How Far Can The State Go?

[JakeStarkey]

Nothing I ever post is false.

You just did.

Much of your material is misanalysed and misinterpreted.

Reactionary freaks like you do not understand the consequences of Hitler had won: a fascist Britain and France, and eventually an authoritarian America in self protection. Plus all the evil that goes with a racial ideology of German fascism.

Where are your examples?
Oh....there are none.

You used to me merely a moron.

Now you're a liar, too.

Deflection. You made the false claim that you never lie. That is your problem, not mine at all.

You have shown to a religious fascist in the worst sense.

It's good to know what you believe.

 

[boedicca]

It’s not possible to interact with society in a meaningful way by not having a mobile phone. I think human implants are likely to go along a very similar route. It would be such a disadvantage to not have the implant that it essentially becomes not optional....[/i]
The Mark: Scientist Claims Human Microchip Implants Will Become "Not Optional"

If that's true then why is everyone worried about some cows in the Nevada desert.

Clearly, connecting the dots is beyond your mental capabilities.

 

[boedicca]

How far will The State go? This far if we let it: manadatory implants so that we are under surveillance...constantly.http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-ne...ip-implants-will-become-not-optional_04242014

What about mandatory implants for the Itty Bitty Titty Club?

I think you need a brain implant far more than enhancements for your Moobies (just get a Manzier for that problem).

 

[PoliticalChic]

You just did.

Much of your material is misanalysed and misinterpreted.

Reactionary freaks like you do not understand the consequences of Hitler had won: a fascist Britain and France, and eventually an authoritarian America in self protection. Plus all the evil that goes with a racial ideology of German fascism.

Where are your examples?
Oh....there are none.

You used to me merely a moron.

Now you're a liar, too.

Deflection. You made the false claim that you never lie. That is your problem, not mine at all.

You have shown to a religious fascist in the worst sense.

It's good to know what you believe.

I never lie.


You do.


Where are the examples you claim?




Curious to me how imbeciles like you post a false claim....made obvious by the fact that you can't seem to come up with examples of your claim.



You remain living proof that cow pies can sprout legs and walk.

 

[PoliticalChic]

PC is a far right opus dei type of pro-fascist who believed that Hitler winning WWII would have better than the West. I am glad she blogs, for it allows us to identify the enemies of America.

" pro-fascist who believed that Hitler winning WWII would have better than the West."


Here we have an example of a poor loser who has been spanked numerous times, and can do no better than lie and slander as revenge.

Here's hoping you get all you deserve in life.

 

[KNB]

It’s not possible to interact with society in a meaningful way by not having a mobile phone. I think human implants are likely to go along a very similar route. It would be such a disadvantage to not have the implant that it essentially becomes not optional....[/i]
The Mark: Scientist Claims Human Microchip Implants Will Become "Not Optional"

If that's true then why is everyone worried about some cows in the Nevada desert.

Clearly, connecting the dots is beyond your mental capabilities.

Please educate me, professor. Connect the dots for my feeble mind. Show me the way.

 

[boedicca]

If that's true then why is everyone worried about some cows in the Nevada desert.

Clearly, connecting the dots is beyond your mental capabilities.

Please educate me, professor. Connect the dots for my feeble mind. Show me the way.

The cows in the dessert are a symptom of The State encroaching into every aspect of our lives. 140 years ago, ranchers were free to graze their cattle on empty land. The land is still basically empty...but the Feds have abused their power by taking it over and using the pretext of a tortoise to steer the benefits of that land to political cronies.

If they'll use a dessert that way, just contemplate how much they desire to control and use people, add the ever increasing surveillance capabilities provided by Big Tech...and voila, it's quite easy to see how implants will become mandatory in order to receive one's monthly stipend and food allowance once the takeover is complete.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Clearly, connecting the dots is beyond your mental capabilities.

Please educate me, professor. Connect the dots for my feeble mind. Show me the way.

The cows in the dessert are a symptom of The State encroaching into every aspect of our lives. 140 years ago, ranchers were free to graze their cattle on empty land. The land is still basically empty...but the Feds have abused their power by taking it over and using the pretext of a tortoise to steer the benefits of that land to political cronies.

If they'll use a dessert that way, just contemplate how much they desire to control and use people, add the ever increasing surveillance capabilities provided by Big Tech...and voila, it's quite easy to see how implants will become mandatory in order to receive one's monthly stipend and food allowance once the takeover is complete.

How come my taxes subsidize his cattle feed?

Secondly the paranoia over the state implants is ludicrous. The government couldn't get a website right that the private sector does on a daily basis but you expect the government to be able to keep precise tabs on the whereabouts of 300+ million people? The private sector only now is figuring out how to pick up the signal from your cell phone when you enter a mall and they have an incentive to get that to work. The government doesn't have the budget, the resources or the skillsets necessary to create the kind of scifi scenario you are imagining.

 

[boedicca]

Instead of questioning why your taxes subsidize his cattle feed (which considering the way the BLM neglects land, is quite nonsense), the better question is Why Does The Federal Government Own 84% of the land in Nevada?

 

[boedicca]

Secondly the paranoia over the state implants is ludicrous. The government couldn't get a website right that the private sector does on a daily basis but you expect the government to be able to keep precise tabs on the whereabouts of 300+ million people? The private sector only now is figuring out how to pick up the signal from your cell phone when you enter a mall and they have an incentive to get that to work. The government doesn't have the budget, the resources or the skillsets necessary to create the kind of scifi scenario you are imagining.

Really? The Feds don't need to invent anything...their Big Tech cronies will do that for them. We already see this in the surveillance apparatus that's being used by the NSA. It's not going to stop there.

And it's not a coincidence that Big Tech is a huge supporter of Big Government.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Instead of questioning why your taxes subsidize his cattle feed (which considering the way the BLM neglects land, is quite nonsense), the better question is Why Does The Federal Government Own 84% of the land in Nevada?

So you aren't going to address either of my questions?

 

[Moonglow]

Euthanasia, does it count if they elect to stand out in a tornado?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Secondly the paranoia over the state implants is ludicrous. The government couldn't get a website right that the private sector does on a daily basis but you expect the government to be able to keep precise tabs on the whereabouts of 300+ million people? The private sector only now is figuring out how to pick up the signal from your cell phone when you enter a mall and they have an incentive to get that to work. The government doesn't have the budget, the resources or the skillsets necessary to create the kind of scifi scenario you are imagining.

Really? The Feds don't need to invent anything...their Big Tech cronies will do that for them. We already see this in the surveillance apparatus that's being used by the NSA. It's not going to stop there.

And it's not a coincidence that Big Tech is a huge supporter of Big Government.

NSA surveillance consists of a super computer searching emails and texts for key words. That is a long way off keeping minute by minute tabs on 300+ individuals scattered all across the nation.

 

[KNB]

Clearly, connecting the dots is beyond your mental capabilities.

Please educate me, professor. Connect the dots for my feeble mind. Show me the way.

The cows in the dessert are a symptom of The State encroaching into every aspect of our lives. 140 years ago, ranchers were free to graze their cattle on empty land. The land is still basically empty...but the Feds have abused their power by taking it over and using the pretext of a tortoise to steer the benefits of that land to political cronies.

If they'll use a dessert that way, just contemplate how much they desire to control and use people, add the ever increasing surveillance capabilities provided by Big Tech...and voila, it's quite easy to see how implants will become mandatory in order to receive one's monthly stipend and food allowance once the takeover is complete.

140 years ago, ranchers were getting used to the idea that they weren't free to rape their slaves anymore. Times change. Land uses change with demographic shifts and global economics. Taxation changes. Cliven Bundy wasn't following the law and threatened Federal agents with firearms. Misinformed right-wing Republican voters forced an armed standoff with Federal agents to protect a racist criminal.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Admit it or not, the politically dominant philosophy, whether one calls it Democrat, Liberal, socialist, Marxist, it virulently opposed to religion, and, by extension, the morality thereof.

Remarkably ignorant and partisan, but not surprising given the OP.

It is moronic nonsense to associate democrats and liberals with ‘socialism’ or ‘Marxism,’ just as it would be moronic nonsense to associate republicans and conservatives with fascists or Nazis.

Democrats and liberals are advocates and practitioners of free markets, free enterprise, and a capitalist economic system; they are business owners and entrepreneurs; they pay taxes, abide by government regulations, and work hard to promote their businesses.

They are also, wisely and appropriately, pragmatists – they correctly understand that post-Lochner Commerce Clause jurisprudence is necessary, proper, and Constitutional, where regulatory policies are implemented to address potential abuse and safeguard the markets where the market system is incapable of providing adequate protections.

Last, the vast majority of democrats and liberals are Christian, an even larger majority are persons of faith – to ‘argue’ that they are “virulently opposed to religion…and…morality” is the epitome of partisan demagoguery and stupidity, reaffirming the fact that the OP is a liar and tedious partisan hack.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Religion has always been the archenemy of Totalitarianism. The Totalitarians need the People to worship Government. Religion gets in the way of that. I think some prominent Communists had quite a bit to say on that subject.

ha ha ha ha ha ha. Religion was basis for totalitarianism for centuries.

in the case of islam you are correct, in the middle ages the priests were the most powerful people in the land--more powerful than the kings.

Christianity of today is about tolerance, acceptance, and freedom. No one is forced to be a Christian or believe in Christian teachings.

Our constitution provides for freedom of religion, not freedom FROM religion. Our founding documents are full of references to the creator and a higher power---but there is not one mention of a specific religion.

No one is forced to be a Christian in this country because the secularists won.

 

[NYcarbineer]

freedom of religion means freedom from a state mandated religion, I think we agree

Freedom from religion means that a majority cannot impose their religious beliefs on a minority because the individual right to be free from religion is more important than the majority belief.

"endowed by their creator" is the DOI not one of our founding documents?

The DOI was not a founding document. The term founding derives from foundation and the Constitution is the document upon which this nation was founded. The DOI was the divorce subpoena that terminated the prior arrangement.

Quite true. But "endowed by their creator" isn't a religious invocation anyway. It's a flowery way to say "natural", as in "natural rights" or "natural born", i.e. a characteristic present by definition. "Creator" doesn't single out any particular religion.

Endowed by their Creator was meant to be a direct refutation of the opposite claim that God had endowed the King with divine powers.

 

[NYcarbineer]

3. PC is, IMO, a bore, a passive aggressive, angry narcissist who holds any ideas which does not fit nicely into the box she carries labeled "my dogma" as the product of (pick the pejorative).

PC is a Republican apparatchik, a foot solider who spreads information created by other people. PC is not attempting to reveal all sides of a given debate; this thread is emphatically not an educational exercise; it is pure information control in the service of a political agenda. She doesn't show how the data was collected and interpreted in the Dutch case, nor does she make a connection between the Dutch case and Obama.

Can you imagine if PC all the sudden started reporting objectively on this stuff, rather than clogging the message board with rightwing propaganda? I can see it now. Tomorrow she will provide a detailed analysis of how much money the Health Care Industry has poured into Washington. She will demonstrate how Health Care was the first or second largest contributor to congressional elections, and that with this money they were given a virtual monopoly, such that consumers in say 95% of Iowa only had one health care option. This meant that BlueCross could raise rates & decrease services without being disciplined by competition, the effect of which was to shrink health care coverage (by making it unaffordable to average people) - the result being a cruel kind of euthanasia by default. And then she will move on to show which prominent Rightwing think tank created "Death Panels" (which, as it turns out, is not a death panel, but an optional counseling session about "end of life" treatment and the selection of medical advocates in the case of incapacitation). That is, she will give us a very detailed exposition on exactly where the "Death Panel" theory came from, and how the concept was not only created by AEI and used by Bob Dole to counter HillaryCare, but - PC will show us - how the rightwing propaganda machine began using the phrase "Death Panel" once Obama adopted this Republican idea, which has nothing to do with state mandated execution. I trust that PC will some day come here not to spread propaganda, but debate actual laws through a direct study of the language of those laws (not merely a cut-&-paste interpretation of those laws by special interests who have a horse in the race).

"And then she will move on to show which prominent Rightwing think tank created "Death Panels" (which, as it turns out, wasn't anything like a death panel, but an optional counseling session about "end of life"......




Now, under the out of use document called the Constitution, the Congress wrote the laws, and the executive branch enforced same....

....but under Obama, he changes laws at will.....ObamaCare, case in point.....some 38 changes by Obama.


So....these may or may not be currently in the 38.1 version, but.....

...just to prove what a dunce you are.....


Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC Bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get

Pg 42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your benefits for you. You have no choice!

Pg 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Government will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors, low income, poor affected.

PG 430 Lines 11-15 The government will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life.

PG 624 "Quality" measures shall be designed to assess outcomes and functional status of patients.

PG 624 "Quality" measures shall be designed to profile you including race, age, gender, place of residence, etc.

Pg 632 Lines 14-25 The Government may implement any "Quality measure" of health care services as they see fit.

PG 633 14-25/ 634 1-9 The Secretary may issue non-endorsed "Quality Measures" for Physician Services and Dialysis Services.





Now to prove that you are a liar, too, this, by Obama adviser Rattner:

"1. "Beyond Obamacare...WE need death panels.



2. ...unless we start allocating health care resources more prudently — rationing, by its proper name — the exploding cost of Medicare will swamp the federal budget.

3. ...in the pantheon of toxic issues — the famous “third rails” of American politics — none stands taller than overtly acknowledging that elderly Americans are not entitled to every conceivable medical procedure or pharmaceutical."

4. Take Britain, which provides universal coverage with spending at proportionately almost half of American levels. Its National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence uses a complex quality-adjusted life year system to put an explicit value (up to about $48,000 per year) on a treatment’s ability to extend life."
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/op...care.html?_r=0

So you're making the argument that we ought to allocate virtually unlimited government resources to the cost of healthcare for those who can't otherwise pay,

in order to avoid any sort of so-called rationing?

Really? You're willing to sign on to that? That's to the left of just about everyone with an opinion on the matter.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Admit it or not, the politically dominant philosophy, whether one calls it Democrat, Liberal, socialist, Marxist, it virulently opposed to religion, and, by extension, the morality thereof.

Remarkably ignorant and partisan, but not surprising given the OP.

It is moronic nonsense to associate democrats and liberals with ‘socialism’ or ‘Marxism,’ just as it would be moronic nonsense to associate republicans and conservatives with fascists or Nazis.

Democrats and liberals are advocates and practitioners of free markets, free enterprise, and a capitalist economic system; they are business owners and entrepreneurs; they pay taxes, abide by government regulations, and work hard to promote their businesses.

They are also, wisely and appropriately, pragmatists – they correctly understand that post-Lochner Commerce Clause jurisprudence is necessary, proper, and Constitutional, where regulatory policies are implemented to address potential abuse and safeguard the markets where the market system is incapable of providing adequate protections.

Last, the vast majority of democrats and liberals are Christian, an even larger majority are persons of faith – to ‘argue’ that they are “virulently opposed to religion…and…morality” is the epitome of partisan demagoguery and stupidity, reaffirming the fact that the OP is a liar and tedious partisan hack.

1. "It is moronic nonsense to associate democrats and liberals with ‘socialism’ or ‘Marxism,’..."

Really?


Ever wonder why Democrat/Liberals are so filled with fear at calling the states that they control "Red States," as they are appropriately named, that they had their minions in the media reverse and call them "Blue States"?


You know why they were originally known as "Red States,"....

....don't you.





2..".... associate republicans and conservatives with fascists or Nazis."

" Liberals claim the center by placing socialism on the left and national socialism on the right, even though Lenin/Stalin and Hitler/other Nazis had much in common as they centralized power and preached hatred.

A more accurate spectrum would place totalitarians of many stripes on the left and defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom on the right." WORLD | Let's admit who we are | Marvin Olasky | July 17, 2010



Nazi...national socialism....based on nationalism and/or race...
Communism....international socialism.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Anarchy is the new conservative religion.

Laws that aren't voluntary are the new tyranny, according to conservatives.

Of course the only modifications to the above are that government and laws that conservatives like are acceptable.

This has been explained to you before. Your reasoning is that two wrongs make a right, and you're embracing one of the two wrongs. That's mindless acquiescence to tyranny. Bottom line: what you're calling anarchy is the opposition to governmental violations of the unabridgible civil liberties enumerated in the Bill of Rights! Seriously, what's wrong with you?