into the scary inner workings of the new healthcare law ever since.
Remember, too, Pelosi's famous “Are you serious?” line, spoken when questioned about the law's constitutionality? Now we get to ask the same question after reading the Supreme Court's majority ruling! What are the odds?
Not much left really, except to sit back and enjoy the benefits of socialism rather than those once provided by your place of employment. And what a treat! Michael Snyder over at Infowars.com has a piece up entitled: 15 Reasons Why The Obamacare Decision Is A Mind Blowing Disaster For America. It contains all kinds of morsels to ponder, from long waits to costly penalties (enforced by your friendly neighborhood IRS agent) to doctor shortages to new taxes.
One last little historical snippet for consideration. The democrats, largely responsible for this dawning age, were voted into office because the republicans were systematically stripping the country of its rights. So, naturally, instead of restoring those rights (remember the repeal process described above) the dems rammed through another law to strip away even more rights, especially when one considers the precedent of the SCOTUS ruling with regards to forcing citizens to buy private goods and services.
My suggestion would be the same as it's always been. Don't vote into office any color of politician who would manage the country, or the world for that matter. Vote for those who would put your rights ahead of war and welfare - if you can find them. If you can't, consider the pithy advice of Gerald Celente, whose words match the critical time in which they are presently spoken:
"What self-respecting person would cast a vote for a lesser of two evils? Not only is it immoral and undignified, it’s destructive. Lesser or greater, evil is evil. By supporting one evil or the other, the voter becomes an accessory to the crime. Only a true intellectual revolution can restore dignity, trust, morality, decency and compassion."
Mark well those tenets worthy of restoration. They are born not of some state apparatus, but from a lack thereof. The intellectual revolution described would be one where our thoughts come back full circle. Back to liberty.