This was part of my answer to reader David B. in Imperialism: Obama Administration Threatens to Withhold Funds If Oklahoma Makes English The Offical Language Of The State. Here is what Dave had to say:

I missed the Viet Nam war by a year. I promised my father (a WWII decorated soldier) that I would go to college before I went into the military per his wishes. I got a job in law enforcement so I could work my way through college and have been doing it for over 33 years. When the first Gulf War began I was too old to enlist. When 9/11 came I did what I could as a detective but like many others I wanted to fight. There’s something inside most men that wants to do that I guess. I don’t know if it’s the same for women like it is with most men but I know there are plenty of courageous women out there for sure. For the first time in my life I feel that our country is in such peril, our liberties at such risk, our way of living in dire jeopardy, that I’m part of a real fight on the front lines. The enemy is sneaky, powerful, heavily financed, has legions of lemmings that will march in lock step for something that is a lie, a cliche, and a pipe dream of ignorant and oppressed people that have never learned self-reliance and self-respect. I finally got my fight.

As Glen Beck said in one of his programs (I am paraphrasing), we are living through historic times. One day you will be asked by a child – perhaps your own, or your grandchild – where were you when liberty was on the line? What did you do? What was it like? Were you scared?

We all have our fight now Dave.

In other news and opinion:

Obama’s CIA in turmoil; Panetta on the ledge; awaiting document dump

Why unions are “Astroturfing” health-care town halls. Reminds you of a slithering snake in the grass or a bunch of cockroaches. Calling animal and pest control – time to fumigate.

I find it interesting the Department of Homeland Security deems it necessary to warn of rightwing extremists, as they ignore the fact of leftwing extremism. As a point of fact, making its rounds within the United States is a little book titled The Coming Insurrection. From the product description on Amazon:

The Coming Insurrection is an eloquent call to arms arising from the recent waves of social contestation in France and Europe. Written by the anonymous Invisible Committee in the vein of Guy Debord—and with comparable elegance—it has been proclaimed a manual for terrorism by the French government (who recently arrested its alleged authors). One of its members more adequately described the group as “the name given to a collective voice bent on denouncing contemporary cynicism and reality.” The Coming Insurrection is a strategic prescription for an emergent war-machine to “spread anarchy and live communism.”

Written in the wake of the riots that erupted throughout the Paris suburbs in the fall of 2005 and presaging more recent riots and general strikes in France and Greece, The Coming Insurrection articulates a rejection of the official Left and its reformist agenda, aligning itself instead with the younger, wilder forms of resistance that have emerged in Europe around recent struggles against immigration control and the “war on terror.”

Hot-wired to the movement of ‘77 in Italy, its preferred historical reference point, The Coming Insurrection formulates an ethics that takes as its starting point theft, sabotage, the refusal to work, and the elaboration of collective, self-organized forms-of-life. It is a philosophical statement that addresses the growing number of those—in France, in the United States, and elsewhere—who refuse the idea that theory, politics, and life are separate realms.

I eagerly await the Department of Homeland Security’s admonitions of the dangers of leftwing extremism.

Our own Declaration of Independence – a bit more eloquent – was used as a preamble to describe the abuse of power by Great Britain and subsequent call-to-action for independence. The beginning is a generalization of the human condition under any form of tyrannical government:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government.

Civilization is a thin veneer that separates us from the hardships of raw survival. While western civilization has provided us with the opportunity to enjoy the more heady pursuit of philosophy, our love affair with the mind and its capacity for abstract thought often precludes us from noting the ephemeral nature of civilized discourse. Such is the blessing and the curse of living in a society such as ours. In our ignorance of the transient nature of civilization we are freed from a constant anxiety visiting itself upon us, blinding us to a harsher reality that peeks from just around the corner – that mass violence can, and has, occurred in America.

The start of the Revolutionary War did not come about through “light and transient causes”, but through “a long train of abuses and usurpations”. Historians estimate that approximately 40-45% of the colonists actively supported the rebellion against England, 15-20% of the population of the thirteen colonies remained loyal to the British Crown, and the remaining 35-45% attempted to remain neutral. While hard to gauge how many males would support violence as a means to secure liberty from oppression, I believe the number not to be small. How many of these would consider it their duty “to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security”? I am of the impression, given my arguments below, that any such action taken by the citizenry of this country would quickly escalate, swelling the numbers of those opposed to a power grab by a centralized government and willing to take up arms to settle their grievances. If one believes I am a fear-monger, think of this: America has enjoyed one of the longest stretches of peace within our borders than almost every other nation on this planet. There were those who thought something like 9/11 could not happen here. They were wrong. Given the current supercharged political climate and the blistering pace at which standard pillars of American society are falling, I do not belong to the “it can’t happen here” crowd. I do, however, hope it does not happen here. Unfortunately, the signs I see do not point me in a direction of comfort concerning this matter. Many whom I have spoken to share the same sentiments. Unless the current administration changes course and desists in usurping the personal rights held dearly since the birth of this nation, it is my belief that a great violence shall overtake our nation.

In the struggle for the life and death of liberty there exists no greater potential for instigating revolution than trampling on the will of the majority in an attempt to steal away rights endeared to our hearts. As America watches treasured traditions and freedoms quickly vanish from the landscape, it is my fear that battles fought with words will morph into something far more nefarious.

White House spy programs, carbon taxes, the plunging value of the dollar, a stimulus package that is not stimulating, exploding deficits that saddle us and future generations with huge tax burdens, government takeovers of the private sector, and a slew of other offenses are beginning to build up a certain sort of pressure. Should health care be rammed down our throats, whether along with cap-and-trade or not, the result could very well be explosive.

Any society, particularly ours, is nothing more than a social contract among citizens to follow a basic set of precepts. As our individual survival is paramount, these group covenants typically address issues related to our own physical and mental well-being, allowing the parties to enjoy a certain level of freedom and to thrive. Don’t murder me; don’t steal from me; don’t cheat me; protect me. In our own peculiar American civilization, many of these intersect with the ideas of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These are the most basic tenets of our civilization, and in reality apply to most Western civilizations. They lead to laws against killing and stealing; laws of fair-business practices, and the recruiting and training of a military. With these basic needs protected, remaining resources concentrate on agriculture, infrastructure, education, and a host of other higher functions: philosophy, mathematics, science, engineering, and the arts, to name a few.

In the advanced stages of civilization it becomes easy to forget just how close we are to savagery. If you take away the contract – or a centralized power continuously and unabatedly attacks our liberties, usurps our power, and abuses us – then like a cornered wild animal we will turn on those who commit such grievous insults, grab back our liberty and take back our power. At first, the attempts will be benign, including legal actions such as 10th Amendment assertion of states rights. However, should the courts rule for the centralized power, allowing the assaults on liberty to continue, then rebellion in some form or another may take place. Will it be the pursuit of legal resolution , civil disobedience, secession, domestic terrorism, or outright rebellion? While hard to quantify, qualitatively the list appears to progress from most likely to least likely, with the possibility of overlap. However, domestic terrorism is a real threat – from both leftwing and rightwing extremists. As the Irish Republican Army once told the Prime Minister of England – we only have to be right once, you have to get it right every time. Such actions would forever change the landscape of our country and I fear the current administration is on track to create such an explosive atmosphere. My fear is that any armed resistance from one side will quickly draw the opposing side into conflict. Whether the sphere of influence for either side widens, drawing in those more moderate to the conflict, remains to be seen. We have already witnessed leftwing SEIU members commit acts of violence against peaceful town hall protesters. This after what almost appears like a cloaked tacit approval to “hit them back twice as hard”. The source of the last statement – the President of the United States. Political language is often parsed for hidden meanings, which is why politicians must be very careful how they use the powerful weapon of speech. For some, it will be difficult to discern whether the leader of the free world, through either naivety or actual support, is recommending violent resistance through a form of passive aggressive use of speech. Combined with flagging spy programs, pre-screened audiences at Presidential town halls, plants at Congressional town halls masquerading as doctors to lend credibility to a health care reform plan which, at its very core, cannot be defended, the signs are troubling. Naturally, the natives are getting restless. Years of not trusting government, combined with the current political atmosphere, the level of engagement by those opposed to the path charted by a very liberal administration, buyer’s remorse by many who voted for “hope and change” and are getting more than they bargained for, and some Congressional members stating they will vote for health care reform in the face of majority disapproval by constituents, is setting the stage for a showdown. What shape the conflict will take remains to be seen.

The civic body can only take so much insult before rebellion. No other species on the planet possesses the savagery and cunning of homosapiens; there is a reason we rule the earth. Our higher functioning brain evolved for survival – civilization is a side effect, and is nothing more than another tool for survival. Take away this tool, and others quickly take its place. We may cherish our moral and ethical framework, but events in history prove over and over again that this framework has no power over our more basal instincts when the facade is ripped away – regardless of how we wish it to be. This is the human condition. Everyone will throw out the rules at one point or another if pushed over the brink.

In such a situation, instinct is now the driving force to reacquire principles and rights, and the sphere of influence for social contracts in such situations shrinks drastically. It is a blessing and a curse of our own civilization that we are unable – and unwilling – to see just how fragile all of this is. We spend so much time caressing our ideologies and cooing over how clever we are that we miss the point. To survive we must be pragmatic before we are ideologues, or at least a better balance must be struck between the two. There is so much more we need to do to ensure our own survival and the survival of our civilization, and it must start with those who, unbeknown to them, are stirring the pot by absconding with our liberties. That they do this with ideology is the real danger. Blinded by this very ideology, they are myopic to the consequences of their actions. There is nothing conducive whatsoever in any of the proposals coming from the liberal establishment of this country. An insurmountable intellectual gap separates reality from anything resembling utilitarian ideas. The reactionary forces will themselves be ideological, for it is principles and ideas which drive us towards and away from civilized behavior – they are our only point of reference. America’s leadership is setting America up for full-scale disillusionment. We sit on a social powder keg.

Take for example the complete lack of pragmatism regarding cap-and-trade. First, if one believes global warming is man-made, the current cap-and-trade bill only moves around the chess pieces as it were. In the process, a transfer of wealth from energy using states to states using less energy through the purchase of carbon credits on a market will have zero affect on the global climate as greenhouse gasses will not be reduced. Even if greenhouse emission reductions are mandated, as they are, if China and India do not participate, America is put at an economic disadvantage. Where is the pragmatism here?

Recently the Australian Senate rejected cap-and-trade due to a seismic shift in the public’s opinion concerning man-made global warming. It now appears that evidence is pointing to other sources of global warming and not industry as the cause. Yet we still suffer from global warming hysteria in this country. Read A Tax On Thin Air. Using what now amounts to shaky science, we are about to submit our economy and future generations to an oppressive centralized regime for reasons that appear more groundless by the day. Try to entertain an opposing opinion to the anthropocentric global warming meme and you are likely to be compared to a holocaust denier. It is this complete lack of imagination on the part of liberals that is so infuriating. And this is not the only subject matter of which liberals are guilty of such transgressions against simple logic. Their tendency towards the illogical on a host of issues and the subsequent sacrifice of our liberties in pursuit of a solution that places more control into the hands of a centralized behemoth defies common sense. Yet here we are.

Reihan Salam writes in Pelosi Is Wrong (emphasis mine):

If Obamacare eventually passes in some form, I’ll make you a guarantee: these ferocious protests will keep getting bigger and louder.

To get a glimpse of America’s future, consider France. The French have the health-care system that Americans desperately want [polls strongly repudiate this last point - I am not quite sure what the Mr. Salam was thinking when he wrote this rather obvious misrepresentation]: it combines private providers and patient choice with a large and generous public insurance system, one that keeps out-of-pocket costs extremely low for working families. The French system is also dramatically cheaper than our own. But whenever there’s a move to tweak the system in some way say, to gently nudge patients to get the approval of a general practitioner before seeing a specialist the French go absolutely mad with rage. Doctors go on strike, massive street protests ensue, the riot police come out: it’s a crazy scene.

And it makes perfect sense: as more life and death decisions are placed in the hands of democratically elected legislators, politics become more than an occasional nuisance. When your wages are stagnant or your health insurance premiums are zooming skyward, you don’t blame your boss or bad luck; instead, you blame the knuckleheads running, or rather ruining, the country. You come to feel as though you can’t just wait until the next election: You need to make your voice heard now even if that means taking to the streets or throwing a punch. We can call the protesters un-American. Yet America has gone through long periods of roiling unrest before and it can happen again.

As CNSNews points out:

Self-identified conservatives outnumber self-identified liberals in all 50 states of the union, according to the Gallup Poll.

At the same time, more Americans nationwide are saying this year that they are conservative than have made that claim in any of the last four years.

In 2009, 40% percent of respondents in Gallup surveys that have interviewed more than 160,000 Americans have said that they are either “conservative” (31%) or “very conservative” (9%). That is the highest percentage in any year since 2004.

Some may not wait for the next election. I plead with our leaders to tread lightly or I fear they may send us down a path none of us really wants. Whether from the left, right, or middle, things could get ugly out there.

Let us hope it is ideas and not violence that resolves our differences. In my humble opinion, the Obama administration is pushing the envelope and the buttons that could very well lead to the violence I and most of you would wish to avoid. The time for leadership is now. Obama, the time to listen to the American people is now.

The above essay, written August of last year, started me on a quest to understand if there is a constitutional non-violent way to take back our liberties from an oppressive centralized regime. When I came across the idea and constitutionality of nullification and the fact it has been used successfully in the past in a non-violent way as pointed out by Judge Napolitano, it became clear to me nullification is the path forward to regaining our liberty without resorting to violence. Failing that, our only option is to live under tyranny or resort to violence. I reject the last two options as necessary IF we are willing to do what is necessary to take our country back.

Thomas Jefferson is quoted as saying, “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”

This is more true today than ever before.

In other news and opinion:

Just say no to jihadi-dumping in your backyard

Cone of Shame Award: Democrat Rep. Melissa Bean

ACORN Watch: What happens in Vegas…

MSNBC: Guys Carrying Guns to Rallies Are Racists, Especially This Guy Whose Skin Color We Will Now Proceed to Hide from Your View

Detonating the narrative: MSNBC and the gun-guy at the Obama rally

McCain: You might be seeing the beginning of a peaceful revolt in America.

That’s a question asked by Joe Gandleman at The Moderate Voice (whatever that means). Channeling Marc Ambler from the Atlantic, Mr. Gandleman asks:

The emerging narrative in a lot of the major press coverage of heatlh care reform is that President Barack Obama has lost control of his message, which is why he was out on the hustings today at a town hall meeting. But now The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder writes that he now senses a slight relief at the White House.

Why? Because, according to Ambinder, there’s a growing feeling that the Republicans may have lost control of their message and that GOPers at Town Halls have provided a picture of some of the party’s most extreme, angry elements — which won’t convince the Blue Dog Democrats to panic and not support the plan and could well scare off independent swing voters.

Here are key portions of what he says in a post titled “How Conservatives Are Blowing Their Chance.” He notes that the mood at the White House has changed from one week ago:

A week later, and the Atlantic’s tricorder readings are picking up much calmer electromagnetic energy from the White House. Getting Democrats to attend the town hall meetings was really an intermediate goal. But Democrats are beginning to notice that opponents of health care reform have discredited themselves. They ramped up much too quickly. When smaller, conservative groups Astroturfed, they inevitably brought to the meetings the type of Republican activist who was itching for a fight and who would use the format to vent frustrations at President Obama himself. There were plenty of activists who really wanted to know about health care, and some who were probably misinformed — scared out of their chairs — to some degree, but the loudest voices tended to be the craziest, the most extreme, the least sensible, and the most easy to mock.

Ambinder suggests that conservatives had a window of opportunity to make their case seriously which “required a certain restraint — and a willingness to traffic in at least approximate truths — and an ability to make distinctions within their own ranks about which tactics were valid and which tactics were venomous. It also required a sophistication about the media.”

And what about the media? Ambinder contends media reports were not helpful to the GOP because reports were done in either two ways: “they credulously reported the louder, angrier voices (inherently damaging to Republicans in this case) or they reported on the political architecture of the town hall meetings, which plays down the substance of the protests.”

The Blue Dog Democrats’ swing constitutes aren’t angry,” he writes, “and the Blue Dogs know this. They’re political independents for whom the sanctity of the process is important. These are the type of voters who like President Obama because he appears willing to bring people together even though they don’t agree with their policies.”

In short, he argues, the right has lost control of its message, much as the left did under Bush. Lawmakers of both parties:

…found their meetings full of engorged spleens. Unrestrained, these town hall meetings are going to turn off the type of voters Republicans most need to pressure Blue Dog Democrats — independents who don’t have red genes or blue genes.

This has been the problem with the GOP in recent years: most of its pitches, when the rubber meets the road, eventually boil down to arguments that seem aimed at wavering Republicans and the style and tone of the rhetoric is — as we have called it here — the confrontional, angry and demonizing talk radio political culture. That works fine with Republicans, but it can only cause a counter reaction in wavering liberal Democrats who began to sour on Obama and independent voters wanting to follow a debate don’t get much substance hearing people yell about socialism, Marxism, Nazi Germany or Obama death panels.

In the end, this may come down to which side discredits itself first. Getting media coverage isn’t always positive if the images that come out are unpleasing to others who are not just not on your side but on the fence deciding which is the side worth joining.

So does this mean that Obama is on the descent as Ambinder suggests due to the images the meetings are emitting?

Not necessarily. Political veteran David Gergen has a different take on it and can foresee health care reform being defanged or even derailed due to the angry protests, which he notes don’t just involve talk radio and special interest group types but other Americans who distrust the change:

In this week’s issue of the National Journal, correspondents Brian Friel and Richard E. Cohen provide a valuable insight into possible endgames. They report that there are four possible outcomes:

(1) A major bipartisan reform bill is passed;
(2) A major Democratic reform bill is passed over nearly united Republican opposition;
(3) The Democrats cannot agree among themselves and pass Health Care Lite, a very watered down version of reform;
(4) Failure

Looking at the chances today, in the midst of all this brouhaha, one would have to say that the odds for outcomes one and two are going down. It is hard to see how a lot of Republicans will sign up for a bipartisan bill in the teeth of this opposition; similarly, it may be tougher for moderate Democrats, especially new members from Republican-leaning districts, to sign on to a Democratic-only bill. That means the odds are going up for outcomes three and, yes, four.

Does this mean that reform is dying? Not at all. It is still possible that if the protests continue at a high decibel level, more people in the middle will grow disgusted and rally to the President. And given his political and rhetorical talents, it is more than possible that Barack Obama himself can turn this around. But for the moment, the raucous clips coming out of Senator Specter’s session with his constituents along with other clips from other town halls — as offensive as they are to many (including me) — are also presenting a growing threat to reform.

So pick the theory of your choice — and come September, see which proved to be correct.

I could not help myself and commented as follows (I add additional information below not found in the original comment):

The first theory ignores the real data – polls. Nothing is mentioned about the polls because the first theory fails on its merits if polling data is included int the analysis.

Polling indicates a growing dissatisfaction with ObamaCare that drops by the day. He is losing seniors big time – and they are the largest voting bloc in mid-term elections. He is also losing independent voters big time. Many independents are experiencing buyers remorse and know the bait and switch Obama pulled on them. If you attempt to argue that no independents are attending town halls and shouting angrily as politicians literally lie to their faces, then you present an opinion that is patently absurd. As the town halls became more vocal, support for ObamaCare eroded further – not something one would expect of a backlash. Blue Dogs and other Democrats are quite aware of this and it is the poll numbers that will dictate their voting behavior. Should they choose to ignore the polls and vote for ObamaCare, look for a real backlash in 2010. So theory one looks like Swiss cheese upon further scrutiny and is not worthy of additional discussion (the extra CO2 required would exacerbate global warming).

Marc Ambinder of the Atlantic is following the media script of “backlash, backlash, backlash!” in an effort to silence the town halls, because they are eroding support for ObamaCare. Of course, nobody is listening to such nonsense. Whatever does pass – if anything at all – will be a watered down version of reform. August 22nd is national recess rally day – look for some real fireworks by millions, not a few hundred at a town hall. It won’t be so easy to dismiss that level of protest. I can’t wait to see Nanny State Nancy try. She is the gift that keeps on giving.

Blue Dogs are also aware of the opt out amendments in Florida and Utah and up to ten other states that will be using the 10th amendment to fight ObamaCare. Throw that dynamic in the mix.

If you want real backlash, check out Little girl at Obama town hall has not-so-random political connections. Documented, proved and case closed. Obama lies once again, stating the members of his town hall were not screened. Of course, anyone with half a brain knew better. Look for further plunging poll numbers, the obvious dynamic described as: Obama opens his mouth on the subject the numbers drop. Marc’s sense of “relief” at the White House belongs in the same boat as Obama stating he was never for a single payer system – fabricated.

Obama’s coattails are becoming an anchor.

Update: Backed up by Mickey Kaus (via Glenn Reynolds)

In other news and opinion:

Democrats now taking refuge at SEIU offices

BUSTED!: “Obama As Hitler” Poster Was A Democrat/Union Plant At John Dingell Townhall! UPDATED with video interview!

If you are a liberal, how do you live with yourself? First, you have the tape where Obama admits he wants a single-payer system – exhibit A evidence. Then, his admission in yesterday’s town hall that he has never been for a single-payer system – exhibit B evidence. Conclusion: Obama Lies.

Now you have Obama claiming there were not plants or screening in his town hall – exhibit C evidence. Michelle Malkin dispels that myth – exhibit D evidence. Conclusion: Obama Lies.

Now a plant by Dingell at a Town Hall?

If one has to resort to lies and underhanded tactics to make a point or sell a product or piece of legislation, it stands to reason that a sane person would begin to question the peddled snake oil and become either cautious or outright distrustful of the whole thing.

Video: Nelson strikes back against ObamaCare

How much can we now trust this: GA congressman describes hate mail, Nazi graffiti after protests

Okay people, time to wake up. Gateway Pundit: Bus–ted… Obama Bussed In Supporters For New Hampshire Town Hall (Video).

Funny… During the meeting Barack Obama told his supporters:

“I don’t want people thinking I just have a bunch of plants in here.”

No, we sure wouldn’t want that to happen.

People might think it was all a staged dog and pony show.

One of the comments for the Gateway Pundit called it:

it was a pony and horseshit show, without the pony……..

UPDATE 1: 9/9/2009 The Nightmare That Is The Senate Finance Committee Healthcare Proposal – RINOCare Gone Wild. Pay attention to what the Senate is doing right under our noses. It is important to understand what the Senate Finance Committee healthcare proposal means to you. Hint: it’s not good.

Update 2: Finally someone is talking about the constitutionality of ObamaCare. It is this very issue which strengthens the case made by Dr. Lawrence Hunter to use the two Jim Demint amendments and pressure five Senate Democrats on the Finance Committee to stand with their party. What Senator wants to stake their careers on a bill that may pass only to be repealed later? The real question comes down to how long can the states tie up this legislation in the courts. We only need three years. Is ObamaCare Constitutional?

Watch for more of this to come. Utah is looking into using its state constitution and the 10th Amendment protection of states rights from an encroaching federal government to opt out of ObamaCare should it pass Congress.

SALT LAKE CITY — Republican Utah lawmaker Carl Wimmer, R-Herriman, wants Utahns to have the option not to take part in a federal health care program.

He says he’s drafting a proposed amendment to Utah’s Constitution; one he believes will get overwhelming approval.

“We’re going to pass a state Constitutional amendment stating that people will not be forced by the national government to purchase health care insurance and that small businesses will not be forced to provide them,” Wimmer said.

Voters, of course, would have to pass the amendment, and it would have to get at least two-thirds majority in the Utah House and Senate. But Wimmer says it’s worth it, no matter what comes out of the Federal health care reform effort.

He says it’s a state’s rights issue and that Utah has made good progress on its own reform plans. “We don’t need help from the Federal government figuring this thing out, we know how to do it and we’re able to do it far more efficiently than they are,” he says.

Such an amendment could lead to cuts in federal funding and to lawsuits, but Wimmer says it’s time states “wean themselves” from federal dollars and that lawsuits may be the only way to “turn the tables” on the Federal government.

The course for the ObamaCare ship is in uncharted waters, while ways to defeat it are not as difficult as one might think. First, Congress needs a bill for the President to sign. In this and the prevous post I outline the process whereby this can come to pass. These are not my ideas, but come from two very distinguished gentlemen, their biographies presented in my previous post. Keep reading.

Even if passed by Congress, expect strong resistance with a slew of state’s rights movements via the 10th amendment and subsequent lawsuits. There is plenty of time to tie this legislation up in the courts. Long enough, in fact, for the opportunity to derail the legislation by repealling it in a future Congress. However, if enough states fight Obama’s attempt to sieze control and increase the powers of federal government the fissures and fault lines created by this backlash would not favor ObamaCare. What vulnerable Senator or Representative really wants to stake their careers on legislation that may pass, only to possibly be killed later, or that would create such an outcry against federal powers as to start a movement of decentralizing power back to the states? In the end, polling and passion will win the day and minds will be changed. We are living through history, and many of us are actively a part of it. As Obama has shown us, we can no longer take liberty and freedom for granted. It is the duty of every American who cherishes liberty for themselves and future generations to take to the streets and town halls, to encourage state legislatures to resist the federal governement, and to call Senators and Representatives and make their voices heard. This is a beast that can be slaughtered.

Florida is also asserting 10th Amendment State’s Rights under the U.S. Consitution (emphasis mine):

On the heels of a successful state-level resistance to the 2005 Real ID Act, activists and state legislators alike are focusing their efforts on state governments as a way to resist new federal programs.

The latest? Health Care.

In response to what some opponents see as a Congress that doesn’t represent their interests, State Legislators are looking to the nearly-forgotten American political tradition of nullification as a way to reject any potential national health care program that may be coming from Washington.

The most recent effort comes from Florida State Senator Carey Baker and State Representative Scott Plakon, who this week filed a proposed State Constitutional Amendment (HJR37) as a means to prevent Floridians from being affected by any Federal Health Care Legislation. If approved by the legislature, Florida residents could be voting on it as early as 2010.

HJR37 would deny the ability of any new law to impose demands, restrictions or penalties on health care choices on Floridians. Versions of proposed federal health care reform legislation have included insurance coverage mandates, and certain penalties on employers who fail to provide employee health insurance.

It states, in part:

(1) A law or rule shall not compel, directly or indirectly, any person, employer, or health care provider to participate in any health care system

(2) A person or employer may pay directly for lawful health care services and shall not be required to pay penalties or fines for paying directly for lawful health care services. A health care provider may accept direct payment for lawful health care services and shall not be required to pay penalties or fines for accepting direct payment from a person or employer for lawful health care services.

A similar measure, called the Health Care Freedom Act, has already passed in Arizona, and residents of that state will have the opportunity to vote on it in 2010. Sources close to the Tenth Amendment Center say that more than ten other states may see such proposals introduced in the coming session.

Of course, this may not even be necessary as outlined at the Social Security Insitute here by Dr. Larry Hunter:

While a constitutional amendment is a sound and desirable backup measure, and a powerful prophylactic against future over reach by Washington, Wimmer and his compatriots are strategically positioned to drastically reduce the chances of nationalized healthcare ever occurring in the first place. To do so, they need to prevail upon Republican U.S. Senator Bob Bennett to stop trying to negotiate a version of ObamaCare Lite with the White House and his Democratic Senate Colleagues.

Senator Bennett’s version of ObamaCare, which he has introduced with Oregon Democratic Senator Ron Wyden as The Healthy Americans Act (S. 391), is really nothing more than ObamaCare in drag—a Trojan RHINO with ObamaCare hiding inside ready to be smuggled into the country disguised as a “bipartisan compromise.” Bennett’s “solution” to the problems afflicting the healthcare system is not a conservative, market-based solution that one would expect a conservative Republican Senator to promote; it is not a plan that encourages and promotes individual self-reliance; it is RHINOCare (Republican Healthcare In Name Only) that simply wraps ObamaCare in a Republican skin and does not reflect conservative principles and values.

The bill would end the employer tax exclusion for employer-based health-insurance benefits and replace it with a combination of direct federal subsidies and individual tax deductions. In other words, it would increase people’s dependency on Washington dramatically. Mandatory insurance premiums would be collected through automatic payroll deductions from workers’ paychecks, which would be enforced by the IRS. Employers also would be required to pay into the nationalized healthcare system on a payment schedule based on number of employees, employer revenue and an average-plan premium—clearly a tax on employers to fund universal heath coverage run by the federal government.

Senator Bennett’s bill would replace the employer as the tax wedge in the health-insurance market with a direct government tax-and-subsidy wedge designed to drive the after-tax price of healthcare below market-clearing levels—it’s called price controls and it will lead inevitably to healthcare rationing. Hence, the bill would replace one poison with another: Rather than having the employer make critical decisions about what kind of healthcare is available to workers, as the current system does, government would assume a much more direct and active role in making these determinations. For example, the Wyden-Bennett plan would replace the current health system with one that is heavily regulated by the federal government. Individuals would have access only to plans permitted by the government, and they would be required by federal law to purchase such a plan.

The federal government would standardize the entire insurance market through direct mandates and regulations. The federal government would determine which health plans people could buy. The bill would establish a standard benefits package.

The bill requires all individuals to purchase government-defined health coverage without any real choice for individuals to pick a plan that best suits their needs. Senator Bennett even requires that all health insurance policies pay for abortions.

The plan would use direct government regulation to “squeeze out inefficiencies” in the system. In other words, the system would rely upon a new federal bureaucracy to implement “cost-control” measures that would ration and delay care to reduce overall healthcare spending.

Let’s call a spade a spade: Wyden-Bennett represents a form of healthcare fascism in which government and private insurance companies work hand-in-glove (an insidious “public-private partnership”) to control who spends how much, on what medical goods and services, for whom, under what circumstances and on what schedule. While the bill would leave a private-insurance façade on the system, Senator Bennett is actually proposing to turn healthcare over to the government to run, making private insurance companies and healthcare providers essentially agents of the federal government.

Dr. Hunter continues to describe why there is an important political reason for Senator Bob Bennett to stop negotiating with the White House on health care, how the Democrats could ram through a version of health care reform via the reconciliation process, and how Senator Jim DeMint offered a point-of-order amdenment (passed unanimously) and motion to instruct the Conferees (79 yeah votes) that would all but kill the reconciliation process, only to have Senate Budget Committee Chairman, Kent Conrad, ignore the 60-vote requirement and allow it to be removed from the Budget Resolution in Conference. Everyone lives by the rules, unless you’re and Senator. It is elitist and dishonest, in the least, to ignore rules while expecting the rest of us to live by them. Call your Senator and Representative and ensure they commit themselves to the rules that, in one case, all of them voted for. Read My Discussion With Lewis K. Uhler – How 5 Republican Senators May Hold The Future Of Healthcare In Their Hands.

Dr. Hunter makes an excellent point that a constitutional amendment is a sound and desirable backup measure, and a powerful prophylactic against future over-reach by Washington. Even if ObamaCare passes, it is this my belief that states around the country draft resolutions and amendments that reassert state’s rights, putting the federal governement and the Obama administration on notice to tread lightly and expect one hell of a fight if they even attempt to tip-toe on our rights. Time to put the lot of them in thier place or throw the bums out. Many inside the beltway should thank their lucky stars that tar-and-feathering are out of fashion.

Stay out of our lives.

In othe news and opinion:

A must see video that should be passed on. The Public Plan Deception – It’s Not About Choice. Three public statements advocates of single-payer health insurance explain that a health care bill with the “government monopoly option” would move America toward a single-payer government health care system. In the video Professor Jacob Hacker admits, publicly, that:

Someone once said to me this is a Trojan Horse for single-payer. Well it’s not a Trojan Horse, its just right there (audience laughter). I’m telling you, we’re going to get there, over time, slowly, but we will move away from reliance on employment based health insurance as we should, but we’ll do it in a way that we won’t frighten people into believing they are going to lose their private insurance.

Watch the entire video. Email it. It is damning to the narrative of the Obama administration and its liberal allies – it pulls aside the curtain and allows us to peak behind the stage where we find the naked emperor.

The gift that keeps on giving. Dick Durbin, who as you remember compared America to Nazi Germany opens his pie hole and ticks off another segment of the public content until now with sitting on the sidelines. He accomplishes this task, free of charge, by stating the town hall meetings are clearly orchestrated and insulting a growing segment of the American public. I mean, you can’t buy that kind of motivation, the type of motivation that awakens a growing number of us to get out and make our voices heard. If any orchestration is going on, it’s people like Dick Durban and Nancy Pelosi, and Obama who are the wind in our sails, and I thank them for that. Keep up the good work and watch as more of us join the largest movement since Civil Rights. Note to self – liberals unable to follow simple logic. The more they open their mouths and accuse people like me and you of being automatons when it is clearly their side that is orchestrating violence at the town hall meetings, clearly liberal organizations such as the SEIU that are robots at the beck and call of Obama the citizen spy master, the more of us show up, the angrier we are, the more desperate they look, and the more the poll numbers for health care plummet. Anybody home in that brain there Dick? Obama? Rahm? Nancy? Any liberal?

Please, keep talking. Don’t ever stop. It’s like free advertisement when liberal leaders decide to bloviate ad nauseum and explain how good their version of health care is for us, yet refuse to back a resolution that would require them to “enjoy” the same benefits as their own constituents. An on August 22nd, when the recess rally occurs, liberals like Dick will look like fools and skulk back under their rocks. At that time, only a few brain dead liberals will buy the already lifeless meme of orchestrated resistance when they see millions of people taking to the streets. Ahhh, I love the smell of crybabies in the morning.

The Washington Times agrees, the polling data does not back up the protesters are scripted. Drooping polls undercut scripted protest claims

CRITICAL: White House continues spy campaign: White House Launches Health Tattle-Tale Site on another .gov website. The site is here. Don’t forget to turn yourself in by using the contact section of the page. Ask them to address this video. Amazing how many lies these people will attempt to propagate in a vain attempt to spread the meme of “ObamaCare” is good for you. Watch this one backfire and the polls to drop even lower. Perchance the older site was inundated with millions of emails? Let’s do it again. Melt the phone (202-501-0282) and email of Lee Ellis (lee.ellis@gsa.gov), policy administrator of the GSA Federal Acquisition Service which assign .Gov domains and creates the guidelines for the use of .Gov domains. Be courteous.

More protests in Austin. Some protests in Massachusetts. Did I just read that?

Death panels? What death panels? Oh, those death panels

Rep. Tsongas tries to explain why Congress is exempt from Obamacare. Fails.

“Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.”

Tsongas (D-MA): I won’t take ObamaCare because I have better options. Wow, the truth from a Democrat!? Quick, somebody turn her in to flag@whitehouse.gov. She’s spreading disinformation! It’s fishy I tell you!

It appears as if Obama’s coattails have become an anchor. Net approval for Dem Senators declining twice as fast as GOP counterparts

Dems Continue “Listening Tour”– Fists, Boots, Bullhorns, Stomping Heads, Smashing Faces, Assaults Included. I can’t wait for the 22nd. A little camera off in the background to document a few things, some thug(s) about to commit an act of stupidity their tiny brains can’t begin to comprehend, and then me. By the time I am done defending myself, said thug(s) will be spending so much time in the hospital they’ll name a wing after them. It will be called the Stupidity Wing – fully paid for by the SEIU.