[geeks] Socialized medicine [was Re: nVidia 8800GT for Apple Mac Pro]
Jonathan C. Patschke
jp at celestrion.net
Mon Jun 2 21:11:07 CDT 2008
On Mon, 1 Jun 2008, Lionel Peterson wrote:
> Neither all Conservatives nor all Liberals march in ideological
They seem to mostly be in step with each other. Both parties grow the
government. Both parties restrict liberties. Both parties use the
income tax (and a myriad of programs to return those dollars to the
states) as a crowbar to effectively unseat that pesky 10th Amendment,
and use the 9th Amendment as so much birdcage liner. Neither party is
interested in any real change in those trends, either.
We don't have a conservative party, and we don't really have a liberal
party. We have a fascist/imperialist party and a socialist party.
Every time the government passes a law, take it to its logical
conclusion. Even if the punishment is defined as merely robbery that we
excuse as a "fine", refusal to pay that fine will result in a form of
kidnapping we colloquially refer to as "jailing", and refusal of that
kidnapping often results in death. Is some new restriction on some
other person's behavior really worth the risk of killing him? Is some
new social program worth robbing your neighbor of his money, under
thread of violence if he doesn't pay up?
Whomever authored those two Amendments didn't seem to think so, at least
not at the national level. Indeed, they thought it was so obvious that
they didn't need drafting at all: "Why declare that things shall not be
done which there is no power to do?"
What sort of person could say "Yes, Mr. Lawmaker, please rob my neighbor
and threaten to take him to jail or kill him! Whatever you have to do!
Just PLEASE pass this law! We NEED you to DO SOMETHING about
$hotButtonTopic even if it means KILLING PEOPLE!" without someone being
in immediate danger?
We need to stop thinking about our elected servants in terms of their
party affiliations, because that excuses a lot of the horrible things
they do individually as "going along with the party." At some level,
you're fine with your representative requesting some insanely large
earmark to pay for some stupid research grant to study something no one
will ever care about because it brings the money back to you (money that
shouldn't have left your pocket in the first place). And, even if you
disagree with him, it's understandable, because it's in line with his
party views, so you just need to get someone from the other party in
next time to put a stop to that, right?
They're individuals. Corrupt, thieving, manipulative, power-mad,
control-freak individuals who need to be held accountable for violating
their oaths to "uphold and defend the Constitution". And there's far
more difference between anyone on this list and anyone in a legislative
office than there is between any two people in legislative office.
 Ah! A difference! One party wants to save the children, the other
wants to save the Earth.
Jonathan Patschke | "There is more to life than increasing its speed."
Elgin, TX | --Mahatma Gandhi
More information about the geeks