Excellent article here. There was only one possible plus to this act, which is a bipartisan compromise proposed by a Democrat and a Republican senator. It is supposed to break apart the corporate hold on health insurance by making the required individual plans the way to freer choice, hmm. This would allow people to shop around for a bargain rather than having to go with their employer's group plan, thus theoretically forcing down prices--always a good thing. This good just cannot outweigh the evils you describe here. Besides, after reading the HAPI (reminiscent of peace, love, and HAPIness, man) health plan, I can't find the positives like keeping your plan when changing employers OR individual choice, which I read in the May 9 issue of World Magazine (worldmag.com), Thanks for this summary for those of us with limited legalese capabilities.
I am sorry to say, we personally do not have that kind of money. How many stamps? How many brochures, tea bags, letters...? My dream was to reach every member of Congress (535), even occassionally. That runs $235 per message. As I posted previously, fax looked like a way to go if I can get it up and running. Then I speculate how long it will be before they disengage their fax machines like they have already done with their emails, which are only accepted from constituents now. In the long run, I believe major protests in the streets will be our ONLY recourse, if the insane spending and socialistic legislation does not stop. I hope we can't imagine how angry we will be if our sources of REAL INFORMATION are silenced! In the meantime, keep talking, people, AND NOT JUST HERE! Talk to.....them
Carefully, so as not to become astro-turf rather than the grassroots we NEED to be. I wholly agree that we must stop talking amongst ourselves. I had hopes of setting up my computer to be able to fax all 535 members of Congress at once, plus President and VP, Supreme Court...but alas, hit a wall. I came across Congfax@CS.com (202-789-2009) who will fax for organizations or individuals at 25 cents/page. Too much money for one person to contact our government on a regular basis. This leads to our dilemma. We need to be more powerful than letter writing to a rep and two senators. But if we organize behind a large organization, we will be minimized as meaningless ditto heads, which is why, I suppose, the radio/TV people can't rally us together and lead us themselves. Grassroots means baby steps. Wish there were more.
The dilema for a grassroots movement like this one is that when we are encouraged to write, it is only one small voice to three people...a very insignificant cog in the wheel. Frustration sets in; need to do more! I would suggest to the Senior Brigade to put a message together and fax it to every last person in power. The double-bind is the looming accusation that we're astro-turfing if we work together. Maybe that's the idea behind it.
The only way I have seen people power at its best is when the radio heads "suggest" we all write at once. Warroom dot com, our radio head, puts out marching orders. Also, Digital March guy, Rob in Adairsville, has been trying to gather a following for mass messaging. It's got to be a united, organized front. What did Glenn say? They need to be very afraid of US!
Perhaps Judge Napolitano has it right. It will have to be a third party candidate, which makes it harder. Or maybe easier. The Donkeys and the Elephants have WAY TOO MUCH power to control the winner in the primaries, with their endorsements. I have a friend on the local committee who found out just how top down it really is. She went to some state function where things were to be decided, except the jury was in before the meeting ever opened. How discouraging is that?
The third party idea is tough because the media would destroy the campaign, mostly by ignoring it. Whatever happened to Bob Barr? Right? Glenn Beck was full throttle over on Headline News. Fox was mum, along with the msm. You are right...Chaffetz gives us hope in a hopeless place.
That tempts me to either have my house moved, move me and my family (without a paper trail), OR at the very least, put up a Don't Tread On Me 912 flag in our front yard. Rebels unite!
This is absolutely why we must choose OUR words very carefully. The "Conservatives" of today are transforming our language daily, with their plethora of bills: Universal (not socialized) health care...volunteer campuses (not camps)...hate speech (not opposing opinion)...hate crimes (not crime, period)...bailouts (not government takeovers or fascism)...right to choose (not right to kill)...
Talk amongst yourselves. I, on the other hand, want to SCREAM at Washington, as in DIGITAL MARCH! ! have been trying to figure out a way to affordably contact ALL OF CONGRESS about the health care issue, for I am distressed.(You might have noticed) Now let me get this straight: We are encouraged to ONLY write to our rep and two senators (as discovered in Googling). Organizations, on the other hand have the ability to petition all members, as they should. But when those supposed "organizations" rally, read TEA PARTY, then the message is negated as "astro turfing". So. let me see, IF WE ORGANIZE, we're damned and if we don't, we have a tiny voice to our three congress people, and yes, we're damned. How are we supposed to SURROUND THEM?
"Can't" or WON'T handle dissent! We are in trouble but this is not a new thing. Liberalism is an oppressive ideology. We dare not forget the remarkable words of Al Gore, "The debate is OVER!" It's over when WE are all dead like the hundred million or so victims of communism. You are aware of the Larry Grathwohl infiltration of Billy Ayers' Weather Underground where Mr. Grathwohl, army vet and former FBI informant, actually heard words to the effect that when the estimated 25 million capitalists FAIL their re-education (like the one to which Rick Santelli has reportedly been sent), they shall have to be eliminated. "And when I say eliminate, I mean kill (25,000,000 people)." ~No Place to Hide, an 80's documentary
I like these ideas. We've thought of some already but not others so there's some new stuff with which to work. In reference to #4, I think we need to be much more specific when discussing whether a person honors their Constitutional oath because of the vast differences in interpretation in which those who are not strict constructionalists engage. I would almost bet that Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, when questioned, would assert that they were honoring their oaths of office. They need to be pinned down on specific issues such as whether they believe the bailouts are an unethical use of tax money bordering on theft or do they believe that an indvidual(not militia) has the right to bear arms, etc. I like this site, keep up the good work
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Branch