The lawmaker's delusional response to a "Repeal Obamacare" petition.
Pity the poor citizen of a totalitarian country who appeals to his government for redress of a grievance. The act of challenging the wisdom of those in power by signing a petition has frequently resulted in secret police kicking down doors in the middle of the night to haul the hapless sap off to Siberia or worse.
Thank God that can’t happen in this country (yet). The worst that can happen to you for opening your mouth here is to have your intelligence insulted by a form letter from your senator. Savor this excerpt from Diane Feinstein:
Thank you for contacting me to express your support for repealing the recent health reform law. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to respond.
In 2010, President Obama signed health reform legislation known as the Affordable Care Act (ACA) into law. The ACA will help drive down health care costs for families, reduce the federal deficit, and take significant steps toward ensuring Americans have access to affordable insurance options regardless of their income level or health status. I support the ACA … The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has repeatedly analyzed the fiscal impacts of the Affordable Care Act and found each time that the Affordable Care Act will save the federal government more than $100 billion over a ten year period.
One wonders how long it has been since this form letter was last edited. We understand why she doesn’t mention Senator Max Baucus’s comments about the coming “train wreck.” Maybe that’s in his form letter. Does Harry Reid’s form letter state emphatically that Senators and Congresspersons are not exempt from the Obamacare exchanges and in fact can’t wait to sign up?
Usually when a for-profit company tries to sell me something, like a car, a refrigerator or or satelite TV service, I can expect to have a choice to buy or not to buy from the company or its competitors, maybe even a ‘no obligation free trial’ for 30 days. But Obama and Ms. Feinstein are making us an offer we can’t refuse, attempting to sweeten it with claims which few people outside of marijuana-obsessed California (three of four propositions on the recent ballot dealt with regulation of pot) believe anymore. Who, Left or Right, still believes that the most massive expansion ever attempted of one failed entitlement program (Medicaid, which as it turns out is worse for its clients than no insurance at all) funded in large part by cannibalizing another bankrupt entitlement program ($716 billion from Medicare) will reduce the federal deficit while providing never-before-seen benefits to 50 million people? The same CBO that Senator Feinstein cites to bolster her case has found that ten years from now, we may expect that 30 million people in the USA will still be without health insurance. Smashing success.
The senator continues:
The Supreme Court, in a majority opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, found that the Act's centerpiece requirement to purchase health insurance or face a financial penalty is constitutional as an exercise of Congress' power to use tax laws to influence individual behavior. As the Chief Justice said, such uses of the tax code "are nothing new" and would include provisions that encourage people to quit smoking or to be more energy efficient[.]
She does have a talent for rubbing our conservative noses in our own dirt by reminding us that the deciding vote for upholding the PPACA came from a Bush appointee to the Supreme Court. That was painful enough. But she goes a step further, claiming constitutional sanction for social engineering: “an exercise of Congress' power to use tax laws to influence individual behavior… include provisions that encourage people to quit smoking or to be more energy efficient.” Really? When did paying for the necessary and proper expenses of government expand to saving us from ourselves, via tobacco, killer lightbulbs and Big Gulp sodas?
Energy efficient? Energy costs money; energy is money. Yet our overlords believe we cannot be trusted even to be efficient with our own money, as if we could spend as much as we want with no consequence to ourselves individually, but with disastrous consequences collectively, and therefore the government must intervene. Who is more likely to spends as if there’s no tomorrow, individuals spending their own money or government spending other people’s?
But we still don’t live in a totalitarian state, right? The targeting of conservative and Tea-Party/Patriot groups was the work of a few rogue agents in a provincial office. No cause for alarm? Try this: try opting out. Try NOT participating in the Obamacare exchanges. Try not paying your income taxes, the taxes on your medical devices (still in force despite a symbolic Senate vote including 33 Democrats for repeal), or the hospital insurance portion of the payroll tax. See how long it takes before you face men with guns, having no gun of your own with which to hold them off.
We are losing our constitutional liberties and heading toward Big-Brother totalitarianism at a faster rate than at any time in the history of the United States of America, for the sake of social programs that are rammed down our throats on fraudulent premises and which can never fulfill their marketed promises. The good news is that citizens are waking up and Democrat sponsors are running for the exits. But it won’t be over until form letters like this one are universally recognized as a grotesque joke from a sicko period in our (ash heap of) history.
Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.