We have met the enemy; Tea Party II, here we come
It becomes clearer on a daily basis, from bribes to Senators to get votes to Pelosi’s refusal to let Republicans participate in a press conference in Copenhagen, that America is no longer a Republic, but a dictatorship, at least until the next election.
The latest, and one of the most egregious examples, is exposed at RedState.com yesterday in an article entitled “We Are No Longer a Nation of Laws. Senate Sets Up Requirement for Super-Majority to Ever Repeal Obamacare.”
I encourage you to read the article, but if you don’t have time here’s the short version:
Changing Senate rules requires a 2/3 supermajority of 67 votes. However, a provision in Reid’s health care “reform” bill (which people including Senators are just having a chance to read now even though it already passed) includes a provision which changes long-standing Senate rules by making it “out of order” for the Senate to consider a change to a section of the bill. This means the process by which the bill would be changed is governed by a new “rule” which itself would require a supermajority to change. Therefore, unlike almost every other piece of legislation and in defiance of years of Senate tradition, that part of the bill which “applies to regulations imposed on doctors and patients by the Independent Medicare Advisory Boards a/k/a the Death Panels” is nearly impossible to amend or repeal.
When Senator Jim DeMint questioned the Senate President about the rule change, he was told that it was simply a “procedural change", which is an outright lie.
Not only is this an indictment of the new tyranny of the Democrats, it also shames the Senate Parliamentarian who, for the second time in a week has allowed the Senate to break long-standing rules that every Senator understands. (The first time was when they allowed Bernie Sanders amendment, the 767 pages of which was being read in full at the demand of Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), to be pulled and the reading stopped. Senate rules are clear that if any Senator objects, the reading must continue once started even if the amendment is not going to be voted on.)
Harry Reid is a shameless thief of Americans’ money, economic liberty, and now our very political system. The Democrats who go along with him are co-conspirators in actions that are economically devastating and irrational if the true goal were health care reform, which if course it isn’t. Beyond that, however, the frontal assault on the structure of our rule of laws is beyond what should be permissible even if you accept the premise that “people get the government they deserve.”
Democrats have twice broken the rules of the Senate in their mad rush to pass anything no matter how bad, no matter how much the public is against it, in order to claim a political victory for Democrats and defend Barack Obama from a devastating defeat so early in his presidency. The Democrats are probably right that antipathy toward them and their bill will initially soften if it is signed by the President. But they are probably wrong to think that temporarily-lessened hatred of them and their law will not soon be swamped by an outpouring of grassroots clamor which could make this year’s Tea Parties and Town Hall meetings look like demure little warm-up gatherings. The political fodder for Republicans conservatives is enormous if only they learn how to use it, something they’ve not done well so far (particulary Senator McConnell, who has a lot to answer for.) One can already think of a half-dozen good ads attacking Democrats in what will certainly be the most aggressive attempt by the GOP to “nationalize” elections in many years. Polls are showing the public being repulsed by the Democrats’ heavy-handed government takeovers, or attempted takeovers, of…everything.
As a secondary effect, I believe that RINO Republicans, whether in Congress now or candidates for office, such as Florida’s Charlie Crist will be badly damaged by the Democrats actions. The picture of Crist with Obama, which was probably already worth 5 percentage points for Marco Rubio, will now be worth at least 10. I will go out on a limb and say Rubio wins the nomination. (Not as much of a limb as it was when I first contributed to Rubio’s campaign.) I should also note that I heard Rubio on the Hugh Hewitt radio show a few days ago and was extremely impressed. I think recent events are the political death of Ben Nelson, and maybe of Mary Landrieu. I certainly hope so.
The key to the survival of our Republic now is that no Supreme Court Justice, and particularly no conservative Justice, leave the court until after the next election. If we get another Sotomayor, especially if that person replaces a conservative, this country will be devastated for years to come. Don’t forget, as recent events prove, for liberals the end justifies the means. Rules are annoyances to be cast aside if it means grabbing more power for the government over your life. And since we can no longer count on the president, regardless of his political party, to defend the Constitution, we’re left sadly reliant on a Court that is already barely reliable.
Finally, with all that said, I reiterate my view that I’m glad John McCain lost. McCain is a RINO. If he represents winning, then the nation is already lost. A McCain government would have been just a slightly slower version of an Obama government. In the spirit of someone whose son’s middle name is Rand, let the voters get a good hard dose of the happy-faced fascism which they have voted into office. Let them learn once and for all that even for people who do not see liberty as an end in itself (as I see it), the tangible results of the loss of liberty, particularly economic liberty, are devastating. It’s going to take a hard, expensive lesson for the benumbed complacent American populous to wake up and realize who the enemy is. Luckily, Reid, Pelosi, and Obama are making it easier for Americans to see evil than it has been for many years.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Rossputin on 12/23/09 at 03:07:12 am . Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. |
Yours truly
-
Following Obama's Economic Policies
Facebook NetworkedBlogs
XML Feeds
12/23/09 @ 05:48:26 am
You know what. With all the goodies that some Senate Democrats got, the next thing we will see are the Senate Democrats starting with the "No" vote until they get the goodies from Reid. Then when they get the goodies, they will switch their votes.
If the Senate Democrats are smart by now, they would vote no tomorrow morning until they got the goodies. But they are probably stuck between a rock and a hard place.
But we may see more of these sweetheart deals next year for each major bill like Cap N Trade and Amnesty bills.
12/23/09 @ 05:53:23 am
I agree with you that a few Senators are probably angry right now, especially Bayh.
What will be interesting is if some House Dems use the Senate bribes (as well as the weakening of the anti-gov't funding of abortion language) as an excuse to change their votes to "no".
They already started the bribes for cap-and-trade in the House (see Rep. Kaptur's bribe), but I have a feeling there's going to be a lot more scrutiny on this stuff and it will be harder to get done.
I think cap-and-trade is dead.
And probably Amnesty as well. Nancy Pelosi said she won't have the House take up an immigration bill unless the Senate votes on it first.
12/23/09 @ 11:13:26 am
I'm sorry,
Tea Parties, 60's era protests and foot stomping are not enough.
What we are watching is nothing less than the systematic dismantling of the mechanisms that safeguard our democracy.
Unfortunately my belief is that most Americans don't have the slightest clue (a) what those mechanisms are and (b) what is going on in the halls of congress. Only a handful of people on the left and on the right are really paying attention to most of what is going on and the majority go blithely on with their lives looking for quick 'dollar meals' and on their way home to watch Survivor finales, the latest on Tiger's scandals and Idol tryouts on their 50 inch flatscreens in government mandated digital HD..
By the time the frog, that is the majority of this nation, realizes the pot is heating up it will already be too late, the republic will have been usurped.
The tree of liberty needs cleansing and defended now and no bit of hand-scrawled poster board bouncing in a crowd of buffoons, led by a megaphone augmented cheerleader is going to do that.
Short of armed insurrection, a TRUE broad based tax revolt, not a protest based on using the words of just that kind of historical action, is a damn good place to start.
We too can arbitrarily change the rules that our congress would impose on us in the dead of night. Shut the place down, force a constitutional crisis while there still is such a document to cling to!!
12/23/09 @ 11:19:20 am
Mike,
I basically agree.
But I am not suggesting that a Tea Party event by itself is what we're aiming for. It's people who care enough not only to go to such events but to VOTE and to get others to vote for pro-liberty candidates.
I'm not yet ready to suggest that a violent revolt is where the country needs to go, and I will probably never get there, which is not to say I won't defend myself by whatever means necessary if the government or a criminal were to come after me or my family.
12/23/09 @ 01:23:34 pm
note Section D
Is three-fifths a SUPER MAJORITY?
(3) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THE BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS-
`(A) IN GENERAL- It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, or amendment, pursuant to this subsection or conference report thereon, that fails to satisfy the requirements of subparagraphs (A)(i) and (C) of subsection (c)(2).
`(B) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THE BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS IN OTHER LEGISLATION- It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report (other than pursuant to this section) that would repeal or otherwise change the recommendations of the Board if that change would fail to satisfy the requirements of subparagraphs (A)(i) and (C) of subsection (c)(2).
`(C) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO
THIS SUBSECTION- It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.
`(D) WAIVER- This paragraph may be waived or suspended in the Senate only by the affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members, duly chosen and sworn.
`(E) APPEALS- An affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members of the Senate, duly chosen and sworn, shall be required in the Senate to sustain an appeal of the ruling of the Chair on a point of order raised under this paragraph.
12/23/09 @ 01:54:14 pm
Mark,
Any requirement that something needs more than 50% to pass is a requirement for a supermajority, whether the requirement is 60%, 2/3, or whatever...
12/24/09 @ 10:05:08 am
I'm with MikeR.
"This is not a Tea Party. This is a 'Tea and Cakes' Party. THIS is a Tea Party." (Mike Vanderboegh)
http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2009/04/this-is-not-tea-party-this-is-tea-and.html
Noted libertarian author Claire Wolfe once wrote, "America is at that awkward stage. It is too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." Well, as folks like MikeR and Mr. Vanderboegh know, it is indeed likely too late to work within the system. Ergo: if it's too early to shoot the bastards, and if we are to nonetheless preserve the republic the Founders created, and our liberties along with it, it will require new tactics. And I would argue even a new strategy.
Tax revolts, as Mr. R. notes, is an obvious one to consider. There are others. I think there may be some real potential in the state-sovereignty/sheriff first movements. This of course gets me branded as a right-wing kook. But that's OK, we were also branded as such when we took up the Second Amendment cause. Largely because of our grassroots efforts, and in spite of the "looniness" so many attributed to us, we got the Heller decision. And keep in mind that during those days of 2nd-Amendment activism there was always the not-so-subtle hint in the background that if you're serious about taking our arms, you'd better be prepared to suffer the terrible consequences.
That was no idle threat, and the Middle American resolve that underlied it has not gone away. It may even now be greater.
But as you imply, Ross, armed insurrection HAS to be the very last measure, and none of us should want to go there. On the other hand, all of us are resolved to preserve our liberty, and certain things follow from that. The Federals need to be educated as to the measure of our resolve, because I don't think they have any clue. That's why they ignore our letters, Tea Party protests, etc. They consider us impotent and irrelevant. We need to show them that we're not, which is precisely why we're going to have to ratchet things up.
12/24/09 @ 10:17:44 am
Jones,
If your comments make you a right-wing kook, then sign me up for the kookery.
As for showing the federals what we are and what we are not, the first thing I'd like to try is beating them at the ballot box, motivating voters with Tea Parties, protests, whatever works.
At the end of the day, the current situation (in which leading politicians care more about passing something than about winning their next election) is very rare. We will soon get back to a more "normal" situation in which their greatest fear is losing -- a fear which remains foremost in the minds of some Democrats, but maybe not quite enough to block the passage of ObamaCare.
We need to reeducate Americans that "free preventative Medicine" is NOT what America means and that the consequences of allowing this bill, particularly done the way it was done, to stand are unacceptable.
I think we are on the verge of something that will make 1980 and 1994 look small. But if voters are too stupid to prove me right on that point, I say screw 'em. We are living Atlas Shrugged at and some point they will realize what they have wrought with their votes. At that point, we will rebuild what is left of our Republic, brick by brick, principle by principle.
12/24/09 @ 11:21:54 am
Ross,
While I admire your high minded ideals about the electoral process I find your optimism about a sweeping change, of the magnitude necessary, impossible to share.
The kind of education or enlightenment required to change the entitlement paradigm in this country is going to require a catastrophic failure of the current system such that a modern version of the dark ages ensues including its more repressive aspects.
All solutions acceptable to the currently indoctrinated masses are going to be further government solutions, 'building' on the current 'social safety net' infrastructure, not tearing it down.
Any would-be reformer will be easily branded a greedy, self-interested, uncaring wretch who doesn't care about the suffering masses.
The problem is further exacerbated by trying to even find a sufficient number of like minded candidates who have a single, sale-able message capable of withstanding and defeating the onslaught of the liberal dominated media.
I truly believe that any such movement would bring us to the brink of civil war in this country if not take us right over the edge.
While the Atlas Shrugged model may indeed be playing itself out here I'm not sure the consequences in this day and age are easily foreseen or resolved.
America does not exist in a Randian vacuum, the world today is an extremely dangerous place and the consequent total loss of hegemony resulting from our collapse would be disastrous for generations if not forever.
I find myself thinking more and more radically in that some sort of swift benevolent coup actually begins to seem acceptable, perhaps even as a consequence of another foreign attack leading to a crisis of confidence.
I am taken aback by my own thoughts on this having never dreamed of really being brought to this point in my lifetime.
I feel as if I am living in some cheap political thriller sometimes and at any moment the plane will land, I'll close the book, stick it in the seat pocket for the next guy and enjoy my vacation somewhere..