Now We Are Political Terrorists

First they published a memo calling all people who have conservative values Right Wing Extremists. The chilling report labeled people with single issues like opposition to abortion, as extremists. It was distributed to police agencies so they could be on the look out for us. Though that met stiff opposition and was reportedly quashed, I would not be surprised if those sentiments were still held and we are all being observed under the radar.

Then came the snitch campaign where the Obama White House wants people to report anyone who says something about the health care plan that might be “fishy.” There is an email address that people can forward such things to. This means if you send an email to a friend and it gets passed on to the White House, you will be in a database of opponents. This is reminiscent of the Nazi campaign to snitch on neighbors, particularly to rat out Jews. Is it any wonder that someone would feel compelled to carry a swastika to a protest event. Yes, it appears that two were seen at different events. All the other signs were ignored and the swastika was the focus of attention. I challenged Pelosi to find one and one of her lap dogs did. I am willing to bet there were more of them at one anti Bush rally than have been at all the protests combined. Why would they feign indignation now when they were not bothered then. It is because they are trying to paint all protesters as right wing radicals rather than the diverse group that includes Democrats, liberals, Republicans and conservatives. They want you to believe that only Republicans and conservatives are involved and they are radicals who have, gasp, a swastika. How dare they insult Herr Obama?

Now we have a columnist at the Washington Post chiming in. He has labeled those who are voicing opposition to the plan as political terrorists. Steven Pearlstein says:

The recent attacks by Republican leaders and their ideological fellow-travelers on the effort to reform the health-care system have been so misleading, so disingenuous, that they could only spring from a cynical effort to gain partisan political advantage. By poisoning the political well, they’ve given up any pretense of being the loyal opposition. They’ve become political terrorists, willing to say or do anything to prevent the country from reaching a consensus on one of its most serious domestic problems. [emphasis mine]

So Steven, what were the Democrats and Obamadinejad when they opposed more than a half a dozen bills that would have reformed health care? If they were concerned about this serious domestic problem then why did they all oppose items that would have provided reform without a complete overhaul in order to cover a small percentage who have no insurance?

The claim by Mr. Pearlstein is that Republicans are making claims that this will result in a government takeover of health care and he contends that there is no way to read what has been proposed and conclude that. This is, of course, a matter of opinion. However, the words of Obama saying that he wanted a single payer system and of Barney Frank saying the way to get there was by first passing a government run plan are clear indications of what they want and what they have in mind. The claims that the opposition is being misleading or disingenuous are funny considering that those who are pushing the plan are misleading and disingenuous.

This is another example of someone presenting two options. Obama has said it a number of times. People who oppose this want to keep things they way they are. This straw man argument is designed to make people believe there are only two options. The reality is that many members of Congress have introduced legislation to reform and those items did not involve the complete overhaul of our system. Democrats opposed these because they want to control it all.

There are plenty of options as I have discussed in the past. We can drop the mandates in coverage. States require a number of things to be in a plan before it can be offered. Some companies do not want to put those plans out so only a few are allowed to offer. This means less competition. Insurance should be like a cable plan. There are items that are essential such as catastrophic care, emergency care, dental care, vision care, surgical care and any preventive care that involves more than a routine office visit. Then other items can be offered if the consumer desires them. It makes no sense to force a single male to pay for a plan that includes abortion services or OB/GYN. It is nonsensical to force people who do not drink or do drugs to pay for substance abuse treatment. Some people might like aroma therapy but others see no benefit. Allow those who want it to add it on and pay for it and those who do not to pass on it. Just like cable TV, you have a basic package and you add on the extras that you want. People should also pay for wellness visits. We have car insurance but that does not pay for routine maintenance. Why should people not pay for their routine care?

We should also remove restrictions on buying insurance across state lines. If a person likes a plan offered in another state then he should be able to buy it. Restricting to in state companies stifles competition and drives costs up.

I also think Doctors should be given tax credits for seeing people with no health insurance. I heard Congressman Ron Paul’s son discuss this and I think it is a great idea. Rand Paul is a doctor (Ophthalmologist) and he is running for a Senate seat in Kentucky. He believes that doctors should see those without insurance and receive a tax credit for doing so. This will provide care to those who need it and compensate the doctors providing the care. Of course there will need to be oversight or some will abuse the system but I think it will provide incentive for doctors to see those who truly cannot pay.

These are but a few ideas that would help to reform the system and they would make health care more affordable. People will still have to pay but it will not cost as much. I am sure if they can afford a cell phone, two cars, high speed internet and cable TV with the premium channels they can squeeze in health insurance.

For the absolute destitute among us, we still have government plans that will cover them.

No, I am not a political terrorist for opposing the health care scheme and wanting less government regardless of what any reporter says. I do wonder though, where this guy was when the left was using similar tactics to oppose Bush? Has he called the Code Pink morons who harassed Marines in Berkeley political terrorists?

The First Amendment protects our right to free speech and the right to peaceably assemble. Opposing health care or any other plan in a peaceful fashion is not political terrorism, it is an exercise of our Constitutional rights.

Those who cannot see that or would work to oppose it, are the real political terrorists.

Big Dog salute to Stop the ACLU

Big Dog

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

27 Responses to “Now We Are Political Terrorists”

  1. Adam says:

    Right, you are “all being observed under the radar.” Your delusional and heightened sense of paranoia cracks me up.

    It’s one thing to know that certain groups are going to be under the watchful eye of the government. Bush was having Quakers and vegans and environmental whackjobs under surveillance for instance at certain times.

    But to act like you yourself are a target? That you all are being observed? Get real. You’re delusional and I think you need to unplug from this fantasy world you and others like you are constructing. It’s not healthy.

    • Blake says:

      Prove that Quakers were surveilled- are you sure you didn’t mean crackers? I know you like to demean others, but that would be beneath you , right?
      Environmental “whackjobs” (your term), I can understand- they set homes and busnisses on fire, but Quakers? Really?
      I find that hard to believe, from Bush. Now, from Hussein…..

  2. Big Dog says:

    Sorry Adam, I missed the report on extremist vegans and Quakers.

    I notice you completely ignore the subject of the post. Just like you to ignore this kind of thing.

    Oh wait, you only ignore it when the right is targeted.

  3. Adam says:

    To say I wrongfully ignored it suggests you made a point that is even worth arguing instead of what you have which is just paranoid delusions that subtract from the debate over health care reform instead of adding to it. Instead I’d rather just keep poking fun at the psychosis you’ve developed since Obama first started running for POTUS.

    • Big Dog says:

      Once again, your argument lacks substance. I am not psychotic or paranoid.

      I am cautious, you are a statist who cannot see what trouble bigger government is.

      I also spoke against things in the last administration that I thought were wrong. You can’t see that.

      • Adam says:

        Substance? One only has to read the words you and Blake post daily to find all the substance needed to make my point. You’re not cautious, you’re deluded. Nobody is snitching on you, nobody is watching you, nobody cares, end of story.

        Yet, here you are again today worrying about being watched, fretting about some idiot journalist calling you a terrorist. At the same time in your eyes anybody who likes the job Obama is doing hates this country. I find that a little funny.

        • Blake says:

          I find Hussein a little scary and sad.

        • Blake says:

          See? Here you go again, “mocking” us, and then you will cry that we are being mean to you, or that there is no discussion here, when you ignore the subject at hand, or just toss out ad hominem attacks because you cannot refute a post. You would be better served by just hanging your head and saying you are sorry and we can get on with the discussion, but that is not gonna happen, is it?

        • Blake says:

          Gee Adam, first there was the report on “rightwing extremists”, and now this- we are being at the very least verbally demonized. Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean no one is after you—Kissinger

  4. Blake says:

    Oooh- when the demmies do it, it is their “First Amendment Right”- when conservatives do this, we are a mob.
    And you cannot see the hypocrisy here Adam? I mean, I would HOPE that you are a sane individual, but to not see how the unhinged left is spinning this takes blinders even Helen Keller would object to.

    • Adam says:

      I haven’t given any opinion on the protests that I know of but it’s nice to know that old reflexive hypocrisy label you use is still up to speed.

    • Adam says:

      The first step to not being accused of being a mob? Stop being a mob. Stop being a bunch of loud mouth jackasses that shout down the opposition at town hall meetings and maybe, just maybe you can talk about first amendment rights again.

      • Adam says:

        But yeah, what was that about the unhinged left spinning what?

      • Blake says:

        You really should get your house in order before criticizing ours- what about the socialist MOBS that actually did damage to property? Does that legitimize your positions?
        You all only talk about rights when it is to your advantage.
        Barama tells the right to “shut up” while Pres. Bush said of people protesting him, that this was a legit use of first Amendment rights.
        Who is the competent adult here? It isn’t Hussein, that’s for sure.

      • Blake says:

        You speak of “stop being a mob”- well, watch this and tell me if these people are correctly exercising their free speech rights, or stifling Tom Tancredo’s:

      • Blake says:

        This from the side that packs the town halls with the purple shirts of SEIU, so no dissenting opinions can be voiced. Now THERE’S Democracy at work, alright.

  5. Blake says:

    Leaving Adam aside, it is as you say – there are many other options, all of them rejected by the left, because they are not now, nor have they ever been interested in bipartisanship, or other plans. It has been their way or the highway, and this will only lead to disaster, as single payer, government healthcare is and has been extremely bad under either the Canadian or British systems, and once the bureaucracy is established, like the African Guinea Worm, it burrows into the American body, and is hard to get rid of.
    Just ask England.

  6. Barbara says:

    Obama doesn’t have to have anyone snitch on me as I will be glad to give him my name and phone number to make arrangements to tell him face to face what I think of him.

  7. Big Dog says:

    Adam, just because they are not snitching on me directly does not make it right. You were one of the people who cried about warrantless wiretaps (that were done according to the law) and now you think it is OK for the WH to ask people to report each other.

    No, you are deluded. Funny how anything Bush did was wrong and anyone who agreed with him was a morn in your eyes but those of us who dislike most of what Obama is doing are unjustified in your little mind.

    And I have complimented Obama once or twice.

    He is not doing things right. You might not like it but it is the end of our freedom.

  8. Big Dog says:

    Well Adam, there you go again showing your ignorance. You have a free speech right even if you are shouting and are saying things people do not like. It is sort of like Flag burning. You say that is a right no matter how distasteful people find it.

    Suppose you were burning another Flag and I turned a fire hose on you and bounced you off the concrete. Then you said that it was your right and I said that you stop burning those Flags and we will talk about your rights.

    How would you react to that? You see, you are saying that these people have no First Amendment right because they are shouting.

    They are not acting like mobs. That is drummed up by the libs. The people are screaming to be heard and are talking over each other. They are tired of being lied to.

    So here is the deal, you may have your First Amendment right to speak freely when you become conservative.

    That would not be right, now would it?

  9. victoria says:

    It is only OK when the left shuts down people like the minutemen and Tom Tancredo and Ann Coulter when they were speaking at colleges.

    • Blake says:

      Victoria- it is not that they know what to do with us when we show up to criticize, because(1)- previously, all the demonstrating was done BY THEM, and (2)- we are, in many cases, their parents.
      How do you deal with angry parents?
      They can’t go to their rooms.
      Although they should.

  10. katy the mean old lady says:

    Hey Adam,

    A sitting POTUS has told the American people to STFU and get out of his way.

    How’s that sitting with you pal?

  11. UNRR says:

    This post has been linked for the HOT5 Daily 8/8/2009, at The Unreligious Right

  12. […] Republicans and the endless war, the financial meltdown, the bloated government spending, etc.2. "Now We Are Political Terrorists" This post responds to a ridiculous & intellectually dishonest Washington Post piece by Steve […]