Cross-posted at the Wolves of Liberty.

When the federal government violates your rights, you’re not supposed to wait four years for new politicians in the hope that they’ll fix it. You’re not supposed to wait two, or four, or more years for some black-robed judge to pronounce that they’ve violated your rights. You are supposed to resist those violations of your liberty as they happen – and it is your state’s solemn duty to do the same…Michael Boldin

Michael Boldin’s post We Refuse over at the Tenth Amendment Center (TAC) defines the core beliefs he holds as founder of the TAC:

The Tenth Amendment codifies in law this principle of popular sovereignty – that “We the People” of the several states created the federal government to be our agent for certain, enumerated purposes – and nothing more. But unfortunately, that’s not how things have been working, and very little that the government does is actually authorized by the constitution. And, this is a problem that didn’t just start in January 2009 – it’s been going on a long, long time.

He then asks the question, “What to do about it?” (emphasis mine):

Question – What do we do about it?

• Do we call and email our representatives in Congress and ask them to limit their own power?

• Do we march on D.C. and demand that the government limit its own power?

• Do we sue them in their own courts and ask their judges to limit their power?

• Do we vote the bums out in 2010, or 2012 – and ask new politicians to limit their own power?

Thomas Jefferson and James Madison both warned us that if the federal government ever became the sole and exclusive arbiter of the extent of its own powers – that power would endlessly grow…regardless of elections, separation of powers, courts, or other vaunted parts of our system.

Guess what – they were right. For a hundred years, we the people have been suing, and marching, and lobbying, and voting the bums out – but yet…year in and year out, government continues to grow and your liberty continues to diminish – and it doesn’t matter who is the president, or what political party controls congress – the growth of power in the federal government never stops.

The problem we face today is not about personalities or political parties – it’s about power. Until we address the absolute fact that the federal government has too much power, things will never change.

The emphasized text defines the very crux of the issue that surfaces when we begin to take it upon ourselves to change a party from within. To believe this actually makes a difference in the current environment of continuous growth in federal power is dangerous. The real issue that must be tackled is the growth of the federal government, how and why this growth occurred, why it is anathema to the very principles held by our founders, and what to do about it. Dr. Larry Hunter writes in The Soft Despotism of Democratic Fascism:

By all means my fellow Americans, go to the polls in November and vote out the bums who are most aggressively subverting our free-market republic and transforming it into Democratic Fascism, i.e., Democrats. But just know when you do, the people you replace them with, Republicans, are themselves subverting the American free-market republic by offering nothing but Socialism Lite as an alternative.

So many scoundrels; so few alternatives.

Had John McCain been elected president in 2008, we almost certainly by this time would have seen a version of RomneyCare enacted into law, which is a lite version of ObamaCare, an idea hatched inside conservative think tanks as a Socialist Lite alternative to HillaryCare all those years ago—can’t stand to be the Movement of No don’t you know.

A trial run of a scaled-down model of the democratic fascist healthcare reform machine was enacted into law with the Medicare Prescription Drugs (Part D) program in 2003 by a Republican president and Republican Congress: a Rube Goldberg device that conscripts the private sector to run the democratic fascist drug machinery, complete with a lite version of an individual mandate—call it contracting out tyranny. Indeed, RomneyCare and its prescription-drug prototype is precisely the template the Democrats used to forge public-private insurance and drug cartels beneath a private patina. No wonder the stock prices of the pharmaceutical companies and the biggest health insurance companies rose markedly during the run up to ObamaCare and right after it was signed into law…

…With only a few exceptions, Republicans are not demanding a roll-back of the welfare state, not talking about scaling back the size of government from its current almost 38 percent of GDP to 15 percent or less. Not more than a fraction of them talk seriously about a total repeal of the income tax (which only half the American people pay) or repeal of the Federal Reserve System, which subverts sound money and undermines economic growth, and no more than couple of them have any clue about how to restore sound money. Beyond a handful, there are no courageous Republicans calling for an end to empire and a return from our counterproductive search abroad for monsters to destroy. Fearful of their own shadows, there are not significant numbers of Republicans urging a dismantling of the domestic police state with its creeping total-information awareness system that is gradually smothering individual freedom and privacy; indeed South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham is actually pushing hard for a biometric national ID card. No Republican is calling for constitutional amendments to put the federal Leviathan back in chains, the kind of chains we all can believe in.

So, once you throw out the Democratic rascals and replace them with Republican scalawags, don’t expect things to change much. While every republican in Congress voted against ObamaCare, the Grand Old Party cannot now even muster the courage to run on a platform of repealing it.

Perhaps not in this election nor even in the presidential election to follow but soon the American people will come to understand a very sad and frightening fact about the United States today: Elections no longer work to divert the nation’s decent into the soft despotism of democratic fascism; they simply perpetuate the fraud of two parties, one Establishment, democratic in appearance, increasingly fascist in operation.

I urge the reader to survey the material presented here, particularly Dr. Hunter’s expose of the scurrilous truths about current Beltway politics practiced between the two parties titled Who Lost Healthcare.

The need we all feel for action is pressing. The current target of the symptom of unconstitutional governance by a strong central power is ObamaCare. Talk of repeal is thick in the air – lawsuits and rumors of lawsuits even thicker. Talk of taking back the party from the ground up is the strategy of the day for many.

Repeal will never happen for obvious reasons. It sounds good, looks good on paper, but is impossible until 2013 due to the power of the veto pen and the realities on the ground. To over-ride a veto takes more votes in the Senate than the Republicans could hope to have under the best of circumstances in the upcoming 2010 midterms. Therefore, 2013 is the best chance for repeal and only if Obama loses the election in 2012 and the Republicans control both chambers of the legislature. Even then, we must assume and count on Republicans having the nerve to take on such an undertaking, something recent history quite clearly demonstrates as contra-indicative of GOP tendencies. Not to mention the fact that most if not all of the bureaucracy for ObamaCare will already be in place, making the repeal of the entire bill a dangerous undertaking as insurance companies and doctors – those who are still around – position themselves to work within the new framework. The damage to the existing system, already done, could be exacerbated as the entire structure is torn down. So much inertia will exist within the scaffolding and foundation of ObamaCare the momentum of this monstrosity of a bill would require great courage to take on, repeal, tear down, and replace. I don’t believe for a second ObamaCare will be repealed and putting our eggs in that basket is dangerous and negligent.

Then there is the lawsuits challenging the individual mandate. Forget for a moment the absence of any real enforcement mechanism for the insurance mandate. Many scholars believe the mandate will not be struck down by the Supreme Court. As the entire history of the Supreme Court since the days of the Marshall Court is a history lesson in how the federal powers absconded with the rights of the states and the people through judicial activism and negligence, I would not be surprised. But I will cede ground and assume that it will be struck down. What occurs then? What are we left with? ObamaCare absent the mandate is a recipe for either single-payer socialized medicine of government backed insurance cartels (fascist medicine). If the mandate cannot be collected, then by default taxes will need to be raised. As it will take years for this case to make it to the Supreme Court, the arguments in the previous paragraph still hold. Strike the mandate with Republicans in control and watch the GOP bailout a few large insurance companies creating a cartel-like environment where insurance companies now make your medical decisions for you with the backing of the government. Great system.

As for those who think taking back the party and changing it from within is the panacea to our problems, I can only point to the above information from Mr. Boldin and Dr. Larry Hunter. There is not point of reference to indicate this approach possesses any efficacy whatsoever. As indicated above, the evidence is quite to the contrary. There is also this to consider:

Further evidence of Federal lucre and its consequences can be found in many aspects of welfare programs enacted in past century and the beginning of this century:

• As of 2003, Medicare we underfunded to the tune of $27 trillion, four times the national debt at that time. This funding crisis was in terms of future obligations versus projected tax receipts. No wonder a Value Added Tax is now being discussed. Chris Edwards and Tad DeHaven found in 2003 that an average male that reached age 65 will receive $71,000 more in benefits from Social Security and Medicare that he had put in. Contrast that with the average twenty-five year old male expected to pay $322,000 more in taxes that he would ever receive.

• Prior to Medicaid, doctors provided services to the poor for free or at reduced rates. Prior to Medicaid poor families had higher hospital admission rates than those in wealthier brackets and both were almost on par with each other concerning the number of doctor visits per year. Medicaid ended that and resulted in a massive decline in reduced-cost and free services to the poor as the government’s payments for medical care for the poor now compensated doctors and hospitals for services once rendered at reduced rates or pro bono. Medicare and Medicaid basically transferred income from the middle-class taxpayer to middle-class health-care workers and the sudden stimulation of demand played a large role in raising the cost of healthcare. The free-market, effectively chocked off by government regulation and welfare services, was unable to work to lower cost and increase consumption by allowing for natural market competition mechanisms.

• A study in 1960 by Charles Murray concluded the Great Society lead to stagnation for the poor.

• Budget cuts are a myth. Even during President Ronald Reagan’s tenure the rate of increase in government spending slowed but continued its upward trend. While defense spending played a large role, non-defense spending was 17.5% of GDP in 1985 compared to 10.1% in 1965. In the aggregate there was neither tax nor budget cuts during the Reagan era. Spending grew faster than taxing, but both lines continued to grow. While some welfare spending was cut slightly, some spending increased by as much as 18% from 1981 to 1989.

• Of even greater surprise is that even though Reagan reduced the top marginal tax rate from 70% to 28%, taxes overall actually increased in the decade of the 80s, with some increases negating and then offsetting the reductions of 1981. Social Security taxes in the early 80s were among the largest in U.S. history.

• The Tax Reform Act of 1986 increased taxes by closing loopholes and eliminating some tax credits. Federal taxes averaged 18.9% of GNP during the 80s, compared with 18.3 for the 70s and 18.2 for the 60s. Even under Reagan, federal government grew.

• One of the greatest twists on logic in DC is the idea of cuts. Under President Clinton’s seven year budget proposal the President called for a $500 billion dollar increase in federal spending while Republicans called for a $350 billion dollar increase. I can look at that sentence all day and I still do not see the work cut. There is no reduction in federal spending by either Clinton or the Republicans. Yet the liberal press was able to tout the tired old line of Republican cuts and tie them to popular federal programs, leading 47% of Americans to believe Republican cuts too deep. Again, what cuts? When Speaker Newt Gingrich proposed a 6% annual growth in Medicare spending and Clinton a 7.5% growth, the liberal press and political commentators went apoplectic over the proposed cuts to the Medicare program proposed by Speaker Gingrich.

• Both parties are guilty of this political double speak, redefining the meaning of the word cut to mean a reduction in how fast the government grows.

All of our current solutions are nothing less than men gathered around a campfire screaming into the night to scare away the predators. Lawsuits, repeal, changing the party from within – all take time, none are guaranteed or even likely to make a difference either to ObamaCare or the issue of federal lucre symptomatic of a practically supreme centralized government that should not even possess these powers to begin with. The real change needed is the use of education and information. For example, did you know the final arbiter of the constitution is not the Supreme Court, cut the states? Did you know that nullification has been successfully used by the states to stop a federal law at the boundaries of that state? Do you know what nullification is?

Back to Mr. Boldin from the TAC, who continues (emphasis mine):

Question – What do we do about it?

Jefferson and Madison gave us the answer. In response to the unconstitutional attacks on liberty that were the Alien and Sedition Acts, they secretly authored the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798. Here are a few excerpts that really define exactly how things are supposed to work when two or more branches of the federal government conspire against the constitution and your liberty.

the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government

whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.

where powers are assumed [by the federal government] which have not been delegated [by the Constitution], a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy

So while it might be important to call, petition, demand, march, sue and vote bums out, because they’re all bums, there’s much more we’re supposed to do. When the federal government violates your rights, you’re not supposed to wait four years for new politicians in the hope that they’ll fix it. You’re not supposed to wait two, or four, or more years for some black-robed judge to pronounce that they’ve violated your rights. You are supposed to resist those violations of your liberty as they happen – and it is your state’s solemn duty to do the same.

Mr. Boldin then provides information on nullification resolutions and laws within the states:

• Already a dozen states have passed 10th amendment resolutions reaffirming the Constitution as the founders and ratifiers gave us.

• 25 states have passed laws and resolutions nullifying the Real ID act – stopping it dead in its tracks in most of the country.

• 7 states have passed Firearms Freedom Acts – nullifying some federal gun laws and regulations in their states.

• 14 states have now passed laws nullifying unconstitutional federal laws on marijuana

• 3 states have already passed Health Care Freedom Acts to ban federal health care mandates in their states.

• Other states are considering nullification laws on cap and trade, the misuse of state national guard troops, monetary policy and much more.

However, even nullification has its own issues as it also relies on state politicians to rescue us from the federal government and re-instate our rightful position as the real power brokers within our states. Probably one of the most accurate truisms concerning politicians was made by President Reagan:

It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.

From Shane Musgrove writing at the TAC:

Are the States and their representatives any better? My assumption is that some, if not many, fall into the same political traps, yet not so deeply nor to the same extremity. I believe with great hope along with many others that there are representatives at the State level who do take these matters as genuinely concerning and view it as their responsibility to protect their citizens from what we can now define as “federal lawlessness.” I commend you on your courage, will, integrity, and your strength.

Now, as Linscott said, “You cannot expect the problem to fix the problem,” referring to the federal government, so we emphatically hope that these problems will be answered at the State level. So, the answer to the perplexing philosophical statement is none other than the States, their representatives, and the people that vote them into office.

Therefore, what follows is in essence, “A Call from ‘We the People’ to All State Representatives.”

As a preface, it is a responsibility of the States to assert their rights, specifically in times such as these. It is absolutely necessary to recognize that responsibility and accountability exists among State representatives rather than open-ended, unmoving opinions based on political philosophy and liberal views of the Constitution. To the best of my knowledge, an oath is taken in all States in some form of an edict to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States and of this State.” In addition, it should be noted that this call for responsibility is void of any form of violence or sedition, lest the leftist accusations of “inciting violence” and “hate” come forth with great force.

Therefore, let it be said: For legislators who are weakly or mildly concerned with these problems and see your duty as a representative half heartedly, resign.

For governors who do not have the courage to stand and fight for State rights in accordance with the following words from James Madison, resign.

Strong words, but are they enough? Looking at the list of states with non-binding resolutions vs. the list of states we need to actually nullify via law not only ObamaCare but any other attempt at federal over-reach before this country falls off the financial cliff, I am not convinced. That is why it is incumbent upon us to initiate a program of massive non-violent passive-aggressive resistance in the spirit of Gandhi and Martin Luther King. As Gandhi once said:

40,000 British troops cannot force 300 million Indians to do what they will not do.

This is true of our situation as well – a few elites in Washington can not make a majority of American’s accept something they are unwilling to endure. Shortly after the War of Independence, our founders looked for the source of the problem that allowed tyranny to fester and thrive, a tyranny so abusive the only way to abolish it was to remove it by force. Wisely, they recognized the sovereignty of Britain lay in the hands of a few, concentrated in the Parliament itself. As they set about creating a new form of governance, our forefathers rejected the very idea of a strong central sovereignty, the United States of America was to be a Union of sovereign states, and the role of the federal government limited by definition. Despite liberal revisionism, the fact remains the Constitution was not ratified by national referendum, but by individual conventions in each state. This fact is indisputable and definitively makes the case that the Uniting of the States was not intended to be a under a strong federal power, but rather that of thirteen sovereign states under a limited federal government.

Since its ratification, our Constitution, under constant assault by activist judges, corrupted legislators and Presidents, is now turned on its head. Thomas Jefferson noted that:

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.

The very nature of man is corrupt and today, after more than two centuries of the corruption of power we find a small island off the coast of France replaced by a city called Washington DC.

This state of affairs cannot be allowed to stand. At risk is the future of this country and its people. Our goal is to educate and the taking back of this country through non-violent civil disobedience and the constitutionally sound tool of nullification. Over time I will outline the tactics and continue to define the philosophy of this approach. Never will we rely on the assistance of those whose stake in this fight is the loss of the addictive and corruptive power gained at our expense. One may as well attempt to force a crack addict to part with their beloved drug. Until the Statists are utterly destroyed under the weight of truth and knowledge this Republic is in danger of utter ruin. If is only through self-power that we can win this fight.

This is the hill we live or die on.

In other news and opinion:

Michelle Malkin on establishment Republicans: John S. McCain, Will You Please Go Now?

If you want to go fast – go alone. If you want to go far – go together.

I’m not counting on these bozos to repeal ObamaCare, even with a 2/3 majority. It just is not going to happen and is part of the denial phase of losing our liberties to contemptuous tyrants. It will soon become apparent this approach is a non-starter. Looks good, sounds good, is inspiring to think about it, but it ain’t gonna happen, so let’s look for the real solution. You will find it in the 10th Amendment.

Kill the bill – invoke the tenth, written by the Tenth Amendment Center and fresh off the presses offers the real solution, along with some eye opening insights:

Lenin said:

“Medicine is the keystone of the arch of socialism” and “The goal of socialism is communism.”

Chew on that one for a bit.

The article continues:

Thomas Jefferson said:

“Whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force”

That is, unless we wish to give them that power over us. Even a cursory reading of not only the Constitution, but also the context of the times it was written in make this clear. The article continues:

Ignore Washington D.C.

They are ignoring you, return the favor. In his speech on Saturday, Obama referred to you as “astroturf”. In political terminology that insinuates that you were paid for your phone calls and someone picked up your travel expenses and bought your dinner for your troubles. That’s one way they ignore you. Another way they ignore you is to use an unscrupulous process to pass an unconstitutional health care bill that changes the foundation of your country overnight.

If you’re like me, when you call representatives, write letters or attend tea parties, you pick up the tab and sacrifice your own personal time in hopes that someone will listen. I’d much rather spend my time and money with my family, business or hobbies than hoping my actions will result in my federal representatives actually representing. And anyone that could have done anything about the health care bill is in Washington D.C., you can’t meet with them, you don’t know them and you cannot reasonably hold them accountable. How can you really expect them to feel any pressure to represent you? Yes, morally your expectations are valid because they should do the will of the people. Unfortunately, the reality is without the power to exert an opposing force, you will continue to be disregarded as a mere annoyance.

The later could not be more true. We are an annoyance and until we realize that, the politicians in Washington will continue happily along the path of political expediency and play on your emotions for their own political gain. Nowhere in their political calculus does their exist an iota of concern for you, unless expressing it so benefits them. Live it, learn it, and never forget it. If you want to win this, then concentrate on the one area where you actually can make a difference. Learn where the leveraged pressure is. Concentrate on the one area where a long-term solution is readily available to you. No band-aids, no wishful thinking, but hard work, perseverance, convictions, and liberty collide in the perfect storm of freedom.

Brian Roberts continues:

Ghandi had it nailed:

“First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. “

For the most part, the federal government has ignored any resistance to the health care bill. Tea Parties have been ridiculed as radicals of all varieties such as “tea baggers”, “astroturf”, “racists”, and “domestic terrorists”. But, they have never formally acknowledged the existence of this movement. Once we begin to focus our attention on the state governments, everything changes. The media will be unable to ignore a block of defiant states. Personally, you will be ridiculed as a “tenther” (I think this is pretty cool) but once states exhibit defiance it will not be long before the federal government shifts it’s focus to the states not the individuals. That’s when you will know that you are not being ignored anymore.

At a minimum, your state will be ridiculed as out of touch with reality, as constitutional rogues, racists, and more. The governor of your state and your state representatives will be positioned as little more than common rabble rousers and will be the target of incredible pressure to compromise. But this must be overcome before we can win and we must solidly stand with state representatives. Federal funds will be used to coerce states to comply as has been common practice for some time. This will be specifically painful with health care because defiant state’s federal funds will be used to finance compliant state’s health care. However, this cannot be allowed to stand for any significant amount of time so states must be influenced to pass state legislation that denies the federal government what they covet most, tax revenue.

From here on, resolve will be the key. Not just your resolve, but the resolve of the rest of the citizens in your state. So it’s our responsibility to educate neighbors and make sure the right state representatives are in place.

Get enough states to do this and we will win. The question remains, do we have the resolve as a people? Are we ready to be revolutionary like Martin Luther King, Jr. and Ghandi using non-violent passive-aggressive civil disobedience and constitutional nullification? We have been ignored, stepped on and spit out by Washington. Is it so surprising we would actually do something about it? At what point does one stop taking the insults to ourselves, the assaults to our liberties, and push back? I think the answer it clear. That time is now.

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.

Continued at the Wolves of Liberty

In other news and opinion:

The cartoon jihadists never forget

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.

If you want to go fast – go alone. If you want to go far – go together.

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.