Monster Hunter Nation

Some people just don't get it

Nick is a regular poster in my comments. He’s a decent guy who means well, a college student who (like many college students) thinks he gets “the big picture” that most of us are too dumb to, and is always ready to point out the hypocrisy of me or my readers. 

He responded to my post about how we’re screwed by Health Control. Sadly, I think Nick’s comments are a good indicator of how a good portion of the American people have been completely snowed.

Well, this time he missed the boat entirely. So Nick, it’s nothing personal, but now I have to destroy you. 

Nick is in italics.

Nick, on March 22, 2010 at 8:33 pm Said: Edit Comment

When I left the house this morning I thought it was just another day, but I’d forgotten that the healthcare bill had passed. I called a guy who posted a classified ad about a shotgun; turns out he was an agent of the Obama Thought Police (established, of course, by a little-known line item in the healthcare bill) and had orders to haul me away to the reeducation camp. Luckily, I produced my ACLU membership and my copy of the Communist Manifesto, and assured him that not only do I hate Jesus and love Lenin, but I follow pregnant women around telling them to abort their babies. He let me off with a warning.

I’m just gonna let that paragraph sit there, so all of you can read it and grasp the idea that Nick thinks he’s both clever and funny.   What he’s done there is called a Straw Man Argument. From Wikipedia: “To “attack a straw man” is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position. “

Now when I do this in my blog, it is okay, because I bring the funny, and that’s why you guys pay me the Big Bucks.

Nick, on March 23, 2010 at 6:17 am Said: Edit Comment

Scott: What part of the Constitution, exactly, does this bill “shred”?  Thank goodness you’re smarter than 30 Attorney Generals! Even the Nebraska Attorney General who’s planning to file suit hasn’t said on what grounds the law should be declared unconstitutional. Let me help you. Utah’s Attorney General, who I’ve worked with and who is a very intelligent man is suing on the grounds that the commerce clause can’t be used to force people to purchase something they don’t want, and then fine or imprison them if they don’t comply.

 

Congress has the power to tax and spend (“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States”) didn’t see health care and general welfare ain’t it  and to regulate interstate commerce, and the necessary and proper clause gives them pretty broad powers to decide exactly what that entails.

Pretty broad as currently defined meaning anything on Earth or in space, that has or might have or could possibly exist in this plane of reality, ever.

By that reasoning, basically the government can do whatever they feel like and justify it as interstate commerce. If that is the case, why then do we even have a Constitution, if that one line about regulating interstate commerce justifies anything?

I really don’t understand the hysteria here.  Perhaps you aren’t as smart as you think you are then?

Nick, people a lot smarter than you are truly freaked out about this bill. I know you think you know everything, but we’ve been fighting this thing for over a year. It is the size of a phone book. Democrats legislators have been bribed and arm twisted into doing something unprecedented, even though it is political suicide. This bill is so very important to our president that they’ll do anything to get it through, even if it means losing their majorities.

Have you stopped to consider why? 

Conservatives didn’t like Clinton’s health care bill either, but generally speaking their arguments were based around spending and bureaucratic inefficiencies, This one makes the Clinton plan look like a well oiled machine  not around this widely spread notion that it was somehow the first step in creating “reeducation camps” Straw Man and a Socialist Thought Police Straw Man.

Why is it so different this time around?  Nick, you don’t know shit about history, do you? How old were you when we fought Clinton care? Five?

We defeated Clinton care, the same way America shot down government controlled health care proposals from LBJ, FDR, Wilson, and TR.  Maybe, just maybe, all the smart people that fought then understood something that you’re too dense to grasp now.  Government controlled healthcare is a disastrous evil.  And yes, I use the word evil. That is not hyperbole. It is capital E –ville.

Conservatives rightly called out liberals for making ridiculous comparisons between Bush and Hitler, but they seem to have no qualms about making comparisons between Stalin (a man who killed more people than Hitler) and Obama, based solely on the grounds that he’s supported a bill mandating universal insurance. ONLY? Like that’s the only socialist thing he’s done?  So taking over industry, business, banking, finance, and insurance doesn’t count?  Government control of over half of our business, and brutal regulation of the other half doesn’t count? Surrounding himself with actual card carrying communists and Maoists doesn’t count? Any of this ringing a bell?

I’ve put this challenge out there a bunch of times. Nobody has ever taken it yet. So here it goes again. If Obama is not a Marxist, can you name five things that he has supported or pushed that Karl Marx himself would not have approved of?

So, Bush and the Hitler comparisons fail because they were based on trying to make Abu Grab the same as the Holocaust, which just showed a fundamental inability of some people to grasp historical magnitudes.  Plus, Hitler was a socialist. (remember that National Socialist thing?) Socialist. Similar to Joseph Stalin’s communism or Barack Obama’s progressivism.  

I don’t think I’ve ever said Obama was the same as Stalin that I can recall. Stalin would make Obama look like a complete pansy on his best day. But hey, as far as total control over people’s lives goes, even Stalin had to start somewhere!

No. We must only think Obama’s a socialist because of health control. It is ONLY because of health control.  That’s got to be the only possible reason.

Seems kind of hypocritical It would only be hypocritical if I gave Bush a pass and only dissed Obama, but my dislike of Bush’s big government policies was clear.  Big Government = BAD. That’s not hypocritical. That’s common sense.   And what we’ve got here is the biggest government take over of the private sector in American history.

Nick, on March 23, 2010 at 7:48 am Said: Edit Comment

Wait, so I’m “promoting socialist bullshit” Yes. By denying that this plan is fundamental Marxism is to lend it credibility. because I don’t care for hyperbole but you sure love you some Straw Men! and I don’t think that the term “unconstitutional” If the shoe fits… should go the way of “judicial activism,” where it basically means “anything I don’t agree with”? How about anything John Adams disagrees with then? Or Jefferson? Or Franklin? I’m pretty certain where they would have fell, and I think they probably know more about the Constitution than you do, since they wrote it.  

The Constitution should be respected, and an accusation that lawmakers have violated that document is not something to throw around lightly anytime you dislike a piece of legislation.  Throw around lightly?  Nick, dude, the government is going to force every single American to purchase something, even if it against their will. It is the largest expansion of federal power in US history.

Lightly?

This is real life. This bill effects every single American at the level of their most basic fundamental needs. This bill effects every single business, every entrepreneur, every company, every man, woman, and child, and you have the audacity to lecture a bunch of people who’ve experienced far more than you have in your sheltered little life about how we’re overreacting… 

Grow the hell up, you petulant child.

There are legitimate arguments against the healthcare bill; consitutionality is not one of them

As pointed out above, bullshit.

Bravo, Sir!
Author Dan Willis got to read the Grimnoir Chronicles and you haven't

Leave a Reply

53 Comments on "Some people just don't get it"

Notify of
avatar

Michael Z. Williamson
Guest
6 years 4 months ago
I grew up with national health care in Britain. I got to try Canada’s for a few years. I have VA access here, but I try not to use it, because I prefer competent doctors paid with money–out of my pocket if need be. I’m on record that I’m willing to kill socialists to prevent those “benefits” being implemented in the US. See, my family didn’t like British health care, or the economic establishment, or the political climate, so we MOVED TO AMERICA. If you really think (fill in some country’s name here) is better than our system, MOVE THERE,… Read more »
Nick Sharps
Guest
Nick Sharps
6 years 4 months ago

Amen to that Mad Mike

ScottTN
Guest
ScottTN
6 years 4 months ago
I too eschew the VA for competent Docs even if it means paying a good portion out of my own pocket. Of course, I know that at least one of my Doctors is getting his affairs in order to permanently retire due to this law. And the Doc that has been my ALL of my kids Doctor is quitting over this too. My younger kids are particularly pissed about that one. But all us know-nothing old farts are sitting back and willing to let you run your pie hole, Nick. But guess who you get to thank for having the… Read more »
trackback

[…] In a post yesterday I espoused the ”Moderate Delenda est” course for Conservatives since Moderates have been show for the cowards they are.  I submit that this strategy will not only be affective, but funny as hell.  […]

Nick Sharps
Guest
Nick Sharps
6 years 4 months ago

Whew. Saw the post, thought it was about me haha.

Sean
Guest
Sean
6 years 4 months ago
here’s a piece of the Federalist papers. the 1st one..written by Hamilton..says it better than I can. or at least more eloquently since by nature I’m exceedingly cranky and tend to use small and profane words to get my point across: And yet, however just these sentiments will be allowed to be, we have already sufficient indications that it will happen in this as in all former cases of great national discussion. A torrent of angry and malignant passions will be let loose. To judge from the conduct of the opposite parties, we shall be led to conclude that they… Read more »
Sean
Guest
Sean
6 years 4 months ago

oops…make that the any number of the latter[demagogues]..all though…..the former is just as true.

Aaron Spuler
Guest
6 years 4 months ago

Did anyone happen to notice that for the first time in American history, the government granted RIGHTS on its people? The founders specifically stated that RIGHTS came from the CREATOR, because if a government can grant rights, they can also take them away.

Sean
Guest
Sean
6 years 4 months ago

of course we noticed. is that not a part of the reason we are thoroughly pissed off?

Nick
Guest
Nick
6 years 4 months ago
Holy crap, I got my own post! That rules. Alright, well here we go. And for the record, I actually don’t really support the healthcare bill; I think it’ll wind up being costly and largely ineffective. I don’t, however, think it’s so horrible as people here seem to think. –My first “straw man,” I will admit was a straw man, but was also not intended to be a serious argument. I was going to leave that as my only comment to the entire healthcare debacle, since I’ve previously refrained from putting myself into the “only liberal on the blog” position… Read more »
Scott
Guest
Scott
6 years 4 months ago

This just proves something the Dems learned a long time ago.

You can tell some people anything for long enough and some of them are going to believe it as truth.

God Save Us.

Aaron Spuler
Guest
6 years 4 months ago

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

–Joseph Goebbels

Sean
Guest
Sean
6 years 4 months ago
Nick, I want to you pay special attention to those that have lived in either Canuckistan or the UK and other countries who have this kind of health care system. They will all without fail tell you just what an utter *clusterfuck* that system is. They moved here so they wouldn’t *die* due to the utter incompetence, and glacial slowness, of that bureaucratic nightmare of a system. They came *here* because, despite a few problems it’s the BEST health care system in the world. Any number of my family members, Aunts, Uncles, Cousins, are a part of it. My mother… Read more »
Julie
Guest
Julie
6 years 4 months ago

Not going to try to address your whole set of comments here, but there’s one thing you are quite wrong about. Health insurance isn’t interstate commerce. It’s been federally mandated for years now that health insurance companies can’t operate across state lines. So any given health insurance company is only *intra*state commerce.

Bit of a nitpick, but it seems a lot of these arguments are.

Sean
Guest
Sean
6 years 4 months ago

I haven’t read the new/old bill again yet, but I’ve heard that part of the bill fixes that Julie. If it does..they can then claim the commerce clause. ugh.

Brenna
Guest
Brenna
6 years 4 months ago

I actually did not know that!!!
THANK YOU! That is an amazingly useful piece of information!
And, thusly, makes the attempt to control these companies unconstitutional.

Nick Sharps
Guest
Nick Sharps
6 years 4 months ago

I wouldn’t exactly call it hysteria. I would definitely call it concern. Hysteria is described as unmanageable fear. I guarantee the people voicing their disgust at the growing government control can handle their fear very well.

Britt
Guest
Britt
6 years 4 months ago
Well, I don’t think there’s been a case like this ever brought to the Supreme Court; if they wind up agreeing with you and the AG’s then so be it. But historically, the Supreme Court has allowed a fairly broad interpretation of the commerce clause. Has it been overreaching at times? Probably, but that’s a decision for much smarter people than me to make; that’s why we have the Supreme Court. ____ Wickard v. Filburn, where the USSC ruled that a farmer growing wheat for his own use was affecting interstate commerce because if he had not been growing wheat… Read more »
Michael Z. Williamson
Guest
6 years 4 months ago

So, the theory is:

People will only buy insurance when they need it. This will destroy the industry, unless the industry can refuse to serve them (Sort of like a car insurance company won’t insure repairs if you sign up AFTER the wreck . Go figure).

Therefore, people who aren’t sick and don’t need insurance must be forced to buy into the pool, so those who are sick can benefit from the collective power.

From each, according to their ability, to each, according to their needs, for the greater collective good.

Nope, that’s not socialism.

Nick Sharps
Guest
Nick Sharps
6 years 4 months ago

Great analogy, I used it on my semi-liberal culinary teacher and he agreed that it would be a horrible way to conduct business. Score one for the home team.

Eric Tank
Guest
Eric Tank
6 years 4 months ago
Nooooo, not at all, Mad Mike. Something Nick may have missed – yes, as it stands right this second, the new healthcare mandate has government force being applied to force everyone (well, NEARLY everyone) to purchase insurance from private companies, because enough people balked over the notion that the government should have any authority to provide insurance. As an aside, in and of itself, that strikes me more as fascism than what I learn as socialism or communism. Back to the topic – those who don’t comply, as mentioned, will be fined, and subsidies will apply for those too poor… Read more »
Kristopher
Guest
Kristopher
6 years 4 months ago

Larry … Nick is right about one thing.

This crap sandwich will probably be held constitutional by the current SCOTUS.

If you look at tit, they did everything in it via punitive taxes and excessive regulation. Looks pretty familiar to any one who’s tangled with the NFA regs.

Which is why I want to go the Amendment route to fix this.

Dave Sohm
Guest
Dave Sohm
6 years 4 months ago

People need to remember that the reason you don’t have a lot of anti-bush rhetoric was that you didn’t start blogging until you had a book to sell, and that didn’t happen until late in bush’s term.

Also, to lump other conservative people’s opinions in with Larry’s blog shows a lack of attention given to the issue. It also shows that your argument is weak, because you can’t address the issues that Larry brings up, without supplementing them with other’s opinions.

I hope that made sense

bluesun
Guest
6 years 4 months ago

I hate this thing, as I have a personal policy and religion that says “hate all evil” (Romans 12:9, ‘yo).

I am going to be calm for now… but at this rate Oby will be repealing term limits. That will damage my calm.

Brenna
Guest
Brenna
6 years 4 months ago

I just got an email from Judas Iscariot. He writes, “Damn, at least I got 30 pieces of silver and a nice bag. Stupak didn’t even get the bag.”

Bend over America, time for your healthcare. Its cherry flavor… not that such things matter in forcibly issued suppositories.

Hank
Guest
Hank
6 years 4 months ago

I read recently that “regulate” meant “promote” way back when. If that’s the case, congress only has authority to promote interstate commerce, not to control it.

Sean
Guest
Sean
6 years 4 months ago

Someone came up with another way to argue the bill is unconstitutional. The 13th amendment. I hadn’t thought of that one but with being forced to either buy the insurance or pay a penalty…it works.

Nick
Guest
Nick
6 years 4 months ago
Larry: Bringing up Social Security and Medicare raises an interesting point. Both of those programs were massive expansions of federal power, but somehow have not led to the US becoming a socialist utopia/dystopia. Sure, they’re bloated and bankrupt and need massive reform. But they haven’t become a jumping-off point for the Socialist States of America. Why do you assume that this bill will be different? Comparing expansions of the power to regulate commerce to the interwar period is ridiculous. Our economy’s not great, but I’m not pushing a wheelbarrow full of dollar bills to the grocery store to buy a… Read more »
Sean
Guest
Sean
6 years 4 months ago
Nick, 37th? Hmmm here’s a thought for you. 1. The WHO is an offshoot of the UN 2. The UN an organization of nations who aside from the fact they couldn’t find their way out of a wet paper bag,with both hands, a flashligh, a map and GPS unit;…. HATE the US, AND are jealous of our wealth, and by strange coincidence..want that wealth GIVEN to them. [It’s called Wealth Redistribution] So you’ll excuse me if I don’t take anything coming out of an organization run by the UN, as gospel. You know..I actually started to come up with figures… Read more »
ScottTN
Guest
ScottTN
6 years 4 months ago

Bugei
Guest
Bugei
6 years 4 months ago
Nick: Yes, I’ll make that equation for you. Mandatory health care coverage = slavery. Because it means that you are not going to be permitted to make choices about your own life and your own body. The government will make those for you. Every socialized system of medicine anywhere in the world that I have seen thus far has restrictions on what you will receive in the way of medical care. Certainly most contain the restriction that you must participate and that you may not seek private help outside the system. Because you must participate, you no longer have the… Read more »
Nick
Guest
Nick
6 years 4 months ago

But once again, it’s a massive difference of scale. If you really don’t see the difference between forcing people to buy healthcare, and a system which kept millions of people defined as the property of other people, I don’t know what to tell you.

As for medical tourism, that’s for the wealthy elites–the ones who, if they lived here, would be going to John Hopkins all the time. As I said before, the US has the best healthcare in the world, for certain individuals. Some of those individuals happen to be foreign. But for the average person, other systems work better.

Bugei
Guest
Bugei
6 years 4 months ago
You don’t know what to tell me, Nick? Okay. Tell me that if I refuse to participate, I won’t be fined. And that if I refuse to pay the fine, people with guns won’t come to collect me. Tell me that. Because that’s what you would need to tell me to make me believe that this isn’t slavery. If you are forced to do something at gunpoint, you have become a slave. You seem to consider this a matter of degree, but it’s binary; you’re free or you’re not. And that’s how all the reasonable, rational, well-meaning citizens of Germany… Read more »
Dave
Guest
Dave
6 years 4 months ago
I find this kind of reasoned debated on the topic fascinating, but I wonder why no one has brought up what seems, to me, to be an obvious question: What if this is simply a face-saving political maneuver? Obama promised “Hope and Change” and, prior to this, I think everyone can agree that neither had yet been delivered. So, what does he do? He forces a bill through on healthcare that doesn’t *really* take effect for another four years: plenty of time for him to get out of office and have someone else repeal it. So, Obama gets credit for… Read more »
Nick
Guest
Nick
6 years 4 months ago

The face-saving makes sense to me, as does the idea that Democrats knew they were going to lose these seats anyway once Obamamania wore off and people realized he was just another politician (and not a particularly good one at that), so they pushed this through early in order to have the maximum advantage. It’s political suicide, but in the same way that a terminally ill person jumping out of an airplane without a parachute is suicide.

Dave
Guest
Dave
6 years 4 months ago

So, how do you feel about the “tanning tax”?

http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/24/news/economy/tanning_tax/

Interesting when you stop to think about who actually tans…

Bugei
Guest
Bugei
6 years 4 months ago

Well, it kind of smack of “sticking it to Whitey”. Just saying.

Sean
Guest
Sean
6 years 4 months ago

Wait it gets better. Same kind of thinking, that this is happening in Cali should surprise no one.
http://www.examiner.com/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2010m3d24-Lawmakers-want-to-ban-happy-meal-toys-to-curb-obesity-in-California

Oh and this bit of stupidity from New York:
http://home.peoplepc.com/psp/newsstory.asp?category=TopStories&id=20100317/66f53f9d-4e11-4734-b19c-0b5e361b1918

Banning SALT? Fucking idiots.

Other Dave
Guest
Other Dave
6 years 4 months ago

Yeah, the tan tax gets virtually no mention in the press. If the tax had been on certain hair-care products there would be no end of the press coverage.

Full disclosure: I used to “tan” for free because my friend owned a tanning salon. I’m in the pocket of “Big Tan”

wekm
Guest
6 years 3 months ago

Larry, once again, brilliant insight and analysis.

wpDiscuz