"So if you're getting one of these letters, just shop around in the new marketplace. That's what it's for." - Barack Obama, Oct 30, 2013

A marketplace is where merchants freely set up their stores and sell the wares they wish to sell to people that freely wish to purchase wares that fit their wants and needs for the prices they will pay for them.

The State store where ObamaCare is forced down our throats, where the products are forced on us by virtue of them being the only things stocked by the State on it's virtual shelves, is a mockery of a marketplace. It has no place in a free country. It is to a marketplace what a lie is to the truth.

If this goes on it is but a precursor of the things to come.

What is happening is not governance. ObamaCare is not governance. The United States was created so that the people would be self-governing. The United States was created so that the State was a container built of laws that protected property and individuals from actual harm caused by other people. The State, (federal, state and local), was only a container wherein the people were a self-governing entity, consisting of all of the fraternal organizations and institutions that are created by freedom of association. A myriad of organizations of every kind for accomplishing things from retirement to healthcare to the very mores and habits of the people, everything people thought important worked in concert as an organic creation born of associations of free people. All of those myriad entities created by freedom of association are the self-governance of self-governance and it's purpose: to protect each individual's own ability to self-govern themselves and fully posses their own life. The State is a container. The State is not the governing entity.

And it never was. This is one of the great discoveries of the Enlightenment. Not in any society, ever - the governance really is with the people and not ever the State. It was like discovering gravity or electricity. Self-governance was not a platitude or the idea of being ruled by the people you've voted for until you can get them out of office, it was a discovery of a fundamental truth about the nature of Man. Self-governance isn't about politics. It's preservation and protection is.

To the degree that we live in freedom and enjoy self-governance, in the very American sense of the term, that is the extent we live in prosperity and civilization.

Statists like Barack Obama are Statists because to them the State isn't a container built to protect free people so they can create the self-governance which comes from freedom of association, to them the State is an entity unto itself which we all belong to and is more important than the individuals themselves.

And so now we are no longer self-governing. And the first of the soviet style state stores has opened it's doors in the United States of America.

Just don't confuse it with a marketplace. It is the Statists usurping your birthright of freedom and self-governance.

The Soviet Union lasted for seventy years. How long this monster?

That foul dead white slave owner, George Washington, said it well: "Government is not reason, it is not eloquence; it is force. Like fire, a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

He had wooden teeth too.

I can add nothing to KMTC's metaphorical "Soviet State Store" other than to point out that societal transformation of this magnitude can only be inflicted from within. No foreign enemy could forcibly cause more damage to a nation's heritage. This brief excerpt from a man who lived over 2000 years ago suggests little has changed.


"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself...A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague." —Cicero

Amen Brother

[img]images/clipart/Prog_Off.gif[/img]
I may be naive but I sense that there is still hope. The statists have fumbled the Obamacare launch so badly that it seems possible to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. The key is being able to focus the attention of the newly awakened on the threat and the remedy.

Unfortunately I do not have faith in the Republican Party or the two party system for that matter. Establishment candidates from either side of the aisle have done nothing but move us toward where we are today, and they've done so with ever accelerating speed. In my mind this process began in earnest with Bush 1.

The canary in the mine for me has been our relationship with China. I grew up in the States and as a kid I distinctly recall the criticisms of the USSR and communism in general. There was pride in rugged individualism, liberty and true non-conformity. We are almost a parody of that now. Sometime shortly after the Tiananmen Square Massacre our media outlets and politicians simply stopped attacking communism and statisim on the grounds of human rights and its diametric opposition to all we hold dear. The focus was lost.

I don't think this was a coincidence obviously and considering their position in trade and debt with us only a fool (in my very humble opinion) would think otherwise.

This may not be a fumble, but rather an intentional strategic move designed to confuse, demoralize, and divide us. If enough people erroneously conclude that the private insurance industry can't handle the job of conversion to the new system - well, look out America, here comes Obama to the rescue with single payer - his goal all along. Given his upbringing, his education, his past associations and his previous statements, this is not out of the question.

INGSOC wrote:[img]images/clipart/Prog_Off.gif[/img]
I may be naive but I sense that there is still hope. The statists have fumbled the Obamacare launch so badly that it seems possible to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. The key is being able to focus the attention of the newly awakened on the threat and the remedy.

Unfortunately I do not have faith in the Republican Party or the two party system for that matter. Establishment candidates from either side of the aisle have done nothing but move us toward where we are today, and they've done so with ever accelerating speed. In my mind this process began in earnest with Bush 1.

.

(emphasis mine....kln)My sentiments exactly!!! My hope is that we can educate people to help them off of there State addiction. Jefferson, I think, said something warning us about party politics. At any rate, I've worked on campaigns for both and believe they are equally evil. The upper echelons of the parties, however, I think; people like Bush 41 & 43, Obama, and Romney are basically pawns of the party elite. And I don't think the solution is a "third" party, either; it's just people being aware of what government is and isn't, and that it's delusional to think the State can provide security for you without taking more of it away.

Captain Craptek wrote:

Prog Off.png

This may not be a fumble, but rather an intentional strategic move designed to confuse, demoralize, and divide us. If enough people erroneously conclude that the private insurance industry can't handle the job of conversion to the new system - well, look out America, here comes Obama to the rescue with single payer - his goal all along. Given his upbringing, his education, his past associations and his previous statements, this is not out of the question.

<off>

Maybe its me being naive again but let's consider; if we are to the point where legislation like this can be shoved through the system in such a corrupt manner and then be botched so badly in its roll-out that you can't even obey the mandate if you wanted to and people want to actually grant the federal government further control over them we are more off the rails than I imagined. This doesn't even take into count the millions and millions of people who are learning that the president is a bald faced liar.

I just don't think we're there yet and I think that effective pushback can happen, but it will take special leadership.

That's the unknown variable.

I'm a Kentuckian who worked on the Paul campaign. His primary was one of the biggest eye-openers of my political life. The venom aimed at him from the republican machine was worse than what I've seen aimed at democrats. I'm not referencing newspaper commentaries or advertisements. I'm talking about whispers at cocktail parties from state republican operatives, open red-hot hostility in private conversations and so on.

A quick refresher on Rand Paul's path to the senate- Paul's primary opponent was a guy named Trey Grayson who was the McConnell backed, Harvard educated Secretary of State hand picked to take Bunning's seat. You'll recall Bunning was essentially pushed out.

A little known fact about Grayson is that he was a "recovering democrat". The guy changed his party affiliation in the 90s after working for the Clinton campaign and just before entering politics in Kentucky. If any of you have worked in political circles you know that candidates are recruited and advanced within the party system which is far more rigid and hierarchical than most of the electorate realize.

This period in my life, working on this campaign, completely woke me to the realities of American politics. I saw clearly the foil of partisanship and the dangers of an establishment manipulating the population with petty issues while the underpinnings of the nation are eroded. It made me consider things I didn't want to consider and gave me uncomfortable insight.

It also caused me to not be dismissive of Libertarian principle and to take Ron Paul deadly seriously. Groupthink is not an affliction exclusive to the democratic party.

With that, I will leave you with an article I read yesterday that is relevant to this entire conversation and the Cube itself.

Truth Can Only Be Achieved Through Free Expression

But without the State to guide me, I might make a bad decision and suffer consequences from it. Surely, it is better to have a loving master who allows me to work for him or her in return for adequate housing, food, medical attention, and the other neccessities of life, than it is for me to try to look out for myself, isn't it? They are obviously smarter and more beautiful than I am.

Ivan Betinov wrote:But without the State to guide me, I might make a bad decision and suffer consequences from it. Surely, it is better to have a loving master who allows me to work for him or her in return for adequate housing, food, medical attention, and the other neccessities of life, than it is for me to try to look out for myself, isn't it? They are obviously smarter and more beautiful than I am.

It's not you. We need you to sacrifice yourself, your choices (except abortion because women have exclusive rights to their body, and so may choose), your children's range of opportunity, your ability to send them to the school of your choosing outside the public system, and so on so that those who do make bad decisions can have better relative buying power. If you do not agree with this logic you are a selfish bastard who can't understand that the morality of a secular ideology should apply to everyone because Obama, and because history says this is the only way forward. Further, as long as race is not used as a qualifier government may oppress on behalf of race or class and the greater good. See "only a small portion of health plans canceled relative to the total pool" apology for Dear Leader's lies. True, this impacted tens of millions of people BUT they are a minority in the way of the "greater good" and therefore discounted. Got it?

INGSOC wrote:

Captain Craptek wrote:

The attachment Prog Off.png is no longer available

This may not be a fumble, but rather an intentional strategic move designed to confuse, demoralize, and divide us. If enough people erroneously conclude that the private insurance industry can't handle the job of conversion to the new system - well, look out America, here comes Obama to the rescue with single payer - his goal all along. Given his upbringing, his education, his past associations and his previous statements, this is not out of the question.

<off>

Maybe its me being naive again but let's consider; if we are to the point where legislation like this can be shoved through the system in such a corrupt manner and then be botched so badly in its roll-out that you can't even obey the mandate if you wanted to and people want to actually grant the federal government further control over them we are more off the rails than I imagined. This doesn't even take into count the millions and millions of people who are learning that the president is a bald faced liar.

[highlight=#FFFF00]I just don't think we're there yet and I think that effective pushback can happen, but it will take special leadership. [/highlight]

That's the unknown variable.

I'm a Kentuckian who worked on the Paul campaign. His primary was one of the biggest eye-openers of my political life. The venom aimed at him from the republican machine was worse than what I've seen aimed at democrats. I'm not referencing newspaper commentaries or advertisements. I'm talking about whispers at cocktail parties from state republican operatives, open red-hot hostility in private conversations and so on.

A quick refresher on Rand Paul's path to the senate- Paul's primary opponent was a guy named Trey Grayson who was the McConnell backed, Harvard educated Secretary of State hand picked to take Bunning's seat. You'll recall Bunning was essentially pushed out.

A little known fact about Grayson is that he was a "recovering democrat". The guy changed his party affiliation in the 90s after working for the Clinton campaign and just before entering politics in Kentucky. If any of you have worked in political circles you know that candidates are recruited and advanced within the party system which is far more rigid and hierarchical than most of the electorate realize.

This period in my life, working on this campaign, completely woke me to the realities of American politics. I saw clearly the foil of partisanship and the dangers of an establishment manipulating the population with petty issues while the underpinnings of the nation are eroded. It made me consider things I didn't want to consider and gave me uncomfortable insight.

It also caused me to not be dismissive of Libertarian principle and to take Ron Paul deadly seriously. Groupthink is not an affliction exclusive to the democratic party.

With that, I will leave you with an article I read yesterday that is relevant to this entire conversation and the Cube itself.

Truth Can Only Be Achieved Through Free Expression

No, we're not there yet. Hopefully a growing number of people will begin to feel the "pain" of Obama's top-down management style before he declares himself King. But even then, he's only human and will eventually succumb to his own power lust. In fact, as history has repeatedly shown, even the most mind-numbed totalitarian societies eventually decay and crumble. The perfect society - either self regulating, or dominated by a tyrant - is a philosophical pipe dream. Even the "Brave New World" had its savage.

Now, enough of this madness...I'm going to finish sorting my nuts before it starts snowing.

I'd like to believe that people will finally get fed up and rebel (viz. the Tea Party and other grassroots movements, including the abolition movement in the 19C.), but one thing that's happened in the past few decades may render even the most popular and organized movement ineffectual. Too much of "government" is now embedded in agencies rather than in elected officials, in regulations rather than laws. Against whom does one rebel? Which suboffice of which office of which agency? How does one repeal thousands and thousands of pages of regulations that have no basis in legislation and sometimes have been instituted in order to bypass legislation? And how does one even know some of these regulations exist until one is arrested for violating them? In fact, regulations may be propagated in order to arrest someone, and where then is the recourse? As we discovered during the recent so-called shutdown -- which was actually an expansion, as more people were called in to enforce the thuggery than would normally have been on duty -- the agencies, not elected officials or books of laws, run a tyranny. Where is the recourse?

RedDiaperette wrote: I'd like to believe that people will finally get fed up and rebel (viz. the Tea Party and other grassroots movements, including the abolition movement in the 19C.), but one thing that's happened in the past few decades may render even the most popular and organized movement ineffectual. Too much of "government" is now embedded in agencies rather than in elected officials, in regulations rather than laws. Against whom does one rebel? Which suboffice of which office of which agency? How does one repeal thousands and thousands of pages of regulations that have no basis in legislation and sometimes have been instituted in order to bypass legislation? And how does one even know some of these regulations exist until one is arrested for violating them? In fact, regulations may be propagated in order to arrest someone, and where then is the recourse? As we discovered during the recent so-called shutdown -- which was actually an expansion, as more people were called in to enforce the thuggery than would normally have been on duty -- the agencies, not elected officials or books of laws, run a tyranny. Where is the recourse?

Yes, I agree about the regulation but perhaps more important is the nature of bureaucracy. There appears to be an amorphous problem with government employment that I haven't seen directly discussed anywhere. Government employment seems to have become a soft welfare system for marginal or otherwise unemployable workers. I know, shocking, but the underlying evidence is problematic and of a sensitive nature.

I read a story a year or so back regarding the lack of minorities in federal agency management positions. The gist of the piece was that Obama was considering some sort of race based quota for promotion and hiring within that bureaucratic strata.

The tell was how massively skewed minority representation was in the general government workforce. When you couple this data with dismal education data regarding these segments of the population it isn't a leap to deduce that there is some masking going on with government hiring.

Obligatory apology for incorrect thought; this is not to say that there aren't outstanding minority government workers, it is to say that government employment is a mechanic used to mitigate and hide the failures of socialist policy with respect to the enfranchisement of minority communities in the broader economy.

In this respect it is arguable that it is a shadow plantation only a few degrees removed from the welfare state that keeps people trapped in ghetto dependence with slim prospects for escape. It is in this respect that it becomes a hardened democratic voting bloc and a monolith of waste, corruption and control.

Captain Craptek wrote: Now, enough of this madness...I'm going to finish sorting my nuts before it starts snowing.

The ability to make mountains from molehills is a valuable commodity in the Party's grand scheme...Keep sorting, Comrade.

RedDiaperette, you bring up a question whose answer could fill volumes.

When the Soviet empire was still a terrible force, a small underground subversive (to the statists) movement sprouted and grew. That movement simply refused to "live within the lie" and chose instead "Living within truth."

That small movement's book was The Power of the Powerless by Vaclav Havel. His essay was instrumental in changing the course of history. It was instrumental in discrediting statism. It was written in the belly of the beast and the movement was the people asserting their self-governance in the only way they could. And it did much to smash the lie which the statists depend to hold their power. Once the statists can no longer force people to live within their lie their power over people is gone. Even they start to change. It's well worth your time to read:

The Power of the Powerless

Captain Craptek wrote:

Prog Off.png

This may not be a fumble, but rather an intentional strategic move designed to confuse, demoralize, and divide us. If enough people erroneously conclude that the private insurance industry can't handle the job of conversion to the new system - well, look out America, here comes Obama to the rescue with single payer - his goal all along. Given his upbringing, his education, his past associations and his previous statements, this is not out of the question.

Indeed. And in the meantime they channeled almost $700 million (and still counting) to SOMEwhere. Much like all those other missing millions and billions from the "stimulus" and elsewhere.

But hey, you gotta shop around spread the wealth around...

<Prog.off>They say that politics makes strange bedfellows, and I boldly predict that eventually, the ACLU (normally progs to the max) will file lawsuits against some of the provisions of Obamacare. This will be hastened if, for example, a minority female on Medicaid (or a leftist lawyer drawing SSI and on Medicare) is denied treatment thanks to the Independent Payment Advisory Board, whose sole purpose is to contain Medicare and Medicaid spending. The constitution says that every person has a right to "life" - for a government panel comprised of people hand-picked by our Dear Leader to obstruct the recommendations of a physician on the grounds of cost for a patient who clearly has no other alternatives goes against all concepts of individual rights and liberties.

Komrade Katz wrote:<Prog.off>They say that politics makes strange bedfellows, and I boldly predict that eventually, the ACLU (normally progs to the max) will file lawsuits against some of the provisions of Obamacare. This will be hastened if, for example, a minority female on Medicaid (or a leftist lawyer drawing SSI and on Medicare) is denied treatment thanks to the Independent Payment Advisory Board, whose sole purpose is to contain Medicare and Medicaid spending. The constitution says that every person has a right to "life" -[highlight=#FFFF00] for a government panel comprised of people hand-picked by our Dear Leader to obstruct the recommendations of a physician on the grounds of cost for a patient who clearly has no other alternatives goes against all concepts of individual rights and liberties.[/highlight]

Dear Leader's "Independent Payment Advisory Board" reply: "So what?"

Captain Craptek wrote:

Komrade Katz wrote:<Prog.off>They say that politics makes strange bedfellows, and I boldly predict that eventually, the ACLU (normally progs to the max) will file lawsuits against some of the provisions of Obamacare. This will be hastened if, for example, a minority female on Medicaid (or a leftist lawyer drawing SSI and on Medicare) is denied treatment thanks to the Independent Payment Advisory Board, whose sole purpose is to contain Medicare and Medicaid spending. The constitution says that every person has a right to "life" -[highlight=#FFFF00] for a government panel comprised of people hand-picked by our Dear Leader to obstruct the recommendations of a physician on the grounds of cost for a patient who clearly has no other alternatives goes against all concepts of individual rights and liberties.[/highlight]

Dear Leader's "Independent Payment Advisory Board" reply: "So what?"

Whatever.

Captain Craptek wrote:

Prog Off.png

This may not be a fumble, but rather an intentional strategic move designed to confuse, demoralize, and divide us. If enough people erroneously conclude that the private insurance industry can't handle the job of conversion to the new system - well, look out America, here comes Obama to the rescue with single payer - his goal all along. Given his upbringing, his education, his past associations and his previous statements, this is not out of the question.

Precisely. Look at how many proggies are jumping to blame insurance companies for dropped plans. The Commie in Chief himself said that transition to single-payer was the end goal.