What has Judge Napolitano said about SCOTUS Obamacare decision?

[Matt Collins]

Defeatists? You're telling me with a straight face that your plan is to die without your freedom, and you're calling us defeatists?

No, my plan is to put out as much effort as humanly possible to get the government off my back. That means starting in the political arena as Ron and Rand have done and working to acquire the means to be effective.

I never heard Ron Paul say it will take 100 years to get our Liberty back.

He has said many many many times "We didn't just have our liberty taken away overnight, we won't be able to restore it overnight either". That's my point.

 

[TheTexan]

No, my plan is to put out as much effort as humanly possible to get the government off my back. That means starting in the political arena as Ron and Rand have done and working to acquire the means to be effective.

Begging the politicians for them to give you your freedom is a far cry from "as much effort as humanly possible."

If it takes 100 years to get something resembling freedom, and even then you have no guarantee it'll work, you need a new plan Matt. Because that's the quintessential definition of defeatism: planning on dying with your chains on.

So, either get a new plan, or start lying to yourself that you can vote your freedom back through Congress in a decade or two.

He has said many many many times "We didn't just have our liberty taken away overnight, we won't be able to restore it overnight either". That's my point.

If you refuse to think for yourself, and will only say and do what Ron Paul himself has said and done, at least do it right

Perhaps the most important lesson from Obamacare is that while liberty is lost incrementally, it cannot be regained incrementally. The federal leviathan continues its steady growth; sometimes boldly and sometimes quietly. Obamacare is just the latest example, but make no mistake: the statists are winning. So advocates of liberty must reject incremental approaches and fight boldly for bedrock principles.

 

[Matt Collins]

Begging the politicians for them to give you your freedom is a far cry from "as much effort as humanly possible."

I never said I would be begging the politicians for anything. I said I would be working to control their behavior. See this for a better understanding: http://training4liberty.org/facl/important_info.html

what Ron Paul himself has said

Please cite your quotation of Ron on that...

 

[MelissaCato]

He has said many many many times "We didn't just have our liberty taken away overnight, we won't be able to restore it overnight either". That's my point.

100 years Matt ? I never once thought 100 years coming from anything Ron Paul said.

 

[TheTexan]

Please cite your quotation of Ron on that...

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?Itemid=69&id=1961&option=com_content&task=view

 

[Matt Collins]

100 years Matt ? I never once thought 100 years coming from anything Ron Paul said.

I never said he did; that's my guesstimate.

 

[davidkachel]

Let me see if I get this right... (I've been away from this discussion for a day or two)

Some people here have the brilliant plan to ask the massah to set them free and if he won't, the fallback is to spend the next 100 years trying to think of clever arguments and ways all the slaves can apply pressure to convince the massah to set them free!

Hmmm, sounds like the exact same plan that hasn't been working for the last 100 years.

Also sounds like someone who has no understanding of history or economics either.

But hey, if those iron collars are that comfortable, keep wearing them. I prefer to shove an AK up the massah's ass.

 

[Matt Collins]

Some people here have the brilliant plan to ask the massah to set them free and if he won't, the fallback is to spend the next 100 years trying to think of clever arguments and ways all the slaves can apply pressure to convince the massah to set them free!

You fail to understand politics.

See this link: http://training4liberty.org/facl/important_info.html

 

[MelissaCato]

I never said he did; that's my guesstimate.

Seriously, 100 years Matt ? Your beginning to sound like a John Mccain. LOL

 

[Matt Collins]

Seriously, 100 years Matt ? Your beginning to sound like a John Mccain. LOL

Ha ha ha... that's the worst insult I've ever had flung at me on here...

But seriously, the Fed is the source of most of our modern problems (we'll ignore Lincoln's war for the time being), it was founded just under 100 years ago. To reverse all of the leviathan that the Fed enables is a daunting task, not to mention that it has to be disassembled in sequence, not just abolished overnight. That's why I am saying that it could take 100 years to do. Nice round number

 

[davidkachel]

You fail to understand politics. .

That is a completely silly response. Politics is nothing more than the foolish game they allow us to play in order to keep us distracted.



Let me put this to you as clearly as I possibly can Matt...

This country has been taken over by people of evil intent who willfully and intentionally, with nearly a century of planning and execution, have turned you into their personal slave, a money producing tool and an instrument of propaganda. (Your naive and foolish statements further THEIR cause considerably.)

Your free country (and mine) is GONE! This is not something that might happen or that is even imminent. It has ALREADY happened. It is over. They are not going to allow you to have your freedom back and they laugh out loud at you for thinking the political process can save you. They laugh at you even more loudly for thinking you might still be free.

Your silly conviction that it can all be achieved through politics rivals "Arbeit Macht Frei". You cannot please your masters enough that they will willingly set you free. To steal an analogy I heard just yesterday, why don't you start small if you are so convinced your method can work. Infiltrate the Mafia, spend years rising to a level of power, then try to convert it into a benevolent, non-violent, non-criminal charitable organization. If that works out for you, then take a shot at doing the same thing with the much larger criminal organization known as the US Government.


Sorry, but at my age I have no patience left for those who embrace the shackles.

 

[Matt Collins]

That is a completely silly response. Politics is nothing more than the foolish game they allow us to play in order to keep us distracted.

Politics is the adjudication in power. It's how society decides who gets to have control over what. Power is defined as getting other people to do what you want them to do.

It's human nature and it's not going away nor will it change. It is fundamental and has existed since the dawn of humanity, so if you want to be effective in winning back liberty, you had better learn how to work through politics because it's effectively dealing with people.

This country has been taken over by people of evil intent who willfully and intentionally, with nearly a century of planning and execution, have turned you into their personal slave, a money producing tool

Yes I am quote aware.

They are not going to allow you to have your freedom back and they laugh out loud at you for thinking the political process can save you. They laugh at you even more loudly for thinking you might still be free.

What you are not understanding is that working through the political process is the ONLY way to take back out freedoms at the current point in time. Sitting around waiting for some sort of societal collapse is a waste of time and makes you just a part of the problem.

Infiltrate the Mafia, spend years rising to a level of power, then try to convert it into a benevolent, non-violent, non-criminal charitable organization.

The difference is that we can't vote the mafia out. We CAN vote out bad elected officials with the right amount of effort at the right time and in the right place. And if we can't do that, we can change their behavior if we know how.


So again, instead of sitting around being a defeatist and doing nothing productive, what are you doing to help win back liberty?

 

[TheTexan]

What you are not understanding is that working through the political process is the ONLY way to take back out freedoms at the current point in time.

There are many non-political solutions. Some of which could theoretically work. Some of which absolutely would work (FSP).

You've got the key to your own prison Matt, but as long as you keep playing politics, it'll never occur to you to just open the door and leave.

So again, instead of sitting around being a defeatist and doing nothing productive, what are you doing to help win back liberty?

Some of us are actually trying to take our freedoms back in our lifetime. Your plan of hoping to get permission to be free about 50 years after you die, really, really sucks Matt. That's not productive, at all.

 

[davidkachel]

What you are not understanding is that working through the political process is the ONLY way to take back out freedoms at the current point in time. Sitting around waiting for some sort of societal collapse is a waste of time and makes you just a part of the problem.

Hitler and Stalin would have just LOVED you. You are so easy, it must be almost an anti-climax to take advantage of someone like you.

And BTW, I never said anything about waiting for a societal collapse. Don't know where you got such a silly idea. Societal collapses usually result in a brand new despot; often one exactly the same, but worse, than the one who caused the collapse in the first place.

 

[Dr.3D]

Back on the topic of the Obamacare decision, I'm still trying to figure out how the decision makes any of it constitutional.

From what I've been getting out of it, they are saying, the government can do anything it wants without regard to the constitution as all they have to do is mandate something (an unconstitutional act they are supposed to be limited by the constitution to do) and then when people don't cooperate with their mandate, they can then tax the people who didn't cooperate.

If this is the case, then the government can do anything they want and then tax those who don't cooperate. Seems like they are bypassing the entire constitution. Next they will tell us we have to turn in our firearms and then it will be constitutional because they will tax those who don't cooperate?

 

[TheTexan]

It's been known for quite some time now, but obamacare really just proves it. There is no such thing as "unconstitutional"

 

[davidkachel]

Back on the topic of the Obamacare decision, I'm still trying to figure out how the decision makes any of it constitutional.

From what I've been getting out of it, they are saying, the government can do anything it wants without regard to the constitution as all they have to do is mandate something (an unconstitutional act they are supposed to be limited by the constitution to do) and then when people don't cooperate with their mandate, they can then tax the people who didn't cooperate.

If this is the case, then the government can do anything they want and then tax those who don't cooperate. Seems like they are bypassing the entire constitution. Next they will tell us we have to turn in our firearms and then it will be constitutional because they will tax those who don't cooperate?

That's pretty much it. What the Supremes did, I believe for the first time in history, is actually rewrite a law so that they could call it constitutional.
So now Congress can pass laws they know are wrong, the President can simply decree laws by edict that he knows to be wrong, and SCOTUS can manipulate anything in order to do anything, all the while knowing it is wrong.

This is a dictatorship by a ruling class. And to quote George Carlin, "Guess what! You ain't in it!"

 

[Dr.3D]

That's pretty much it. What the Supremes did, I believe for the first time in history, is actually rewrite a law so that they could call it constitutional.
So now Congress can pass laws they know are wrong, the President can simply decree laws by edict that he knows to be wrong, and SCOTUS can manipulate anything in order to do anything, all the while knowing it is wrong.

This is a dictatorship by a ruling class. And to quote George Carlin, "Guess what! You ain't in it!"

Well, the individual mandate is unconstitutional, SCOTUS even said so. If you call it a tax, that doesn't make it constitutional.

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Well, the individual mandate is unconstitutional, SCOTUS even said so. If you call it a tax, that doesn't make it constitutional.

Beside the fallacy of authority, yes, it is unconstitutional, but not because some robed men said so, but because through our reason we can read and understand what the document says, and then compare it to the action and see they are incompatible. Using your own logic, you must support the tax as constitutional because...even the SCOTUS said so.

Beside that, the document is worthless. If it's only merit to being was to prevent tyranny, it's an abject failure.

This is for Matt and the rest of the incrementalists:



PS: It would also help you to read MLK's letter while he was incarcerated in jail about the 'white moderates'. Replace 'white moderates' with 'libertarian moderates', and it describes it well.

 

[nobody's_hero]

Beside that, the document is worthless. If it's only merit to being was to prevent tyranny, it's an abject failure.

I think it was the people's responsibility to prevent tyranny. The Constitution was really just a document that the people could point to and say to tyrants, "See, you broke this rule, this rule, and this rule, and that is why we're getting rid of you."

You wouldn't blame a gun for a murderer's actions.

Why blame the Constitution for a politician's actions?