Mandate my ass

By 65 Comments 689 views

Doug Ross:

In other words, convincing 1/10th of one percent of the American population to vote for fiscal rectitude would have changed the course of history.

Mandate my ass.

Read more

Filed under Uncategorized

Curt served in the Marine Corps for four years and has been a law enforcement officer in Los Angeles for the last 24 years.

65 Responses to “Mandate my ass”

  1. 51


    @Richard Wheeler:

    Using your name is your prerogative. Your being a Democrat, it’s highly unlikely that the SEIU or “Occupy” movement would camp out on your lawn (unless you are an executive at B-of-A)

    It is undeniable that radicals and union thugs have targeted conservatives for harassment and physical attacks (nor do I leave out the anti-abortion fanatics on the right). But “in your face” tactics received the blessing of President Obama and fellow Democrats. Why don’t you tell Chick-Fill-A’s owners how they shouldn’t be paranoid about speaking their mind? Or the young Black conservative selling signs in St’ Louis? Maybe Tabitha Hale should not be paranoid, even after being attacked by an SEIU thug? Then there’s Sendik’s grocery store in Wisconsin which was threatened with a boycott simply because they dared to openly contributed to a Republican. The various assault’s made by the “Occupy-WS” protestors are too numerous to go into detail. Then there’s also the possibility of someone data mining enough information on you to steal your identity.

    But wait! There’s more!:

    Therefore it is up to bloggers to protect themselves against frivolous and reactionary lawsuits by not giving out their real names, addresses, phone numbers, or any other personally identifiable information to their blogging service. Blog using a pseudonym, or, if you must, use your real name and restrict your more colorful entries to people you trust.

    Risks of getting sued for blogging

    “Though the likelihood of a plaintiff winning a lawsuit is not high, ‘you could go bankrupt’ just from defending against them, says Miriam Wugmeister, a partner at Morrison & Foerster LLP and a privacy and data-security law expert.”

    Bloggers, Beware: What You Write Can Get You Sued

    Bloggers are increasingly getting sued or threatened with legal action for everything from defamation to invasion of privacy to copyright infringement. In 2007 — the most recent data available — 106 civil lawsuits against bloggers and others in social networks and online forums were tallied by the Citizen Media Law Project at the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University, up from just 12 in 2003. There have been about $17.4 million in trial awards against bloggers to date, according to the Media Law Resource Center in New York, a nonprofit clearinghouse that tracks free-speech cases.

    No thanks. With this litigious society and the fact that I can’t afford to defend myself against frivolous lawsuits by conservative blog haters, I’ll keep to my nickname.

    Even if the case is thrown out at court, you still will have to spend the time and money to defend yourself. Remember too that ignoring such a lawsuit will mean you will most likely lose by default

  2. 52


    Instituting a speed limit abridges freedom. But what about criminalizing abortion? What about prohibiting same gender marriage? What about a prohibition of marijuana for personal use? What about a mandate to purchase health insurance? Wear a motorcycle helmet? Not rake the autumn leaves in your front lawn into piles in your driveway and burn them up (which is what everyone did, at one time, when I was growing up in Michigan)?

    I know this wasn’t directed at me Larry, but it is very good and I’d like to respond.

    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.

    I would like to blame the federal government for all the stuff you mentioned above, but the fault lies with us, “we the people.” We have given the power to do all of this to us at a federal level. Do you remember when they changed the drinking age from 18 to 21? Some of the States refused to do so, most notably, Louisiana. The feds said they could keep the drinking at 18, but they would receive no highway funds.
    There are a bunch of companies that are laying people off and/or moving people to part-time in an effort to get below the 50 employee minimum for Obamacare. Not making this about Obamacare specifically, but people are going to find a way to be free, no matter what.

  3. 53

    Richard Wheeler

    Larry #50 Very well done. Aye can find an acorn in a haystack. Let’s see if he can help J.G. on his assertion.Personally doubt anyone will be spending your $50 anytime soon.

    Aqua Heckuva ballgame last night.Look forward to the Irish-Seminole contests to come.

  4. 55

    Hard Right

    I wouldn’t blame the hurricane entirely. It may simply have been the final nail in the coffin.

    The dems STILL out organized the GOP. Funny, in this day and age I thought both sides were using the data mining techniques the dems used. It’s 2012 for crying out loud. Plus, their use of media and social networking made a big difference. The GOP needs to learn from them and do the same to turn out the vote.
    It seems a few million Republicans failed to to vote. Enough to make a difference? That remains to be seen.
    Larry, I saw where a few others were correct, and I THINK some were Republicans, just not as well known as some of the big names that got it wrong. Really, almost no one on our side (myself included) believed that dem turnout would be up.

    Larry, while I strongly disagree with your beliefs, I have come to the conclusion you really do mean well. I do not feel that way about other liberal/leftist posters here.

  5. 56


    Hard Right
    the lost of the election is the GOP failure to lie, fail to cheat, fail to incite revenge, fail to throw money and buy
    the votes, and fail to yell with hate card , failure to abuse the rights of just election
    which demand one vote one person,
    they GOPS re dealing with all of the above done without failure from the DEMOCRATES
    help by unions and members , and OBAMA SPEECH of revenge.
    the GOP are to honest and tolerant, they have to start playing the same game,
    tolerance zero,

  6. 57

    Hard Right

    The funny thing is that in OH and WI, we may have been the victims of our own success. The GOP helped turn around their economies, but that success did not translate into support for Romney. In fact, it may have helped obama. Ironic.

    Bees, half of America will not support obama or the dems, but we are fast approaching the point where such people will be in the minority. Then it will be goodbye America as we know it and hello Europe West.

  7. 58


    Hard Right
    the time will come that
    what ever OBAMA SIGN WILL BE INVALIDATE in this 4 years,

  8. 59

    Richard Wheeler

    H.R. Actually I support the Democratic Party. Were you questioning my Patriotism? My belief in Freedom and Democracy? You wanna clarify your #54.
    Happy Birthday Marines 11/10
    God bless all our Vets 11/11

  9. 60


    As I said, Larry, if I had just one small bit of the talent Mata does at mining through the older postings, your “pooh-poohing” of the use of “freedom and liberty” would be pasted here.

    The funny thing is, you have done so in the past and you just did the same in your #50, when you started talking about ‘trivializing’ the terms freedom and liberty. That is what I mean when I said you “pooh-poohed” the use of those terms.

    I provided over 10 years of service to my country, Larry. It wasn’t until after my first couple years of service that I really understood the meaning of the oath I took when I first entered the military. Those two terms, and what they stand for, are as important to me as anything else in life. I’d still give the ultimate sacrifice if it meant freedom and liberty would endure.

    Now, getting back to why I think the Democratic party cannot claim those anymore, one must look back at history, specifically the catalysts that ultimately led to throwing off the shackles of the British rule and the formation of our own government. The Boston Tea Party was conducted in response to several British government mandates and Acts immediately prior to the night the tea was thrown into Boston Harbor. The most egregious of these was a duty tax on East India Company tea that was sold in the colonies. No representation by the colonies in the British government that decided their fates, and the issuance of specific taxation upon the colonies, steeled the backbone of the citizens of the colonies to commit the act. What’s more, the British government, under King George, essentially made the East India Company specifically, and British tea in general, the only legally accepted tea that could be sold to the colonies.

    Fast forward to 2009/2010. Passage of the Stimulus, with virtually no GOP support (Snowe, Collins and Specter being the lone GOP votes), and in particular, Obamacare, which received no GOP support, or even representation on writing and debating the bill’s details, and most importantly the public’s overall support for NOT passing Obamacare at the time, both were passed and signed into law.

    These two biggest “achievements” during Obama’s first term are quite similar to the catalyst for revolution back in the 1770’s. And no, we weren’t represented this time around. When the Democratic party cut out any GOP representation on the deliberations for Obamacare, we didn’t have representation. When Obama turned to the GOP and proclaimed, “I won”, we didn’t have representation. When Obamacare was finalized in the dead of the night and voted on just a few short hours later, NO ONE in America had representation.

    Freedom and liberty? The Democratic party, at least the leadership, doesn’t care about it. Especially not now. Let’s take your example of prohibition on raking leaves, Larry. That kind of prohibition is ok, because it is in response to those wishing the freedom and liberty to breathe fresh air and not the smoke from the fires. And it points to one important aspect of freedom and liberty. That is, having the freedom and liberty to do as you choose, as long as it doesn’t impact the freedom and liberty of those who choose otherwise. Burning leaves freely impacts others’ rights to clean, fresh air.

    How does me not wishing to engage in the commerce of buying health insurance impact others’ freedoms and liberties, Larry? It doesn’t. Which makes the mandate for me engage in that commerce a direct repudiation of my freedom and liberty. I no longer have a choice. Some freedom and liberty evaporated when Obama put pen to paper. Government, specifically the federal government, took control over a portion of my life. Tyranny, albeit soft, ruled the day, so to speak.

    Yes, we do live in a nation of Constitutional law. It is increasingly apparent, however, that the Constitution represents, to liberal/progressives, a mere hurdle to overcome, or ignore completely, for the government to mandate certain controls over my life, as well as yours. You may like the nice shiny shackles you have been given, but they chafe the hell out of me, Larry.

    “Government can do whatever they want!” – Pete Starks, CA representative, Democrat.
    “We have to pass the bill, before you can see what’s in it!” – Nancy Pelosi, CA representative, Democrat.
    “I won!” – Barack Obama, US President, Democrat.
    “You know we’re going to control the insurance companies!” – Joseph Biden, US Vice-President, Democrat

    I have no love for what the Democratic party has evolved into over the years. And I will never agree that the Democratic party is about freedom and liberty. Maybe individuals within the party, and probably many who vote Democrat, can claim that, but the leadership of that party determines it’s course, and they have nothing to do with those two important terms.

    I will, however, echo HR’s sentiments, that although I do not agree with your beliefs, I do believe that you are well-meaning in intentions.

  10. 62

    Hi John,

    I don’t have the time to do it, but I could easily find examples of Republicans behaving badly, as well. Off the top of my head, what does come to mind was the Paycheck Fairness act, which the GOP minority in the Senate killed by unanimously voting against it, leaving it 58-41 in favor, and therefore two votes short of the filibuster proof super majority. Block voting is a fact of life. Killing a bill by block voting is just as egregious, if you want to view it that way, as passing a bill by block voting. Some of the most important Supreme Court decisions of both of our lives have been decided by a single vote, but this is the way that our Founding Fathers intended it. Congress is the same way.

    With regard to ObamaCare, there were many concessions made to get the votes of Republicans. Liberals wanted single payer Medicare for all; what we got was a Heritage Foundation-designed system piloted by the Republican nominee for President. The Dems proposed a trillion dollar spending stimulus. The GOP countered with $500 billion in tax cuts. The final stimulus was $750 billion, including $250 million in tax cuts. If two Republican Senators had come forward and offered to vote in favor some version of ObamaCare, they could have gotten a lot more concessions, including malpractice tort reform. But there was no willingness at all on the side of the GOP to support any version of national health insurance reform. And then there was the pledge by McConnell that the number one agenda would be to make Obama a one term President, and the total legislative gridlock which ensued. As I said, block voting is a fact of life today. One hopes that both sides have learned a lesson.

    Comparing any of this to King George and taxation without representation is grotesque hyperbole. ObamaCare passed constitutional muster. You may not think that the mandate is constitutional. The Supreme Court doesn’t agree with you and they have the last word. As I noted before, the mandate wasn’t even a Democratic idea; it came right out of a conservative think tank, supported by Republican legislators and put into place by a Republican governor.

    There is nothing in the Constitution about requiring two party agreement or giving one party veto power over the other. It’s all by numerical voting, with voting coalitions assembled through any Constitutional means available. What about the “legitimate concerns” of the Libertarian Party or Green Party? The National Bank was a no compromise showdown between Alexander Hamilton and James Madison which was much more consequential than the comparatively trivial Affordable Care Act. Demonizing the Democratic Party as being against freedom and liberty is hyperbolic demagoguery at its worst. What about criminalizing personal drug use and criminalizing abortion and enforcing both at the barrel of a gun? As I noted, there are lots of abridgements of personal autonomy which do not make proponents of said abridgements anti-Freedom (large F) or anti-Liberty (large L).

    – Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

  11. 63


    Just one quick point, as I have to go off to work.

    I don’t have the time to do it, but I could easily find examples of Republicans behaving badly, as well.

    The quotes weren’t included to show Democrats “behaving badly”. They were selected, a few of them from the multitudes I could have used, to show that the Democrat leadership doesn’t care about freedom, liberty, or representation. And this is what you vote for when you vote Democrat. All claims to the contrary aside, the Democratic party has moved steadily left, with a huge move left in 2006. Liberalism has been relegated to the back seat in the Democratic party, and progressivism to the leadership.

    PS – One thing about the Supreme Court upholding the “mandate”. It was done on the basis that it is a tax, and not government forcing people to engage in commerce. If it had continued to be argued that way, it would have failed. Congratulations. You voted for the highest tax on American citizens in history, and particularly the middle-class. And, as you said, the Supreme Court has the last word, and their last word on it was that it’s a tax. No denying that now, Larry.

    Now, I have to go off to work in order to pay for all of the free “stuff” Obama has promised people. And I don’t even get to enjoy the sex, or use the cell-phone minutes, or be worry free that my mortgage is paid, or be able to hit the grocery store with no hit to my own wallet.

  12. 64

    Hi John,

    I’m entirely in favor of tax increases — for middle class as well as for the 1%. I’ve written — many times — that I’m in favor of rescinding ALL the Bush tax cuts! It’s time we started paying our own bills, in real time, rather than borrowing money and passing down the debt. I’ve been arguing that since well before Cheney uttered those immortal words “deficits don’t matter.” Back to the days when George HW Bush accurately described Reagan’s proposals as “voodoo economics.”

    The fantasy that tax cuts wouldn’t lead to increased debt is what is most responsible for ruining America’s economy, along with the fantasy that money from massive tax cuts for the wealthy would be invested in business growth, as opposed to being sequestered in investments which don’t grow businesses, jobs, and middle class take home pay. Why give someone a tax deductible raise, when your taxes are so low that it makes more sense to take the money out of your company and improve your own personal circumstances? Microscopic capital gains tax rates are a cancer on the country.

    By the way, an alternative way to view the ObamaCare (i.e. Heritage Foundation/RomneyCare) mandate is to say that it is a tax on everyone, but that everyone is eligible for a full tax credit, provided that they secure health insurance for themselves. There were similar mandates in effect in colonial America. Mandates that both ship companies provide insurance for seamen and seamen purchase insurance for themselves. Mandates that able bodied men purchase, possess, and maintain weapons; so that they could serve in militias, if required. There’s nothing new or insidiously anti-freedom and liberty about any of this.

    – Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

  13. 65


    I consider you an honorable man, that is one of other treasures you are made of,
    and you have my total respect, in all your comments,
    best to you

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *