TexasCHLforum.com

AEA wrote:I just figured it out........Obama's plan........

If the Commerce clause thingy was upheld by the Supreme Court, then as suggested by many that they could control almost anything .......I know what the next move of the Administration would be........

They would pass a Nationwide Gun Registration Law and you would be forced to pay money to register your guns or have them confiscated. This would bring in more money for them to waste and would enact the Registration process "under the radar" with the precedent being the approval of SCOTUS under the Commerce clause for the Health Care Act. Thereby doing the same thing....."Creating something that didn't exist and forcing you to pay for it" all under the authority of the Commerce clause.

Think I'm wrong on this?

No, it's plausible. As Justice Scalia put it, they want to create a product, and then force people to buy it. That's what they think the commerce clause empowers them to do.

srothstein wrote:Relevant to this law is the phrase regulate interstate commerce. Just exactly what is legitimate regulation is not spelled out, and neither is exactly what is interstate commerce. This vagueness is why I am not sure the law will be ruled unconstitutional and why I am not sure the court would be wrong in saying so. We would be much better off working to get the law repealed through the legislative process than counting on the court.

I honestly think that if this law is not overturned by the court, we will be at a tipping point for some kind of significantly traumatic reset button, possibly one involving violence nationwide. There are just too many people who are bitterly BITTERLY opposed, and who may take their anger out in violent manners against those elected officials who voted for it. I would not—and let me be clear that I am not advocating here—be surprised if people started taking potshots at those representatives and senators who voted for this abomination.

I personally feel so strongly about this, that I could not be anymore outraged if Congress had re-instituted slavery, because I believe that the healthcare bill is no less a violation of my rights as a sovereign citizen and it makes us slaves to the whim of every commie pinko bastard democrat who is determined to turn the USA into Cuba. If I can't even decline to buy a product I don't want—and more importantly, don't need—without being fined a significant chunk of cash nearly equivalent to a monthly insurance premium each and every month by the IRS, then how can anyone legitimately argue that I still have rights? If they can do this to you, they can come take your guns too. They can imprison you without a trial. They can quarter troops in your house. They can search you, and detain you as long as they want. If they get away with this, they can do anything they want to you, and you will have no recourse..........except at the bullet box, because apparently the ballot box is broken. A Congress that is this far out of touch with A) what people want, and B) what rights they have, is a Congress that has lost all moral authority. If SCOTUS lacks the courage to say "ENOUGH!!!," then I really do think that the backblast could push this country into real third world-style political violence, with people getting disappeared, and the degradation of democracy into dictatorial oligarchy.

I know that might sound paranoid to some, but I really am truly worried about this stuff. It is exactly this kind of legislation that will lead to the dissolution of our political system, and any access to the American Dream. True patriots simply must do whatever is required in the way of exercising their political rights while they still have them to get this thing overthrown; and then to vote every crappy toxic democrat out of office and ensure that their party ceases to exist as a political force.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Rea ... d_Medicine

Reagan opens by saying that in 1927 socialist Norman Thomas said that the American people would never vote for socialism, but "under the name of liberalism the American people would adopt every fragment of the socialist program."

{snip}

Reagan says that "Government has invaded the free precincts of private citizens," stating that the U.S. government owns "1/5th of the total industrial capacity of the United States." Reagan says "One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project, most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can’t afford it." Reagan cites the failure of president Harry Truman's national health insurance proposal as evidence of the American people's rejection of socialized medicine.

Reagan describes Representative Aime Forand as having introduced a bill which would institute "compulsory health insurance" for all people of social security age. Forand is quoted as having said, “If we can only break through and get our foot inside the door, then we can extend the program after that." Forand is likened to labor union leader Walter Reuther, who is quoted as having said, "It’s no secret that the United Automobile Workers is officially on record of backing a program of national health insurance." The Forand bill is described as being praised by socialists: "They say once the Forand bill is passed this nation will be provided with a mechanism for socialized medicine capable of indefinite expansion in every direction until it includes the entire population. Now we can’t say we haven’t been warned."

We have been warned. There was a time when democrats could be counted on to be virulently anti-communist (JFK comes to mind). Not any longer. From now on, any democrat is going to have to prove to me that he is a friend of the Constitution, or as far as I am concerned, his voting makes him a domestic enemy of it.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/ ... e_law.html
Unequal Protection Under the Health Care Law
February 15, 2012
By Hal Scherz

One of life's minor annoyances occurs when someone receives preferential treatment because of his wealth or perceived power. Many people have experienced this firsthand when a "VIP" comes into a restaurant and jumps ahead while they've been waiting for a table. This offends most Americans because it is contrary to our sense of fair play. It divides people into elites and everyone else.

This is where we are heading with health care. Don't think so? Well, on October 11, 2011, the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) declared that PSA screening for prostate cancer in healthy men was no longer recommended. No urologists -- the acknowledged experts in the treatment of prostate cancer -- were involved in this decision. During the time that PSA screening has been available, prostate cancer deaths have steadily declined. Then why have these recommendations been issued? Because in a top-down, government-controlled health care system, dollars need to be trimmed and patients cannot get everything that they want, even when it means screening for cancer. Patients have no say over their health care, and the government decides where health care dollars are allocated -- perhaps instead to Planned Parenthood for abortions. Incidentally, President Obama underwent PSA screening several months ago.

Get that? Obama wants us all to pay for abortions and birth control pills in the name of "reproductive health" for women; but when it comes to REAL reproductive health, a simple and inexpensive routine blood test which is a reliable indicator for cancer in the male reproductive system is no longer recommended. Men are being robbed of REAL reproductive health in order to help pay for aborting babies in the name female contraception.

In addition to BHO, I am also someone who has to deal with prostate issues and requires regular screening. Guys, this president literally doesn't care if all of you die of metastatic prostate cancer (yes, it is VERY terminal if not discovered and treated) as long as tramps keep receiving free abortions that you pay for.

This bill MUST be overturned.

And incidentally, my wife's insurance policy, which we pay for out of pocket, shot up $100 more per month within a couple of weeks of the healthcare law's passage. Since then, it has gone up a couple of times again, and it is now approaching a price which we can no longer afford. So in the next year, neither of us will have insurance, and she is in perfect health for her age (early 50s).

Democrats killed healthcare coverage in this country for anybody over about 50 years old. I hate them all for that. They are literally the domestic enemies the oath refers to.

There are two BIG problems with the healthcare law.........not to mention that Government has no business being the nation's medical provider......but that's a whole other issue tied to the fact that the democrat party is composed primarily of illiberal little control freaks who are crypto communists and want to tear down the nation—controlling access to healthcare being probably the most effective way to do that....

1) Mandatory car insurance cannot be even remotely compared to mandatory health insurance because you are not required to own a car. But mandatory health insurance requires you to be insured simply because you have a pulse and respirations. Nobody argues whether or not the government has the authority to intrude itself into the stream of commerce. Even though the Commerce clause is routinely abused, there are some legitimate exercises of power which are legitimately sanctioned by that clause. However, never before in the history of this nation has the government required a citizen to enter the stream of commerce simply for no other reason than that of being alive. That has to be unconstitutional, and it is definitely contrary to the notion of personal freedom.

2) In order to enforce the law, the IRS has been authorized to assess a monthly fine of $225.00 (if I recall the amount correctly) against those who have not purchased insurance. Now, although I am against the idea of socialized medicine, the sting of this fine would be less obnoxious if it at least bought me a healthcare benefit. But it doesn't. It is purely punishment for not having insurance. There is no benefit to it, except that the state makes an additional $2700.00 per year off of me.............for breathing. In other words, it is a life tax—a tax for living and using up oxygen while committing the cardinal sin of not being a wealthy democrat donor.

No commercial insurance program will cover me for less than about $1200 per month, and the coverage is lousy if I can get it. Most insurance companies won't touch me with a ten foot pole. The state's high risk pool would cost me $628/month this year. That is a total annual premium of $7536. That policy has a $7500 annual deductible, and $5000 out of pocket limit......and it doesn't cover any of my pre-existing conditions for the first year. That means that I have to spend $7500+$5000+$7536 ($20,036 total) during the first year BEFORE I get to see any benefits, and after the coverage actually kicks in, I have to spend another $20,036 per year in order to get any benefits at all.

The federal plan is only a little bit better, but do I want the federal government mixed up in even more of my life? No. But even if I was OK with it, the premium alone is more than I can afford by a factor of at least 2. So the bottom line is that I can't get coverage at a rate that I can afford. Since I'm not a rich man, I get to pay the federal government $225 of punishment money every month. The democrats who voted for this are fascists. The republicans that voted for it are even worse. ALL of them are completely out of touch with America and the lives of real people. Anyone who voted for this abomination needs to be thrown out of office. The president who pushed it needs to go.

If SCOTUS will not overturn the law, then we are completely lost as a nation because there will be no end to what the government can require you to buy, and if you can't afford it, then you'll either have to pay punitive fines, or you'll have to become a ward of the state. I love America, but I am beginning to hate our government with a deep and abiding passion. If this law stands, the government will have lost every last vestige of moral authority as far as I am concerned.