Yep, we did have to pass the bill to learn what’s in it
And even though the liberal senators already knew what was in it, some of them are finding it not to their liking.
Boo hoo.
An epic rant by Rush Limbaugh.
The New Neo
A blog about political change, among other things
<>
So it is, naturally, full of factual information.
So? All this says is that when they ask “what do you think of my purple horse”, they all say yes.
want to guess that MOST of the electorate has no idea about communism and socialism and whats now starting to accelerate? more and more masks are coming off as it doesn’t matter if they wear them or not
even the tricksters are being tricked..
which IS the key to the game…
read the catechism of the revolutionary (please), and then see where these fit. these are one of the specific groups laid out.
the unions are scaffolding to make the revolutionary changes… as are people like chomsky and moore, as also are dems who are dems with their own ideas and not part of the actual councils..
so the unions are being dismantled in power base by the new law… Chomsky and Moore are now afraid of being in prison for the rest of their lives for having terrorist friends… and these dems are realizing that they are going to be purged by their loyal actions so that others can take their place (who are connected).
keep watching, as each power base that was put together to make the change, is dismantled to prevent a reversal of the change (As laid out in hundreds of writings).
the only coalition with enough power to reverse it was the coalition that was put together to assemble enough power to make it happen.
this is what ALWAYS happens, its a part of the process IF you know what the process is and can identify the functional parts and mechanics of it and so know where you are in that process.
those that don’t know, are arguing from ignorance claiming that since they don’t know, it cant be so, and since they don’t know, they cant work it out, so it cant be so.
but ya know, when they capture the wild pig in the fences, the point is that he don’t know…
ie. and if they DID know, they would not be the self sacrificing self funded disposable army and scaffolding of a new society.
their usefulness is gone now… they are disposable…
in fact, the day he won, was the day they became the enemy in the long haul, as the people using them were never going to share power with them as a reward…
just think of all those feminists who gave up family, got high paying jobs thanks to affirmative action, and now are about to see Obama go over the cliff and take that money in taxes!!!!!!!!
and the poor? ever wonder why there are zombie games? ever notice that zombies look like masses of starving civilians? you know, like in other countries looking for food?
and note that half a million small farms are about to be wiped out, along with the land of the delta smelt, and on and on.
after all, you really dont control everyone until you control their food… and people in cities, they are really easy to control their food. just ask the survivors of holodomar.
The Spanish Civil War: Anarchism in Action
Chapter 3 The Counter Revolution
http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/spain/pam_ch3.html
The behaviour of the Spanish Communist Party and the United Socialist Party of a Catalonia (PSUC) had more to do with what was in the best interests of Stalin than what was in the best interests of the Spanish working class.
They went out of their way to deny that a revolution had taken place. Then they did all they could to repress this revolution they pretended had not happened. As far as they were concerned the Civil War was only about restoring democracy to Spain.
this is the american history that got so many fighting against fascism and FOR STALIN…
the history has repeated about 10 times or so…
how did the health care go in? it went in under feminism, and helping minorities, and gays, and the elderly and on and on..
those are called: Popular Fronts
each aggregates the power of the people under it. then uses that power for what they want. so the elderly had no opposition front, women had no opposition front (but were the oppositoin front to their own mates who was a group neutralized by self cancelation), and so on
it was this and that time that made the communists of america out of the wealthy who thought they were going to fight fascism, and not that they were going to defeat fascism and so make things ripe for another totalitarianism.
redit was withheld from those workplaces who refused to come under government control. As said earlier the banks had not been taken over so the government had a huge lever against the workers. Nationalisation of major industries was declared thus bringing them under government control.
so companies that served the state were able to get loans and bail outs. those that didnt, were taken apart, and consolidated.
does this sound famliar?
health care was nationalized… ie. like the nazis/nationalizers… as in spain too…
all they needed was a law like the NDAA that obama just signed in… ie. they had the power to detain anyone for their not agreeing wiht the state (making them terrorists), and so locking them away at will…
The aim was to eliminate revolutionaries. Anybody who dared to speak out against what they were doing could be the next to suffer. Nin, the leader of the POUM, was murdered by the GPU as was Camillo Berneri, an Italian anarchist who was critical of the CNT leadership.
today they use CHARACTER ASSASINATION as real assastination would not be ambigous enough at this stage… ie. if you take them out before you have the power your taking them out for, you can lose it. but neutralizing them is the same thing, even if you leave them alive. feminists coming out of the woodwork and making false claims are a good source of weaponry to take out the person.
V. I. Lenin
Revolution and Counter-Revolution
Proletary, No. 17, October 20, 1907.
Lenin Collected Works, Progress Publishers, 1972, Moscow, Volume 13, pages 114-122.
vents have now taught everyone, even people who are utter strangers to Marxism, to reckon the chronology of the revolution from January 9, 1905, that is, from the first consciously political movement of the masses belonging to a single definite class.
When the Social-Democrats, from an analysis of Russia’s economic realities, deduced the leading role, the hegemony of the proletariat in our revolution, this seemed to be a bookish infatuation of theoreticians. The revolution confirmed our theory, because it is the only truly revolutionary theory.
The proletariat actually took the lead in the revolution all the time. The Social-Democrats actually proved to be the ideological vanguard of the proletariat. The struggle of the masses developed under the leadership of the proletariat with remarkable speed, much faster than many revolutionaries had expected.
blame the dems, but its the proletariat that became the popular fronts, the army, and empowered them.
or to quote lenin on this:
All that the liberation movement in Russia has won up to now was won entirely and exclusively by the revolutionary struggle of the masses headed by the proletariat.
who put them in power? who gave them permission to make the health care law, and redistribute, and make race and gender the new merit, and all that stuff?
He who still fails to see this bankruptcy of the liberals, who have undergone a practical test of their worth as champions of democracy, or at least as fighters in the democratic ranks, has understood absolutely nothing of the political history of the two Dumas.
Among these people the meaningless reiteration of a memorised formula about supporting bourgeois democracy becomes counter-revolutionary snivelling. The Social-Democrats should have no regrets at the shattering of constitutional illusions.
They should say what Marx said about counter-revolution in Germany: the people gained by the loss of its illusions. Bourgeois democracy in Russia gained by the loss of worthless leaders and weak-kneed allies. So much the better for the political development of this democracy. Lenin
The revolution has taught the proletariat to wage a mass struggle. The revolution has shown that the proletariat is able to lead the peasant masses in the struggle for democracy. The revolution has united the purely proletarian party still more closely by casting out petty-bourgeois elements from it. The counter-revolution has taught the petty-bourgeois democrats to give up seeking for leaders and allies among the liberals, who are mortally afraid of the mass struggle. On the basis of these lessons of history we can boldly say to the government of the Black-Hundred landlords: continue along the same line, Mr. Stolypin and Co.! We shall reap the fruits of what you are sowing!
“There’s letters seal’d, and my two schoolfellows,
Whom I will trust as I will adders fang’d–
They bear the mandate, they must sweep my way
And marshal me to knavery. Let it work;
For ’tis the sport to have the enginer
Hoist with his own petard, an’t shall go hard
But I will delve one yard below their mines
And blow them at the moon.”
Hamlet Act 3, scene 4
I own an insurance agency. We offer health insurance as well as home, auto, etc. Three prospective clients came in this week looking for health insurance and all three were surprised to find that they did not qualify due to serious pre-existing conditions. “But ObamaCare mandates that you accept me despite my illness!” I had to explain that won’t happen until 2014.
I also took the opportunity to explain how ObamaCare would put health insurance companies out of business by mandating unlimited risk while also also limiting their ability to charge a premium based on that risk. As a result, we’ll all be insured by the government someday. Two of my health insurance companies are already gone.
BTW, I am one of those people who cannot get health insurance because of pre-existing conditions. So I do have sympathy for the pre-existing masses. But nationalizing health care for everyone is not the answer.
I believe the plan is to crush the private insurance companies and to force people into government health care.
Sangiovese:
Are you familiar with Karl Denninger? He suggests the cause of serial inflation in the medical and pharmaceutical sectors is monopolies or monopolistic practices enforced through government authority.
My only concern with his argument is that he does not normalize the costs with respect to population growth and longevity. However, in absolute terms, he does demonstrate that our economy cannot support the quantity and rate of those expenditures. He also describes contributory issues related to international trade, cost shifting, illegal immigration (i.e. unmeasured), dysfunctional (voluntary) behavior, etc.
I would summarize it as Obamacare and similar “reforms” treat symptoms while ignoring causes. It is certainly a profitable model, but it is also a cause of progressive corruption, and is unsustainable at any level.