Submental Gymnastics

Bill Maher and Piers Morgan
CNN, October 29, 2013

Submental. A word that seems to mean one thing, but by means of some linguistic gymnastics, is bent to mean something else. It would imply something below the level of proper mentation, but it doesn’t.  Just like the meaning of the word “settled” seems to mean something special to statists in regards to the law.

“And also, let’s again have a little perspective. Was any program ever, ever sabotaged to the degree this one has been? I mean, it’s been three years. It’s not a bill. It’s a law. I know that tea people think they know the Constitution — I don’t think they’ve even read it. A bill becomes a law, once it does, you don’t argue about it…I don’t care what your opinion on the health care law is now, it’s the law — you’re supposed to help it along.”  — Bill Maher, “Piers Morgan Live”, CNN, Tuesday October 29, 2013

Hey, Bill…I have a question for you.  Have you driven on a road in the past decade or so that had a speed limit of, say, 65 mph? It’s hard to drive any significant distance without finding one; most Interstates and other major highways have raised their limits to somewhere around there.  You’re old enough, Bill, to remember the late 70’s, just after something called the “National Maximum Speed Law” was passed, in the throes of the “Energy Crisis”. It was part of the “Emergency Highway Energy Conservation Act”, which limited maximum speed on ANY road in the US to 55 mph.

In 1995, guess what happened, Bill. That law was repealed.  That’s right, it was repealed.  As in eradicated, removed, cancelled. Congress voted to negate it.  “What,” you say, “A Federal Law was cancelled?”  You recoil in disgust, your emotions an agonized, confused whirl.  “But when a bill becomes a law, once it does, you don’t argue about it!  It’s supposed to never go away!”

It did, Bill. History is full of such laws that have been passed, lasted a while, then were…brace yourself…repealed.  I’m sorry to have to shock you like that, Bill, I know that word hurts to hear, but you have to face it someday. Laws like the Alaska Native Allotment Act, the Chinese Exclusion Act, the Dawes Act, and even the…I’m sorry, this is brutal for you and I realize that, but be brave…the Smith-Hughes National Vocational Education Act of 1917.  Now that’s submental, isn’t it, Bill?

Then there’s the Banking Act of 1933. You’re a liberal, Bill, you surely know what that was.  You don’t recognize it?  Why, it was the Glass-Steagall Act! I thought every liberal knew what that was, and blamed it’s loss for the financial crisis. All the Occupiers had signs demanding it be reenacted, you MUST remember THAT!  And the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act — though you may remember it as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 — don’t you remember?

That act repealed PART of the Glass-Steagall Act. Just part. There was such argument and haranguing over that, but in the end, it was done. Weren’t you all so upset when the Republicans tried to negate just PART of the ACA? You thought that was so unfair, to try to remove just a piece of a law like that. And when the shutdown came, there was such furor over the Republicans trying to pass “piecemeal” laws to cover things like death benefits, and national monuments. No, it had to be all of it, that’s what you all screamed, all of it!  It’s the law of the land, it’s settled!  You can’t just hack at it like this, you have to accept it, get behind it! That’s what you all said.

But then someone asked for the sequester to be negated. They wanted those increases restored.  I thought the sequester was a Federal law? It’s settled.  Why this talk of…(choke) repealing  it? Wait…wasn’t that something you wanted?  You didn’t like the sequester. In fact, didn’t you say “This Sequester shit is so submental – its like not having the willpower to diet, so rigging the refrigerator to blow up when you open it”?  Bill, even though the word “submental” means “located in, affecting, or performed on the area under the chin,”  that comment would imply that you…you…didn’t agree with a law.  You wanted it…repealed.  But according to you, isn’t that sort of thing submental?  Well, I, for one, feel like I’ve taken one on the chin, but I don’t think that’s what you meant, was it?

I’m confused about your desire to repeal the sequester, Bill.  Aren’t we supposed to help it along, regardless of our opinion on it? But Democrats want to fight over the sequester, and even Ezra Klein can see that the deal to end the shutdown presented them with a golden opportunity to change an existing, settled law.

“The timing of all this is designed to create a fight about sequestration. The Jan. 15 deadline means funding for the federal government runs out at the exact moment sequestration’s deeper cuts kick in. The Dec. 13 deadline means that the full House and Senate would have time to consider any package of recommendations the bicameral committee comes up with, if the committee actually manages to come up with anything.” — Ezra Klein, Washington Post, October 14, 2013.

I think it’s time to face some uncomfortable facts, Bill. I know it hurts to say this, but I think it’s clear that any law can be repealed. It doesn’t matter if it’s a liberal or conservative law. It doesn’t matter if it has bipartisan support, or if the Supreme Court rules in its favor.  SCOTUS can revisit it and change its mind, or Congress can pass a law that changes or even negates a law — they can remove it entirely. There’s even a procedure, laid out in the Constitution, for amending it. The highest law of the land can be altered if the proper procedure is followed.  There have been 27 amendments to the US Constitution. Of those, the 18th Amendment prohibited alcohol…and the 21st Amendment repealed the 18th.  No law is immune to changes over time.

Democrats have been screaming for the 2nd Amendment to either go away, or be hedged about with regulations, restrictions, and obstructions to the point where the people would only be able to legally get single-shot rimfire rifles, which they have to keep in a government-run armory, and can only be taken out to go to a government-sanctioned range and back again. That’s how they do it in much of Europe, after all, and aside from the skyrocketing violence, terrorist actions, and public massacres by rampaging nutcases, they’re doing  just fine… Well, to be fair, not all Democrats want that. Some want every single gun in America turned in and melted down into commemorative paperweights. Except for the ones held by the police, of course. They say “we don’t want to take away your guns,” but they have their fingers crossed behind their backs, because they have made it perfectly clear that they do in fact want to do just that.

But to paraphrase you, Bill, it’s not a bill. It’s an amendment to the Constitution. I know that statist, leftist people think they know the Constitution — I don’t think they’ve even read it. A bill becomes an amendment, then goes to the States for ratification. Once it does, you don’t argue about it.

Right, Bill?

 

Respectfully Submitted

References

Bill Maher on Piers Morgan Show, CNN 10/29/13:  http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1310/29/pmt.01.html

Ezra Klein, Wonkblog, Washington Post 10/14/13:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/10/14/the-senates-deal-to-end-the-shutdown-is-a-deal-to-fight-over-sequestration/

CU Talks – Lonegan for Senate – ep.025

Steve Lonegan for NJ Senatevote-wed[1]

Did you know that in two days there’s a chance to get another GOPer in the US Senate? Lonegan for Senate special election vs. Pathological Liar Cory “Hollywood” Booker.

The Shutdown Continues

Also, the Shutdown continues, negotiations happening as I write this. We’ll talk about it, and try not to get TOO angry.

Given that some folks are going a few weeks without expected paychecks, and in llight of the “catastrophic” EBT outage – some aspects of the Prepper Philosophy have been proven to make complete sense

We’re seeing the result of widespread removal of enforcement of many laws, lack of moral clarity in the culture, lack of repurcussions for bad actions. Sure, it’s a cyclical thing, but how bad is it going to have to get before some morality and decency creeps back in?

And then, because all of that talk is pretty depressing, we circle around to talk about our friend who attended the Million Vet March on the Memorials and engaged in the most beautiful act of Civil Disobedience. It’s the people stepping forward, saying no, taking responsibility for themselves and their nation that really give me hope!

 


Every week: Current Events from a Conservative standpoint

We will discuss the week’s happenings within the larger context of growing the conservative movement.

  • What does it mean to me?
  • How can we look at and talk about the news of the day in a way that grows the movement and keeps us happy, productive, and successful?

With your Hosts Leslie P & Nikolaos Dimopoulos

How Can Good Things Happen Without Government?

shutdown-closedMuch of the “concern” about government shutdown is that without the federal government, good things stop happening. At least, that’s what the Big Government fear mongers are trying to convince us.

“Shutdown Theater” is all about immediate cessation of the good stuff, making us feel the pain of a government shutdown, so that we will clamor for someone to help us, save us, protect us, care for us! And then…Big Gov’t steps in and saves the day. And then, the most important part…we meekly go back to our lives of drudgery continuing to give Gov’t big piles of our money so that they can live fancy lives “taking care of us”.

Guess what? It’s a lie!!!

Sams Club Fayetteville, ArkansasCostcoThe Feds shutdown the military commissaries so that poor veterans and soldiers lost the savings that many of them depend on. Sam’s Club and Costco immediately stepped in. They didn’t have to discuss or pass any laws or hire consultants, the free market was able to move quickly and make that decision. I suspect that one of the two came out with the message first, and the other, wanting to compete, followed suit. That’s the free market.

FisherHouse1The Feds stopped the immediate payout to families of fallen soldiers, which has allowed them to travel overseas to accompany their loved ones home. The story hit the news yesterday. Fisher House steps in with a solution today.

That’s two different solutions to “problems” that the Big Gov’t folks wanted you to feel the pain about. One solution is free market competition, the other is individual charity. Both solutions were implemented quickly, can be adjusted quickly to meet demand, and are implemented voluntarily by all parties – no confiscation of money involved.

This is how smaller government works.

And it TERRIIFIES the Big Gov’t folks for you to discover this, and understand it in this way.

Because it makes you think….hey,. maybe I don’t have to be a dependent child of the government, maybe I can be a free and independent adult.

Spread this story – make sure to explain it to people in these terms, so that they understand.

References:

Fisher House Steps in: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/09/nonprofit-steps-up-to-help-families-of-fallen-soldiers-after-government-shutdown-blocks-death-benefits

Sam’s Club Free Passes to Military: http://www3.samsclub.com/newsroom/Press/1513

Costco Free Membership to Military: http://www.examiner.com/article/costco-welcomes-military-id-card-holders-u-s-a-a-gives-loans-to-service-members

CU Talks – Shutdown Theater – ep.024

The Federal Government shutdown on October 1. Nikos and I review a bit of the constitutional justification for the House choosing not to fund certain programs, in this case Obamacare. Mostly we talk about how the shutdown has been implemented. The Administration started off as “President Stompy Foot” and his buddy Harry Reid the whiner – complaining that the GOP wasn’t giving in to their demands. Their next step was to be horribly petty and vindictive. Most of my commentary on Google Plus over the last week has been titled Petty, Vindictive Shutdown Theater. Now, the Administration has moved to the 3rd stage – Jack-Booted Thugs. They’re blockading private businesses, removing old people from their homes, the stench of desperation is strong.

That which is in the control of government can and will be used against the people as leverage in a political debate. – Mike Lee

The reality of the Federal Government shutdown? Quite a lot of people who believed that they had stable, reliable employment are suddenly without a paycheck. Many of these people will get back pay once it’s over, turning this into a paid vacation, but they’ll have to make it through a few weeks without income. Others, government contractors, likely will lose their pay.  It’s the same thing that has happened to millions over the last few years, although these guys don’t get the benefit of knowing they’ve been laid off, and are free to look for alternate work, they’re just in a holding pattern. So yes, it does suck greatly for a good number of people.

For the rest of us? Estimates are that only about 17% of government is actually stopped. The world hasn’t ended. Yes, some important things did stop, also some stupid things are still happening. What this tells us, if we’re paying attention, is that government can be 17% smaller, and the remaining 83% reallocated, and we’ll be fine. THAT is why Washington is scared. We’re finding out that maybe we don’t need them as desperately as we thought we did. Maybe these federal lands could be state lands. Maybe some of the stuff that Washington has been doing they could just stop doing.

How does it end? The House has to stay strong, and it looks like they’re doing so. Speaker Boehner has a site where you can track the spending bills they’ve passed so far, and see where the hold up is. Hint: Harry Reid.

What can you do? Become the trusted news source. The majority of your friends and coworkers get their news via social media now. They aren’t seeking out the Old Media, they’re receiving it via stories shared by their friends. Be the friend who shares NEW media sources. Share your point of view, share your analysis along with the stories from conservative sources. Old Media is NOT neutral and unbiased, they’ve been lying about that from the get-go. They are liberal sources. It is entirely appropriate for people to get the opposing point of view. Old Media is choosing what to cover, their interests are not the same as ours. The stories you read in New Media are different topics, share them with your friends, discuss them everywhere.

Be a reporter – you have a reporter’s notebook and camera with you – take notes, pictures, and dictation and share it to social media – you’ve just reported a story and now you are an ORIGINAL news source. Old Media is biased to the left. That’s a fact as immutable as the Sun rising in the East. Doesn’t even make sense to bother discussing it. You know the sun rises in the east, and plant flowers, install windowshades according. Do the same about Old Media lefty bias. Just work around it.

References

  1. How to Constitutionally Fund the Government  – Andrew McCarthy’s article at NRO on how the House is exactly the right group to defund Obmamcare
  2. The List: Unnecessarily Shut Down by Obama to Inflict Public PainShutdown theater, unnecessary closures
  3. ABOUT THAT VEGAS COUPLE KICKED OUT OF THEIR HOME…  – Blaze article mentioning the Oil & Gas co’s staying open
  4. Vindictive Shutdown Theater – NRO article about the pettiness
  5. Senate Must Act – get the latest official word from the Speaker

Every week: Current Events from a Conservative standpoint

We will discuss the week’s happenings within the larger context of growing the conservative movement.

  • What does it mean to me?
  • How can we look at and talk about the news of the day in a way that grows the movement and keeps us happy, productive, and successful?

With your Hosts Leslie P & Nikolaos Dimopoulos

Just — Power

Shutdowns-in-the-pastThe President recently stated during a speech on October 1, 2013, that the Affordable Care Act (aka “ObamaCare” or “ACA”) was “settled”, and “here to stay”.  Since then, I have seen a number of posts deriding others for saying the shutdown (which I call the “Governocalypse”) was a clear sign that the President and the Democrats don’t want to negotiate.

This in contrast to the many times, 17 in fact since 1976, the US Government has shut down and there have been efforts to work out the difficulties between the aggrieved parties.  Eight of these shutdowns occurred when the Democrat Party controlled both House and Senate, and five of which where the Democrats controlled the entire government, including the President.  (Contrast this with the TWO where the Republicans controlled both House and Senate, but not the Presidency, and the remaining eight where the Democrats controlled only part of the legislature, whether they controlled the Presidency or not.)

This is the first such shutdown EVER in which the President and the Senate refused FLATLY to negotiate at all with the House. The bone of contention? ObamaCare. The opposing party finds it objectionable and wishes to repeal it, defund it, or, at the very least, delay it, depending on who is speaking.  But the opposition is told to “sit down!” and “shut up!” and “forget it!”.  They are called “terrorists” and are said to be “holding the country hostage”, and why?  Because this law is “settled and here to stay.”

Excuse me, Mr. President…

But just because something gets enacted as law, and even when it has been challenged unsuccessfully in SCOTUS, this does not mean a law is “settled” and is “here to stay”. ANY law can be repealed by passing a new law that negates it — that is part of the “checks and balances” nature of our legislative process. It is entirely reasonable, logical, and practical for those in Congress who do not agree with a given law, or believe it does not serve the needs or interests of their constituents (should be the same thing, but frequently isn’t) to work to repeal it or negate it in whole or in part. That is their JOB. If they feel something does not adequately represent the wishes of their constituents, they have a responsibility to work against it. That’s called a “representative republic”, which we are.

It is the height of statist arrogance to say “we won, get over yourselves, we got it, shut up.” The Democrats have NEVER sat still for something enacted they did not like, not once. They ALWAYS continue to fight, even when SCOTUS has either upheld something they disagree with, or declared something they like unconstitutional. Case in point, look at gun ownership — it is in the US Constitution, it is in most State constitutions, there are many laws that protect and secure the rights of people to lawfully own and carry firearms, and there have been plenty of SCOTUS cases that support the individual right to keep and bear arms. But the Democrats continue to scream and lather about restricting the rights of Americans, and trying to either pass restrictive laws or negate laws allowing them. Why aren’t these laws “settled” and “here to stay” as Obama said about ObamaCare? Why are they still considered malleable? Because the Democrats don’t agree with them, or believe they don’t serve the needs and interests of their constituents…and it’s their JOB to oppose such things.

Do I agree with that position? Not in the slightest. I want to keep my rights, and not have them infringed upon by any government action. And I want the efforts of these Democrats to fail…but that doesn’t mean that I think they are wrong to try. They are doing the job they believe is correct, and it is MY right to contact them, or their opponents, and express my wishes. This is how a republic works, and ostensibly protects the rights of the minority position. If we didn’t have this, it would simply be two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch.

The Democrats and the President do not wish to compromise, meet in the middle, or negotiate ANYTHING with regards to the ACA. They want it exactly as it is, undisturbed, unrestricted, and complete, and will not budge. They have said so publicly.

That same public has overwhelmingly said, time and time again, that they do not want this law. SOME do…and it’s their right to tell their legislators this…but it is utterly disingenuous of Democrats to demand that the Republicans always negotiate, compromise, and meet them in the middle whenever there’s something they want to gain, but now clam up tight. They always say that the Republicans are the “Party of No”…but if you look at the shutdowns as I did above, the Democrats are more intractable, because if they can’t get 100% of something, they will wheedle, coerce, and attack until they get at least part of it, or the government shuts down.

Admittedly, so do the Republicans. If they can’t get 100%, they will do the same to get at least part of what they want, they just have done it less of the time to this degree. And this is exactly, precisely, and completely what they are both supposed to do. They are groups IN OPPOSITION. They are not buddies that always agree with one another, they are opponents.  Every single shutdown has been because of a fundamental disagreement between one part of Congress or the other, or between a part of Congress and the President. NO shutdown has lasted longer than 21 days, the vast majority lasting only 3 days or so, frequently over weekends.

Another complaint was that there should be no negotiation, no compromise, because the ACA was necessary for the country. As for whether the ACA is “necessary”, every country that has something similar has had no end of troubles with it, and the people there hate it. Socialized, national-level medicine is dangerous, overly complex, and MORE expensive, not less.

Remember, the reason they said they were enacting this was to give “access” (translation: free) to “health care”. To quote Inigo Montoya, I don’t think that word means what you think it means. Access does not mean automatic receipt of something for free, it simply means that it is available. Health care is available. Expecting to get valuable services from people and institutions without paying for them is criminally stupid. A thief expects to get things for free, because he is simply taking them from people who have them. This is no different. The money to pay for this “free” healthcare comes from the people who HAVE money, and get it taxed away from them. It isn’t being altruistically given to them at no cost, it ISN’T free (they still have to pay for it), and it isn’t “affordable”, as the government-run exchanges are more expensive than similar coverage used to be privately.

In his October 1 speech, the President claimed that “tens of thousands of people die each year due to a lack of health insurance”.  Not…precisely.  A Harvard study determined that “approximately 44,789 deaths among Americans  [are]. . . associated with lack of health insurance.”  Associated.  That’s the operative word here.  There’s a truism in statistical analysis — correlation (association) does not imply causation.  Most of the comments I’ve seen about this statement since have simply assumed that the President was stating it baldly and correctly, that lack of insurance caused these people to die.  Nonsense.  If you’re eating a cheeseburger and are bitten by a snake and die, the cheeseburger was associated with your death, but did not cause it, the snakebite did. Notwithstanding the one case I know of where a hospital emergency room refused patients who could not pay (violating the law), one where ironically Michelle Obama, David Axelrod, and Valerie Jarrett were contracted to implement an “Urban Health Initiative” by moving Medicare/Medicaid patients to different facilities, it is not difficult to get “health care” if you are unable to pay.  It IS the law of the land as much as the ACA that an emergency room MUST treat you and get you stable, regardless of your financial state.

All of this legislative foofooraw was enacted to give coverage to some 30 million people who didn’t have health insurance for one reason or another. Rather than give those people some subsidized health care plan, thus solving the problem, the Democrats chose to completely change how EVERYBODY gets their health care coverage, even those who didn’t need it changed! Why change it for 400 million people when it’s only 30 million with a problem — 30 million who, after all the dust has settled, still don’t have coverage!  Since the President is wont to refer to our nation’s difficulties using an automotive metaphor, I will too — this is as if, upon discovering that the ash trays in your car are full, you rebuilt the car from the ground up, replacing every single part, and added two extra alternators, four batteries, three superchargers, a spoiler, four banks of fog lights, and gold-plated cup holders, buying everything from the most expensive source, and paying for overnight delivery…instead of simply emptying the ash trays.

Why do that? Because it isn’t about providing affordable health care. It isn’t about keeping people from dying. It especially isn’t about saving people money.

It’s about controlling peoples’ lives, choices, and destinies. It is about POWER. That’s all, just POWER.

Respectfully Submitted.

(Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_shutdown_in_the_United_Stateshttp://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/09/new-study-finds-45000-deaths-annually-linked-to-lack-of-health-coverage/http://www.nationalreview.com/article/360157/fact-checking-obama-health-care-patrick-brennan,  http://hotair.com/archives/2009/07/23/video-did-michelle-obama-start-a-patient-dumping-program/)