At least Obama wasn’t lying when he said, “I’m really good at killing people.”
Obama has said it time and time again, most recently saying it in September, 2013: “If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period.”
But it was always a baldfaced lie. Still, Jay Carney recently tried to move the goalposts by saying that “only 5% of Americans would be affected” by the insurance-cancelling provisions of Obamacare. He didn’t move them quite far enough, because Obama’s administration knew as far back as 2010 that 93 million Americans would be at risk of losing their health insurance under the Obamacare bill they had just passed.
Yet Obama kept lying, and lying, and lying, and is still lying. He used the media strategy that got him off the hook for so many other lies: He denied knowledge, moved the goalposts, and then blamed the private sector and the Republicans.
But the real question is, are you as stupid as Obama thinks you are? Do you really believe that he had no idea that 93 million health care plans would be at risk from his signature law, even though we have it on record that his advisers told him? Do you really believe he had no idea the Obamacare exchange system was in trouble before the launch? Do you really believe he had no idea his NSA operations were spying on every American, as well as dozens of foreign leaders, including our closest allies? Do you really believe Obama had no idea why the National Park Service was closing down roads, lands, and private businesses that do not require federal funding to remain open during the shutdown? Do you really believe Obama had no idea his IRS appointees were engaging in illegal political harassment and intimidation to help him get reelected? Do you really believe Obama had no idea that the Benghazi attack was carried out by Al Qaeda? Do you really believe that Obama had no idea that his gun-running operation had gotten out of control and killed 300 people?
It’s no coincidence that Obama’s relationship to all of these incidents is similar. It’s called “plausible deniability.” He knew about all of it. And he lied, shamelessly and repeatedly, to avoid all responsibility. Let the subordinates suffer so the head of the operation can continue on. It’s the Chicago way.
On average. That’s right. The more intelligent you are, the more likely you are to be a Tea Partier. So all you folks who think those Tea Partiers are all just crazy, ignorant “bitter clingers,” perhaps you don’t know something that they do.
All humans operate with a limited knowledge base. Have you ever stopped to consider that maybe your intellectual opponents seem crazy and irrational because they have some piece of knowledge that you’re missing? You may actually be the irrational one.
Think about that the next time you feel the need to use the government to push some program on someone. Leave people to their own judgement, and you can be sure you’re not just dumbing down all of society.
Q: Isn’t this government shutdown the fault of the Republicans because they refused to agree with Obama or Harry Reid unless they could get everything that they want?
A: No, the House bills do not give the Republicans everything they want. That’s a complete lie. All of the House bills funded the government. None of them gave Republicans everything they wanted (which would necessarily include a complete repeal of Obamacare). They each did something different:
1. Defunded Obamacare completely.
2. Delayed the Obamacare individual mandate for a year.
3. Repealed the medical device tax and introduced a “conscience cause” allowing businesses to opt out of providing contraception coverage.
4. Eliminated the government employee “exemption” from Obamacare.
Harry Reid could have agreed to any one of those four proposals, and the government would remain funded. But he didn’t. Is it really reasonable to shut down the government just to keep government employees exempt from the costs of Obamacare while the rest of us suffer through it? Harry Reid and Obama wanted this shutdown to happen. They did everything they could to make it happen, and are continuing to do everything they can to make it as painful as possible. They have even rejected every proposal to fund the government piecewise or temporarily to minimize the pain while negotiations continue. The President and his party are holding this country hostage, and none of these Democrat lies are going to change that.
Imagine a corporation that possesses monopoly power over all of its services. Its CEO is immune to any form of accountability (aside from a massive regulatory agency which is too inept and internally-divided to do anything), and there is no direct, external oversight. This corporation also maintains an arsenal of weapons, which it uses with impunity to support its own interests, often to force you to buy its products and muscle competition out of the markets. Pretty horrible and scary, right?
The worst part is, this corporation actually exists. It calls itself your government.
We all are the regulatory agency that has the power to hold the CEO accountable for his crimes and break up this massive monopoly, if only we could agree to do it. So why do so many people seek to defend this corporation from oversight, and repeatedly fall on their swords in support of its power-hungry CEO? Isn’t a free, competitive market better than one single, massive, monopolistic, unaccountable conglomerate dominating us all?
The same company with the power to judge us and throw us in jail should not be allowed to participate in any other industries. It’s just too open to corrupt abuses of power.
In case you’ve noticed, the title of this blog has changed. This decision was made after googling my own name, and discovering that all of the results related to my scientific endeavors have been drowned out by links leading here.
Unfortunately, the world of a science is filled with people who are perfectly happy working for the government. Many scientists see their own intelligence as a reason to use politics to force their beliefs and lifestyle on others, rather than as a reason to be free of government intrusion. This stems from the belief that the public is too stupid to appreciate good science, and so the only way to get funding is to appeal to the confiscatory power of government, rather than by seeking out voluntary funding sources. Of course, this unenlightened view ignores the fact that the government is made up of the same descendents of Cro-Magnons that make up the general public, but with even less inspired variance. Yet, even scientists usually don’t have the courage to question their own funding. Just like everyone else, they don’t like to bite the hand that feeds.
So, to avoid being retaliated against in the professional world for my advocacy of liberty, I must distance my online presence from my professional name. Of course, I will never allow myself to be silenced, but I will be a more effective voice for my cause in the future if my career success is not hindered by butting heads with my colleagues. A name change seems the simplest way to achieve this.