As a moderate, your Uncle Dave and others like me may not like (to be kind) some of the things Obama and the left are doing, but with idiotic things like the birther movement, town hall screamers, death panels, religious wackos, Sarah and all the rest, the right is doing everything it can to ensure we want nothing to do with them or their policies. If they really have any anymore.

Something strange has happened in America in the nine months since Barack Obama was elected. It has best been summarised by the comedian Bill Maher: “The Democrats have moved to the right, and the Republicans have moved to a mental hospital.”

The election of Obama – a black man with an anti-conservative message – as a successor to George W. Bush has scrambled the core American right’s view of their country. In their gut, they saw the US as a white-skinned, right-wing nation forever shaped like Sarah Palin.

When this image was repudiated by a majority of Americans in a massive landslide, it simply didn’t compute. How could this have happened? How could the cry of “Drill, baby, drill” have been beaten by a supposedly big government black guy? So a streak that has always been there in the American right’s world-view – to deny reality, and argue against a demonic phantasm of their own creation – has swollen. Now it is all they can see.

Since Obama’s rise, the US right has been skipping frantically from one fantasy to another, like a person in the throes of a mental breakdown. […] This tendency to simply deny inconvenient facts and invent a fantasy world isn’t new; it’s only becoming more heightened. It ran through the Bush years like a dash of bourbon in water. […] But the ordinary Republican base believe this stuff. They are being tricked into opposing their own interests through false fears and invented demons.

Read the rest of the article for a lot more of a pretty clear description of how crazy all this looks to the rest of the world.

  1. Mr. Fusion says:

    #87, Thomas,

    I never denied that the Federal government has the authority to regulate interstate commerce. Never. So, showing USSC that support that is a strawman.

    In #56 you wrote,

    No, the “tough titties” result is that the Constitution does not give the Federal government the authority to centralize the health care industry (just like it does not have the authority to impose direct taxes)

    First, to dispense with it, The XVI Amendment,

    The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

    The Federal Government has the authority to regulate interstate commerce. The courts have ruled that includes anything from doing nothing to taking over the industry. Provided they do not confiscate anything, they can nationalize all the business sector and put the previous owners out of business. For example, The Volstead Act prohibited the sale of alcohol even in States where it was legal. Banking regulations put loan sharking out of business. Pure Food and Drug laws killed the snake oil industry.

    The Federal Government does have the authority.

    The question is whether the interstate commerce clause gives the Federal government the authority to impose a health care system on the States and you have shown nothing in your examples to support that.

    There is no way I can present a case showing the exact thing you argue against BECAUSE IT HASN’T HAPPENED YET. The courts can only rule on questions of law. There is no law to rule on.

    Every case the Supreme Court ruled on in my examples dealt with the Commerce Clause. The Supreme Court upheld the Federal Government’s intrusion into local areas of jurisdiction in all those cases. It won’t matter how much you deny it, the Federal government has the authority to implement a National Health Care Plan.

    Your arguments are the same as the “birthers” denying Obama’s birth certificate is valid. You (and the “birthers”) just won’t accept the facts.

  2. Thomas says:


    RE: Income tax

    You are barking up the wrong tree (again). The 16th Amendment has nothing to do with the discussion as to whether the Federal government has the authority to impose an income tax. To wit, in Stanton vs Baltic Mining Co, “provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new powers of taxation” No, the fundamental problem is that the concept of what exactly is meant by an indirect tax has been warped over decades and essentially forgotten so that Congress can tax people’s income. The fundamental question is whether the Founding Fathers intended for the Federal government to ever have the authority to tax income directly and the answer to that is no.

    > The Federal Government
    > does have the authority.

    I agree that that the Federal government has the *power* to tax income. So much so that the authority is irrelevant.

    RE: Health care and constitutionality.

    Of course you cannot claim it to be Constitutional because no one has challenged it. That is precisely my point. So, stop claiming that Medicare is Constitutional. There are many laws that are probably (or absolutely) not Constitutional but we’ll never know until someone takes the case to the Supreme Court *and* they hear the case (the later being more problematic than the former).

    RE: Commerce Clause

    You are confusing the issue. There are absolutely situations where the commerce clause is needed. The interstate highway system for example. I’m not questioning that so to mention it is a strawman. The question is whether *health care* qualifies as something that the Federal government can take over whole cloth via the commerce clause and that is far more questionable.

    You are big on espousing the benefits of facts but poor on analyzing the entirety of them.


Bad Behavior has blocked 18731 access attempts in the last 7 days.