GOP RESOLUTION: OBAMACARE AS A VIOLATION OF THE 13th AMENDMENT

[g5000]

If the People are demanding more and more government tit, that means you really suck at making your case.

Perhaps you should consider the whining thing just isn't working.

I would also suggest taking a look into your own bag and noting all the government gifts you happily accept and deciding just how important it is not to be a fucking hypocrite.

 

[pvsi]

F I N A L L Y ! ! !
Special thanks to "Avatar" for explaining in plain terms of forced servitude (that since health care is not free but requires the labor, time, expertise or services of others, then "free health care" cannot be forced on others against their will or beliefs but provided by those consenting to do so).

Isn't it amazing how all the political experts of the GOP on the MSM were never yet able to pin point to this simple fact yet? it's like they are professionals at beating around the bush and achieving nothing useful (same on both sides) - as I talk about in my speeches, they will expose the other side, but they will know when to stop, just short of a solution. Now if someone can go a little further and point to the reasons of high cost of health care, that would be even better, but I guess that is up to me.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

No, tard.

I'm saying that the Government issued the currency to begin with.

The world cannot run on finite resources, or don't you understand?

Like I said - go live without government. I'll be there in a few minutes with a tank and a missile launcher breaking no laws in your lawless land and take everything you own? Or................no one would dare do that eh?

The government DEMANDS that their currency be used exclusively for the theft. People didn't choose the FRN as a base for the storage of wealth or transaction. It was forced upon the people. Another form of slavery - economic slavery.

Defined when - a condition that a person finds themselves in when the totality of their wages only allows them to pay the interest payments on their accumulated debt.

Think about that. Your government,l who forced you to use the currency created by a legislated banking cartel, has run up a 17 trillion and counting debt. A debt that has saddled each individual, at birth, with a burden they never voted for, never participated in at all, and are expected to pitch in on. That's slavery.

The American people most certainly did vote for a $17 trillion debt. They demanded it.

"Gimme, gimme, gimme." I have frequently spoken of this. Americans demand no end of gifts from their government and expect someone else to pay for them.

That $17 trillion was spent on mortgage interest deductions, farm subsidies, defense, food stamps, Pell grants, child tax credits, equipment depreciation deductions, employer-sponsored health insurance tax exemptions, roads and bridges, Medicaid, and a zillion other such things.

All of it voted upon and approved by the American people.

I don't even hear very many right wingers demanding the government stop giving them the gifts they receive. "Gimme gimme gimme, and make that guy over there pay for it, and blame those people over there for the debt."

The unborn child voted for the debt? You have to face it, even democratic forms of governance are nothing more than tyranny by majority. And in many cases by minority. Take a look at the last NYC mayoral race as an indicator. only 24% of eligible voters participated. The reality is that even if only 10 people voted, the state would still hold up a winner and begin the process of seeking their "projects".

I certainly didn't vote for 17 trillion in debt. i've voted against every major two party candidate since Reagan. But I'm still saddled with the debt from programs and wars I was against. Because in such a system as government, the individual truly has no voice. It's tyranny. Plain and simple.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Another example comes to mind which would have to qualify as "slavery" if we bought into the OP argument: Public education. Childless couples having to pay property taxes to pay for schools. That would have to be considered "slavery", too.

It is.

No, it is a social contract. Completely different from slavery.

The social contract is a myth. There is no contract. Unless you want to provide me with the copy I signed.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

If the People are demanding more and more government tit, that means you really suck at making your case.

Perhaps you should consider the whining thing just isn't working.

I would also suggest taking a look into your own bag and noting all the government gifts you happily accept and deciding just how important it is not to be a fucking hypocrite.

You're trying to make the illogical leap that everyone voted for it. They didn't. Your using tyranny of majority (or even minority) to justify theft. it's a major leap in logic.

 

[emilynghiem]

If ObamaCare is slavery because it requires "those who can afford to purchase health insurance to also purchase it for others who cannot afford it", then so are all social programs like SCHIP and welfare.

So is TARP slavery.

It's an idiotic argument which I am sure has already been addressed by case law.

Yes, G5000
technically any taxation WITHOUT representation or consent
can amount to "involuntary servitude" if the taxpayers dissent.

The only reason the IRS and Federal Reserve are respected as govt institutions
is that people CONSENT to use them. It is only because those who consent outnumber the Ron Paul libertarians and other groups who DON'T CONSENT that these institutions continue to operate without check or reform.

Technically, they could both be dismantled as unconstitutional mixes of private interests or entities with federal authority not properly checked as with the other branches and institutions whose functions are authorized specifically under the Constitution.

It's because we don't have a "consensus how to change them" to correct problems, so we tolerate the conflicts of interest and remain with the status quo. Same with ACA that is also a "hybrid" mix of private interests with federal government, and depends on consent of the public to have validity. without a public "consensus" the legislation remains as is, despite the objections which are too divided to enact a "unified solution" that represents the public.

On the left side: of the anti-war protestors I know whoe ALL objected to tax dollars going into corrupt war contracts, the ones I ask about reimbursing this money to taxpayers to pay for programs they believe in, unanimously agree YES they would support that!

I even had one friend ready to print the debit notes to represent the tax dollars and credits owed to taxpayers for war spending that can be shown to be fraudulent.

If we had unified support behind each case of seeking reimbursement or credits back to taxpayers for govt waste, corporate abuses, misspending or fraud at public expense,
there is no reason we could not create a similar system as the federal reserve,
issue notes against debts, invite citizens as investors to lend money to correct problems and damages by corrupt govt, and start buying back control of govt programs gone astray.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Consent is not to be confused with compliance. They are different.

 

[emilynghiem]

If the People are demanding more and more government tit, that means you really suck at making your case.

Perhaps you should consider the whining thing just isn't working.

I would also suggest taking a look into your own bag and noting all the government gifts you happily accept and deciding just how important it is not to be a fucking hypocrite.

Dear G5000:

Of the people demanding more government,
how many of them suddenly go silent when asked to pay for these handouts?

On the right side:
Of the people who demand to shrink govt and shift social programs
back to local free enterprise and the private sector,
when I ask such people to help support programs that do this,
how many of THEM keep wanting to change govt by focusing on "election campaigns",
by lobbying for "someone else to do the work by getting elected to Congress"
and don't see what I mean by investing THOSE SAME CAMPAIGN DOLLARS
DIRECTLY into local programs and solutions
that WOULD take responsibility back from govt and pay people locally to run
our own community systems.

I think a couple of solutions to make this shift away from govt welfare
1. replace handouts with microloans, job training and assistance
to follow set plans and terms for PAYING BACK WHAT IS BORROWED THROUGH GOVT
2. using the legal system and schools to redress grievances and negotiate
settlements for corporate and govt abuses to PAY BACK TAXPAYERS
for all complaints of fraud, corruption, conflicts of interest, abuse, waste, etc.
3. require wrongdoers, both individual and corporate, to pay restitution
to victims and the public "in proportion" to their violations, damages and debts.
make this a requirement of citizenship or for corporate license to operate,
whether a religious, political, nonprofit, business, public or private institution.

 

[emilynghiem]

Trust me

In an election year, no Republican would put their name to this. It would go over worse than intentional rape

Ah, we need a movement to require gop candidates take a pledge to support this!

AGREED
and likewise a movement to require Democrat candidates, leaders and members
to pay for a "Singlepayer system" for their members managed through their own party..

If you believe in it, you pay for it, you manage it,
and collect taxes for it.

No more conflicts if both parties pay for the systems they advocate

 

[dblack]

Damn

And I thought Republicans had played all their repeal Obamacare cards

But equating it to slavery is just getting ridiculous

Yet still not as sublimely corrupt as Congress forcing everyone to buy overpriced crap from their pals in the insurance industry.

 

[dblack]

But if people are paying up to 40% in taxes to govt (and only retaining 60% of the benefits from their labor), how is THAT different from being 3/5 free and "2/5 slave?"

Any "taxation without representation" (or co-opting of labor or portion of our salaries under terms we don't consent to as with ACA and business contracts with private insurance) is "involuntary servitude" where the govt continues to abuse people like me against our will.

You have representation. Did you not know this? Sadly for you, your fellow citizens just can't get enough government tit. They demand more and more milk.

You are collectively able to change the ratio of taxation and benefits any time you please.

Therefore, not slaves.

So, slaves own by the majority don't count?

 

[Avatar4321]

Trust me

In an election year, no Republican would put their name to this. It would go over worse than intentional rape

I hate to break it to you, but it's an election year.

 

[Avatar4321]

If ObamaCare is slavery because it requires "those who can afford to purchase health insurance to also purchase it for others who cannot afford it", then so are all social programs like SCHIP and welfare.

So is TARP slavery.

It's an idiotic argument which I am sure has already been addressed by case law.

Social programs are tax and spend issue. They don't force people to use their own money to purchase anything.

 

[Avatar4321]

If the People are demanding more and more government tit, that means you really suck at making your case.

Perhaps you should consider the whining thing just isn't working.

I would also suggest taking a look into your own bag and noting all the government gifts you happily accept and deciding just how important it is not to be a fucking hypocrite.

I agree that we are bad at making our case. I don't see how trying to improve that somehow makes us a hypocrite.

 

[dblack]

If ObamaCare is slavery because it requires "those who can afford to purchase health insurance to also purchase it for others who cannot afford it", then so are all social programs like SCHIP and welfare.

So is TARP slavery.

It's an idiotic argument which I am sure has already been addressed by case law.

Social programs are tax and spend issue. They don't force people to use their own money to purchase anything.

That's an excellent point - and hits on a related issue that drives me nuts, namely when people want to complain about "their" tax dollars being spent on "XXX". Once the state takes money from you in the form of taxes, it's no longer yours. At that point, like it or not, it belongs to "the people" as represented by government.

If we want to socialize health care expenses, we should do it through real taxes and real government spending. Not monkey around with schemes that serve primarily to enrich crony corporations.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

If ObamaCare is slavery because it requires "those who can afford to purchase health insurance to also purchase it for others who cannot afford it", then so are all social programs like SCHIP and welfare.

So is TARP slavery.

It's an idiotic argument which I am sure has already been addressed by case law.

Social programs are tax and spend issue. They don't force people to use their own money to purchase anything.

That's an excellent point - and hits on a related issue that drives me nuts, namely when people want to complain about "their" tax dollars being spent on "XXX". Once the state takes money from you in the form of taxes, it's no longer yours. At that point, like it or not, it belongs to "the people" as represented by government.

If we want to socialize health care expenses, we should do it through real taxes and real government spending. Not monkey around with schemes that serve primarily to enrich crony corporations.

The question becomes, even though congress has the power to steal, do they have the enumerated power to take over an industry entirely.

 

[dblack]

Social programs are tax and spend issue. They don't force people to use their own money to purchase anything.

That's an excellent point - and hits on a related issue that drives me nuts, namely when people want to complain about "their" tax dollars being spent on "XXX". Once the state takes money from you in the form of taxes, it's no longer yours. At that point, like it or not, it belongs to "the people" as represented by government.

If we want to socialize health care expenses, we should do it through real taxes and real government spending. Not monkey around with schemes that serve primarily to enrich crony corporations.

The question becomes, even though congress has the power to steal, do they have the enumerated power to take over an industry entirely.

I certainly don't see it. Not at the federal level. To maintain any pretense of constitutional government it would require an amendment.

 

[rightwinger]

Damn

And I thought Republicans had played all their repeal Obamacare cards

But equating it to slavery is just getting ridiculous

Yet still not as sublimely corrupt as Congress forcing everyone to buy overpriced crap from their pals in the insurance industry.

Let's examine the difference from slavery

Slaves did not get to vote. They did not elect representatives who would defend their position. They were property not people

Obamacare was approved by the representatives of voters. They were constitutionally elected. Like it or not.....it was the will of the people
Republicans are idiots......no other way to explain it

 

[rightwinger]

Trust me

In an election year, no Republican would put their name to this. It would go over worse than intentional rape

I hate to break it to you, but it's an election year.

That's why this boner will never see the light of day

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

GOP RESOLUTION: OBAMACARE AS A VIOLATION OF THE 13th AMENDME

That’s unsurprisingly partisan, ignorant, and idiotic.

Clearly, the ACA constitutes “[n]either slavery nor involuntary servitude,” to argue otherwise is, again, ignorant idiocy, where the ACA is indeed not ‘un-Constitutional.'