Heil Obama

The knock came on the door long after we’d put the children to bed. I’d been expecting it. To me, caring for my family was far more important to me than obeying arbitrary laws. Nodding to my wife in a prearranged signal, I walked over to the door as she hurried to the back of the house. The bags had been packed since that terrible vote by Congress last year. I hadn’t expected it to be the last thing Congress would ever do, but there you go. Some say a dictatorship is more efficient.

I chuckled sourly to myself as I approached the door. Who ever thought that Canada would be considered a freer country than the USA? I hoped the tunnel into Alberta was still open.

Twin silhouettes against the door’s glass panel blocked the view of the sidewalk. The new IRS personnel had to have been hired by the pound. My papers were where they were supposed to be, in their clipboard by the door. The knock came again, slightly louder.

I opened the door and said the approved rote phrase of greeting, “Heil Obama.”

                                                ♦          ♦          ♦

Last night the liberal wing of the Democrat Party took the first step in Obama’s planned transformation of the United States into a progressive dictatorship. If any of my readers find this statement to be over the top, think for a moment. When has Obama done anything but continue to assert that this has been his agenda all along? Does the phrase, “This is just the first step,” or “This is what change looks like,” sound familiar? The ultra-liberals who desperately desire the sort of world George Orwell envisioned are still disappointed. Some have actually chided the House Democrats for “not going far enough.”

What none of them understand is that this entire process is one big lie. Obama lied when he promised transparency. He lied when he said this bill would reduce the deficit and he lied when he promised at the last second that federal money would not be used to fund abortions. The only time he hasn’t lied is when he pontificates about his dreams of a socialist dictatorship replacing our democratic republic.

2.4 trillion, that is our current deficit. The healthcare bill adds another trillion over the next decade. Pelosi and Reid call that “deficit reduction”. Doesn’t that seem just a bit slanted?  In Orwellian newspeak that would be “doublenotgood”.

About 38 states have filed their suits against the feds to opt out of Obamacare, basing their suit on the 10^th amendment, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Catherine Cortez Masto, the Nevada Attorney General, a Democrat, has refused to join in on the suit. No surprise there.

Now some, especially those who believe in the nanny state will claim that the Commerce Clause gives Washington the right to ride roughshod over the states. Oh really? First, look at the phrase, “by the Constitution”. The Slaughter Rule, which I wrote about in a previous column, violates the Constitution and can easily be challenged in the Supreme Court. Secondly, look at this Commerce Clause:

The clause, article I, Section 8, Clause 3,  states that the United States Congress shall have power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes".

Can anyone who isn’t a mushy-brained liberal read these words and claim that this clause gives the federal government the right to tell a private citizen what type of insurance policy they are allowed to buy?

Regulating commerce, based on the understanding of trade when this article was written, meant allowing free trade, not constricting it. Again we are back to the Obama version of newspeak.

Back when the Articles of Confederation were first written, states were able to erect barriers to trade with other states and foreign countries. This caused a number of problems, one of them the formation of monopolies within some states. The Commerce Clause was added to the Constitution so that true free trade was able to flourish. The liberal definition of the Commerce Clause is a polar opposite of the original intent which should come as no surprise to anyone. You should go back over all of the archives where Obama is describing his plans for our nation. By compiling them all together they form a chilling vision of a socialist workers paradise…without any of the checks or balances we used to have.

Those who claim that only by controlling the people can we insure freedom have already been brainwashed by the liberal big brother.