Recent Comments
Anonymous on Call Em Like I See Em conner43 on Call Em Like I See Em Propertius on Today’s Poll -Who Is The… Matt Cavanaugh on Call Em Like I See Em Matt Cavanaugh on Call Em Like I See Em Thank You!
Buy This Movie!
On the radio!
Your turn…
This entry was posted in Politics and tagged 2012 election, obamacare, supreme court. Bookmark the permalink.
I was thinking the same thing, that this could boomerang against Obama. However, in the article that I wrote on DailyPUMA, I think I touched an area that I haven’t seen discussed yet regarding lack of any intelligent incentive for getting out of having to pay for coverage. http://dailypuma.blogspot.com/2012/06/unanswered-obama-care-questions-check.html
“Any intelligent incentive for getting out of having to pay for coverage?” By bringing in large swaths of folks who will be subsidized, and those with pre_existing conditions, the current rates will go through the roof, many working people will find it unaffordable. The quality of care will suffer, due to an existing shortage of doctors and a big increase in patients.. A medical procedure costs what it costs, everyone involved will have to be paid, so there is no savings there. Even average earners may be thrown on Medicaid, which they will Not like. First Responders may fall into that group . If one has to choose between food and insurance, they will choose food, then they will be fined for not choosing insurance. No one wants to be hounded by the IRS, believe me, they have the right to grab all your bank accounts and put a lien on your property, or force you to sell it.
Some entrepreneurs should start sewing brown shirts and jack boots, the gov’t will be buying a lot of each.
\
Judge Roberts rationalization that this is simply the levying of a tax does not add up. Taxation is based on a product, providing a service, or use of a location, or, providing access to a product, service, or location. In other words, taxation is based on some type consumption, or visitation.
If a person refuses to participate in Obama’s healthcare program, they are not consuming, using a service, or visiting a location, and therefore there should be no “tax” levied. Can someone give an example of a tax that is not based on a product, service, or visiting a location, or providing access to a product, service, or location?
Can’t john Q public simply challenge the definition of taxation in the case of Obama Care and argue that Robert’s simply made up a form of taxation that did not exist before, and that is beyond his powers to so? I call his tax definition the equivalent of a “breathing tax”. Anyone who breathes, is taxed.
I would respectfully disagree that we aren’t already taxed for existing. If you live on land (or even at a marina) you directly or indirectly pay a tax for taking up space in the form of real estate or marina taxes (or whomever is supporting you does). But the heart of the Obamacaretax act is changing behavior in a way that the citizenry does not agree with. Roberts I think stripped away the double, happy talk about all the goodies that it was going to provide for certain citizens (many noble, most not) and called it was it is- a TAX.
The mandate is only one of many onerous taxes within this horror. He basically shot down all the arguments that say it is good social policy (for little or no cost!) and stipulated that Congress created a tax for your own good to make people to do the right thing in the case of the mandate. Congress uses the tax code to reward and punish behaviors, groups of constituencies all the time, from the working poor, to retirees, to corporations, to small businesses, etc. These draconian new laws turn a economy which is already on the ropes onto its head and has made the depression-recession worse because of uncertainty and a massive transfer of wealth from one group to another. One of the goals of the Obamacaretax act is to redistribute the cost and consumption of health care in this country (and the profits). There are good and bad things about this goal, but it is a political and economic question which the Democratic party in the Congress and Obama specifically excluded the populace from having a say in the way that it was constructed and passed. Remember the screaming constituents from 2010 at town hall meetings and the Democrats response. This highhandedness of Democrats and Obama started with the rigged nomination of Obama in 2008. They have no respect for the public and outright contempt in many instances.
Roberts threw the issue back into the political struggle we call elections. He called it what it is which is a tax. He essentially cleared the deck of the prior arguments that Democrats were using to justify it. They now have to justify taxing people not only for not having something they may not can afford but also taxing them if they do (Cadillac plans are more like Buick plans it seems to me). The states are going to also pay the price of much of the implementation and state taxes will be used to pay for it. The 2012 election is going to be about taxes and the methods in which the parties use to implement them. The Affordable Healthcare Act was a tax bill and the Democrats cannot fudge it any longer.
No this is wrong.
The Democratic Party and Obama and Congress did not exclude the populace from having a say. The populace had THE say. The populace elected every member of Congress. The populace elected Obama. The populace gave millions and millions of dollars to the Democratic Party to help make this happen. The populace is content with its lies and pretense and confusion because the only alternative today is emptiness and loneliness. A huge segment of the populace bullied an increasingly smaller segment of the populace into bending over and taking it hard because they think that protects them and –most importantly because this trumps all– makes them part of the crowd.
Bushies did it in the early to mid 2000s. Obamabots did it in 2008. And slowly Hillary supporters started peeling away and joining them. It happened with the Arab Spring hullabaloo. It happened with Occupy Wall Street. It happened with Wisconsin and the public union argument. It happened with the contraception and Trayvon Martin and gay marriage bruhahas. Bit by bit the Bushes and Obamas of the United States –and there are many many of them in government, in big business, in the media, have hit on particular issues that this group or that of Americans do not think rationally about and, bam, they’re drawn into the side that gives Bush/Obama/Corporations power. A little here a little there, a lot some days, a bit the next, and next thing you know the populace has handed over its power to people who will destroy the whole kit and kaboodle. This has happened before, it’s human nature playing out inside and around us; we make choices every hour of every day and in the end the populace destroys itself while a few figureheads are blamed.
The populace had a say in all of this, it still does. But too big a portion of the populace is willing to attack truth tellers and prop up liars; that portion has grown steadily the past 30 years, accelerated the past 10, and continues to grow, as evidenced this very week.
Respectfully I do not think that the public was included in several different ways. Obama ran specifically against a mandate. The Democrats held virtually no public hearings. Pelosi and Reid kept the bill out of site of the public and even Congressmember’s view until it was time to vote and then pressured them to vote yes. Lobbyists wrote the legislation. Deceptive language was used to justify the draconian measures stipulated in the bill to the public and then before the Supreme Court in arguing it was not a tax which it clearly (to me at least) is. Public funds were used to propagandize the public into accepting it which has been a massive failure.
You are describing tactics which have been used successfully by a myriad of interests to gain control over the public (and the public purse) and I agree that they are harmful and unfair. I think they are losing their efficacy for many different reasons. I think Roberts just changed everything in ways that I (and a lot of people) don’t even fully comprehend yet.
Everything you and I knew about Obamacare as health care reform was being crafted was public information that the rest of the populace knew or had access to know. I read it in The New York Times, the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, TIME, on Huffington Post and Drudge, heard it on MSNBC and FOX and CNN, read it on Firedoglake and The Confluence and TalkLeft and countless other blogs. The final legislation wasn’t a surprise to me, was it to you? I read about Pharma and Big Insurance’s access to the White House, I read how the public option was tossed aside, I read how the mandate was included. I wrote criticisms of this on my Facebook page and hundreds if not thousands of comments on several blogs and I got attacked for it by Democrats, by gay Democrats and feminist Democrats and Wall Street Democrats and Democrats receiving public assistance.
This was not done in secret, no wool was pulled over anybody’s eyes. I was in America, I was online, I was watching TV, the information was out there and the populace defended or accepted it without insisting our elected representatives do something else. Maxine Waters said at one point to an audience (the YouTube is probably still up) that she and others were ready willing and able to criticize Obama and what he was doing but her constituents didn’t want to hear it and she’d be tossed out if she went against the tide so she wasn’t going to do it. As has happened many times in history, the populace knew what was happening and they went along with it because they thought what they were getting was worth it.
Lulu, what’s interesting about this youtube of Maxine Waters is that the audience of AAs is saying they want her to go after Obama, but the TRUTH is they do not. They want Maxine Waters, et al, to get for them what they need but they do not want the First Black President bruised in the process. Blacks and whites are no different about Obama, it’s just some of the issues that are different. The populace is very much involved in determining the direction of how this goes.
In reply to LuLu way above, I wrote “Taxation is based on a product, providing a service, or use of a location, or, providing access to a product, service, or location. In other words, taxation is based on some type consumption, or visitation.”
Then LuLu wrote, “I would respectfully disagree that we aren’t already taxed for existing. If you live on land (or even at a marina) you directly or indirectly pay a tax for taking up space in the form of real estate or marina taxes (or whomever is supporting you does).”
So where is your example of a tax that is not about something? The example you gave is one I covered above, and different from what Roberts did.
Here is what Roberts confused. A levied tax on an item cannot be greater in cost than the item itself. Normally, taxes are set to be around 1% to 33% for most items. Even Income tax is divided into separate categories so even when the tax rate rises higher, it’s because of several different types of taxes for different purposes.
If Robert’s want to assess a no health insurance coverage tax (aka penalty) on people, it can’t be for the full amount of the premium, that is just insane.
What Roberts is calling a tax, is really a penalty, and making a penalty equal to the price of the product or service that is being refused most probably violates several legal tenets having to do with fairness and commerce.
So if a yearly health care insurance premium was going to be 3,000 dollars, than invoking a 10 or 15% penalty is much more in line than what Roberts did incorrectly, which was assess a 100% penalty.
dailypuma, you’re exactly right.
I keep reading here and other blogs about how brilliant Roberts’ decision was but I don’t see genius at all, I see bullshit. It’s the same old deception and pretending that’s become the standard bearer for American identification and characterization and justification and belief. “If I pretend it’s so, it becomes so.” But it doesn’t, it’s just pretending.
You’re right that this is not a tax. I don’t care how many people label it brilliant to call a fine a tax, it’s not brilliant it’s just a lie.
Zal, I fear that keeping too much bottled up and not letting people know how you feel may eventually be detrimental to your health.
Zal is objectively wrong that the public had a say in this ARA bill. He is right that they had the ability to find out what was in it and many did. That’s why people excercised their right to petition their representatives against this bill. They did so in massive numbers. No one knew before they elected Obama and Dem reps in 2008 that they would try to pass this monstrosity. When they realized what was happening, they came out in great #s at town halls, in phone campaigns, in letters to their reps, in email, and on and on to register how much they DID NOT want this to pass. Far from “propping up liars,” they told Congresspeople exactly what they thought and what would happen if they passed this. Democrats didn’t listen and instead likened these people – many of them seniors who had fought against Hitler in WWII to Nazis!
Then the bill was passed through backroom deals, arm-twisting and threats from Reid and Pelois – not something the public had access to influence. This, plus the stimulus, which the public also vocally resisted started the Tea Party – hardly a movement trying to “prop up liars” and lay down and take it as Zal so contemptously states and implies. This same public cast out the Democratic party from the House and almost from the Senate in response to the fact that they refused to listen to the people they represent – actually a sign that our system, as broken as it is in many ways – sometimes works.
I predict they’ll do the same to Obama and more of the Senate this year to have the final say over what happens to our fellow citizens who we bestow the honor to represent us when they begin to act like royalty and/or dictators rather than our peers.
I see the difference between a “fine” and a “tax” this way – You are fined when you do something that is against the law. Like parking in the wrong place or for too long or having an unlicensed dog. A tax is something you pay for something that you own or do that isn’t against the law – like buying liquor or paying excise tax on your car. I think that what CJ Roberts is saying is that the ACA does not make it illegal to not buy health insurance. It triggers a tax, but the act of not buying the insurance is not punishable in and of itself. That might be a fine distinction, but I suspect that it has some legal ramifications that will unfold as the law goes into full effect.
Maybe you’re right, run_dmc, or maybe I’m right.
It’s turning out I was right about the Trayvon Martin story (though of course it’s barely in the news and has disappeared from blog conversation) and about the Muslim Brotherhood taking over power in Egypt. Time tends to reveal what I see that many others don’t because most people go along with conventional thinking, it’s human nature and makes people feel good to be in agreement with the crowd. I’m, by nature, unconventional, nonconformist, comfortable neither leading nor following, so I’m out of step with the crowd, which pisses off some people and also generally makes for clearer observation.
The people I’ve engaged with are people I’ve known for years, people I meet day to day, both in real life and online. And I listen. A lot. I listen online and in line in public places, I listen to people talking on TV and at social events, at dinners and on subways and when people I don’t know make casual comments. I watch and I listen in cities and small towns, and I listen well, that’s how I can read people so well. Believe me or not I’m uncommonly observant, and although there was certainly lots of dissent (mine included) about Obamacare, there was more defense of it and of Obama while it was being crafted. He could never have got that cockamamie law through without public support. As the Maxine Waters clip I posted reveals, elected officials got the message loud and clear: constituents wanted Obama supported, not criticized or challenged. People like Maxine Waters do not hold office as long as she has without being able to read what people want — it’s an especially revealing clip because she (and we) can hear audience members tell her it’s time to go after Obama, but she laughs because she knows that’s what they said but it’s not what they wanted and she’d be out on her ear if she couldn’t tell the difference.
elliesmom, I think that’s a reasonable read of it.
It’s an interesting legalese point but it’s also bullshit, legal fancy footwork, semantic calisthenics like Clinton’s “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is,” not good lawmaking or genius judicial finding.
Anybody thinking honestly about citizens being forced to pay money to the government if they don’t buy private insurance knows it’s a penalty, and most people define paying a penalty as a fine not a tax.
Zal – “Trayvon Martin” and “Muslim Brotherhood” – complete and utter non sequiturs. My point stands that you are taking what you see in your, by definition, limited world as evidence despite objective evidence through elections and protests that shows otherwise.
Elliesmom, but even if one wants to call this penalty (or fine) a tax, it is depraved to assess the penalty, fine or tax at 100% of the value of the item being taxed. Think of all the taxes you pay, and the percentage that tax is of the item you are actually buying.
Whether we like taxes or not, the concept behind a tax is to siphon a portion of the wealth created through commerce to mitigate any possible unintended or intended side effect that could cause harm.
very thoughtful question… i am wondering the same thing now…
I saw what you saw, I understand your point and I realize you believe that’s all there is to it. A lot of people agree with you, a lot of people think the same way. I see more than most people see, I recognized something else was going on and, as I pointed out back then, I came to a different conclusion and my conclusion (which some others would say is obvious whether or not others recognize it) is the one that makes sense. The full truth can be surprising but it almost always makes sense; full truth can be hard to come by in times like today, and is oftentimes not what appears on the surface.
What happened in Egypt and then Trayvon Martin (the latter of which you and I got into here) speak right to my point, which you didn’t then and maybe now don’t understand — or maybe you understand it now and refuse to acknowledge it, I don’t know. And that Maxine Waters clip also speaks directly to my point. Anybody who watches that Maxine Waters clip will agree that, objectively on the surface, Maxine Waters is being given the okay to go after Obama; but she laughs because she knows no matter what seems the objective evidence, she will be skewered if she goes after Obama. Some people see only what’s on the surface during an event and, combined with their own biases, believe that’s the full story, the only objective evidence. Some few of us see much more and use our biases to open up our view rather than narrow it, then use that wider field of observation to collect more objective evidence and figure out what’s going on in a fuller more detailed way.
My point is that despite what the crowd says, I tend to get what’s really happening from the start with events like Obamacare being crafted or when or a Facebook “revolution” erupts in Tahrir Square or Trayvon Martin gets used for Obama’s political expediency. More times than not, what I see and my conclusion will not agree with conventional “wisdom” and then will ultimately turn out to be more on-the-mark than the crowd’s was.
You can resist and attack what I say, you have every right to do that and I champion that right, or you can learn from me; my life will be the same either way.
I think it will help Romney because it will fire up the average right-leaning voter who wasn’t interested in coming out to vote for McCain in 2008 and maybe even pull in some libertarians too. I don’t think Obama has anything, at this point, to fire his side up with. But I don’t have a horse in this race and both candidates look like the same horse’s ass to me so I may just be too disgusted to see what the rest of America, with their ideology blinders firmly in place, sees. IMO, the deciding factor will be who stays home. Will it be the uni-party’s right wing or it’s center right wing? It’s a coin toss but, for now, I’m calling Romney.
zolandice: yEAH THE POPULACE had A SAY-tHEY f**CKING SAID NO OBAMACAREFROM THE start—-see WHERE THAT GOT US
I don’t know where you hang out, who you know, what you read or watch or listen to, but you missed a lot if you think the populace said no from the start. I engaged in countless discussions in person and online with Democrats who voted for Obama (Obama did win the popular and EC vote, which is the majority of the populace that’s engaged) and to a person they defended Obamacare from the start. Most of them still do. Sure there was an occasional peep about a public option but 99% of the noise from Democrats was in support of Obama and his Health Care Reform, and after it passed there was a huge victory dance.
Perhaps you think, as many Americans do these days, that what YOU say is the same thing the populace wants — the constant, “Americans think such and such” and “Americans want so and so” to back up one person’s opinion is typical of this dysfunction — but the truth lives in what a whole lot of individuals actually say and do, not what you say they’ve said and done. Obama was elected in the general election because the majority of voters voted for him, and throughout the process of creating HCR legislation, Obama supporters supported the choices he made that made Obamacare. That’s what happened.
You can CAPLOCK all you like but yelling doesn’t make you right, it only makes you loud.
Sure, Zal – your one-person engagement in “countless discussions” with idiots cancels out the actual evidence of the millions of people who came to town halls, wrote, emailed and phoned their congresspeople, marched on the Hill, etc, to protest the ARA and then voted to turn the House and almost the Senate over to Republicans in response to the Democrats refusing to listen to them about how much they, the public you think are so stupid, hated this bill. Narcissist much? (Actually, you sound very much like the elitist snobs in the Democratic party you profess to dislike so much). Just because people around you are clueless doesn’t mean the rest of us are. Maybe you just need to get new friends and acquaintances or drinking buddies or whoever you are talking to. (And, see my other reply above)
I think the people of Massachusetts sending Scott Brown to the senate was a very distinct shot across the bow of ObamaCare.
Agree with run_dmc and Elliesmom. Many, many dems I know – and I’ve been in politics a long time – did NOT want the obamacare bill and informed their reps in congress – for all the good it did.
I think you’re mistaken on this one, Zal. Scott Brown, the 2010 elections all point to the people being angry about ramming this bill through. I would guess the election in November will be another indicator.
What people may say to you in your area of the country does not reflect on the full conversation that is happening all over the country nor does it take into account exactly what run_dmc so eloquently put it. The great numbers of people at the town hall meetings to tell reps/senators they didn’t want this bill fell on deaf ears. Many dems chose not to have town halls because they were afraid to face their constituents.
We had a say, according to you, I disagree, the dems stole the primary, probably the election and continued to ram through bills the public hated. And here we are…
zaladonis, in regards to the car insurance tax, you can choose to not drive and simply find a job close to where you live, and then take public transportation, walk, or bike, and suddenly, you don’t have to have car insurance.
I don’t think that analogy works in regards for health care insurance.
we definitely didn’t have a say at all… or they just wouldn’t listen. the tea party grew out of them shoving this unknown huge bill down our throats. so yeah, they didn’t listen at all to anyone. they just wanted to pass their bullshit and were out of touch with the american people, all sides. they didn’t help any liberal causes or conservative causes passing this thing. no single payer and the mandate, etc. and if zal thinks we had a say because of who we voted for in 2008, well, i didn’t vote for any of those folks that voted for it, so i didn’t have a say and lot’s of people didn’t have a say because they didn’t vote for those people either. plus ob didn’t even have a plan for healthcare before he got elected. he dropped it into congresses laps to come up with it after the election. he didn’t want anything to do with it, until he started to see the push back on it from americans….
“But too big a portion of the populace is willing to attack truth tellers and prop up liars; that portion has grown steadily the past 30 years, accelerated the past 10, and continues to grow, as evidenced this very week.”
Zaldonis, you’re right on. The public’s willingness to embrace disinformation when it comes from their side of the uni-party is mind blowing.
The only way the mandate can be a tax is as a capitation (“head tax”), as it’s levied simply for existing, rather than a transaction or activity. Capitations are banned by the Constitution.
Actually it’s a “tax” on inactivity, on not doing something the law has mandated we have to do.
Like if you don’t have car insurance. Nobody calls that a tax. If I’m stopped, driving, without car insurance, I have to pay a fine, not a tax.
Ok, I think this post will go in the right place now. zaladonis, in regards to the car insurance tax, you can choose to not drive and simply find a job close to where you live, and then take public transportation, walk, or bike, and suddenly, you don’t have to have car insurance.
I don’t think that analogy works in regards for health care insurance.
I agree with Tamerlane — it’s effectively a poll tax. And, that’s why, it shouldn’t, and probably won’t survive. Certainly, historically, poll taxes have been very unpopular.
dailypuma, you’re right it’s not exactly the same (there’s nothing exactly the same, which is why this was heard by the SC) for the reason you cited but in an effort to comprehend what it is and the relative reasonableness of it, people are drawing comparisons. So I jumped in. Car insurance is the closest tax/fine law to this because of the correlation between our government mandating the citizenry buy insurance from private corporations supposedly for their own protection and the economic protection of others in the community, or else pay a fine for not doing so.
NES: It’s not anything like a poll tax. A poll tax or head tax is one that everybody pays, as Tam says, merely for existing. By far, the majority of Americans will not pay this Obamacare tax. The only people paying the Obamacare “tax” will be those who do not buy private insurance or are not old enough or poor enough to qualify for medicare or medicaid.
In striking down the mandate, the 11th Circuit court likened it to a capitation. Since, as the obama admin argued, the mandate was valid because every citizen at some time in their life uses healthcare, then simply the act of being born subjects one to this tax (sic).
I believe you if you say the Obama administration argued that, Tam, but what they argued is incorrect. As I pointed out, the vast majority of Americans are not subject to that “tax” because they have health care insurance or coverage one way or another from birth onward. The only people subject to this tax are those who do not have health care insurance and are not eligible for medicare or medicaid.
This can be argued seven ways to Sunday and peabrains can insist it’s not a penalty but it obviously is a penalty that must be paid by people who are not covered by private insurance or public programs.
Any rational person (which excludes 5 SC justices) can see it’s a penalty. My point was, that IF it’s a tax, then it can only be an head tax. Officially, thanks to the Roberts Circus, it’s now a tax.
Obviously, in legal terms, it’s a tax if the SC terms it that and the IRS collects it.
My point is how can it be a head tax if most heads don’t have to pay it? By definition a head tax is paid merely because the head exists, not as a result of income or doing or not doing something. This tax will be levied against only the 10% or so of citizens who don’t have health care coverage; the other 90% (or whatever it is) will be exempt.
What is fascinating about these discussions is hearing from folks who would have sworn they were Liberals, as they understood Liberalism.. I took Liberalism to mean singing one’s own song, and dancing to the music in our heads, forging a path, without gov’t interference and making a life as big as one’s dreams. Loving, acceptance of others and never judging were important, along with putting God and country first..I was such a Girl Scout. New Liberalism is nothing like that, it has become a giant birthday party, where the gov’t is always the host, and everybody goes home with a cheap prize. It is an ongoing social engineering project, costs a fortune, lives and dies by polls, and sees no individuals, only ‘blocs’. Most of us dislike so called friends who are always trying to ‘fix’ us, especially when we don’t think we need fixing…It reminds me of being a little kid and told to take my medicine, especially cod liver oil, ugh, because it was ‘good for me.’
John has commented on his debate with himself over Liberalism and being a Democrat, boy oh boy, do I understand that.
Can one still be a Liberal and not want to pay for yet another gov’t program ? Or partake in another gov’t birthday party ? Are we now at the ‘enough is enough’ point ><<? Is it still okay to be a Liberal and yet be fed up ?
It’s changed from half a century ago, sophie, and it’s about to change again. Liberals back in FDR’s time and LBJ’s time supported these programs because they saw people in distress and felt it was their obligation to help. People who’d worked a lifetime shouldn’t be destitute eating cat food in old age; people who are sick and without money should be able to get the medical attention they need.
But times have changed and today people feel entitled to a great deal more than not being destitute or having an ear ache attended to. Today, whether or not they’ve worked a lifetime, they “deserve” air conditioning and abortions and gift bags with all kinds of goodies. And discussion about health care legislation isn’t about the health care involved as you keep valiantly trying to inject, no it’s about what the meaning of the word “tax” is and how brilliant a Judge is for making it about that. That’s today’s “liberals.”
This generation of liberals is a world apart from ours and our parent’s. Liberals were do-gooders because doing good for others was its own reward; fighting the good fight, being honest and forthright was virtuous, and virtue wasn’t snickered at, it was something of value that was what made liberalism better than conservatism, made us proud to be Democrats and disdainful of Republicans. That’s old fashioned. This generation wears deceit proudly and although they like to think of themselves as generous and giving, in truth they’re narcissists who “give” because of what they feel they’ll receive. Giving for the sake of giving, playing by rules, being true, honor and integrity, is –to them– for suckers.
But as I said, it’s about to change again. When a few of them had figured out you can lie and get away with it, that scamming gets you more than playing fair, they could collect their goodies, snicker disdainfully at the suckers, and go on to another day of it. But more and more figured it out, more and more lie and cheat and scam — and eventually it gets to the point that nobody is believed, nothing is trusted, and the house of cards falls. Our society, our whole system, is based on trust and belief in one another, and just like individual relationships, when trust is broken all the good stuff you took for granted disappears.
Taxes are going to be hiked up, programs are going to be cut, and American citizens are about to find out what it’s like to be as victimized as many of them have felt for years.
I think I was clinging to a souped up, dreamy version of Liberalism that hasn’t existed for many years. Perhaps because it flattered my ego, and need to feel ‘helpful’. That set of ideals has made a long journey, only to arrive at the Port of Cynicism, which doesn’t exactly boost one’s spirits. Shouldn’t there be at least a rest stop between Head-in-the Clouds ideals and the dungeons ? Thank God for jokes and interesting wines.
I clung to the same version of liberalism and Democrats until 2008.
Abrupt awakenings are rude.
In 2006, the year I turned 50, long into a festive dinner party at my house I went to the bathroom to pee. I peed, then, washing my hands, looked up at the mirror. And I aged from 30 to 50. In an instant. Somehow each year after 30, each of the thousands of times I looked at my reflection, I’d remained unchanged from the time before. Then in a moment, with 14 guests having a grand time on my screened porch twenty feet away, I aged twenty years. Returning to that party, showing my face aged 20 years from the way it looked when I’d left five minutes earlier, told me everything I ever needed to know about vanity and devastation. Not quite the same as the aging and sagging of liberalism, but rude awakening just the same.
But there’s a next day and new dreams can be made along with knowing things we don’t want to know. And we, individually, don’t have to gauge our behavior or identify our values by the same rules the majority does. At our age, sophie, one of the perks is how much easier it is to wear purple when the norm is blue, to see clouds as beautiful formations rather than blocking the sun. Okay now I’m pilfering from Joni so it’s time to stop. Anyway you know what I mean. We can live liberalism our way even after recognizing others are now living it another way. And yes, there’s good wine to share with good friends who appreciate us no matter how out of fashion our dance becomes.
I love this exchange because it’s so honest.
My Democrat identified mindset was killed in 2008 as well. And yes, it was a very rude awakening.
Since then, I’ve had to slowly realize that those who believe in Obama and his brand of false liberalism were doing what I’d probably done right up ’til 2008. Otherwise, I’d probably voted for someone other than a Democrat by now — still haven’t. The feeling that followed this rude awakening was as close to ‘depression’ as I think I’ve ever been conscious of feeling.
But here’s the kicker — what it’s shoved me toward is a deeper sense of integrity. I’m glad for that part. I’m glad that I’m willing to look at Romney instead of only looking for the reasons I wouldn’t vote for him. This appeals to my sense of fairness. The result may be the same, because there are some values that I don’t want to budge on, but the thought process has changed. I have 2008 to thank for that.
Nicely said, Jay. It’s been very much the same for me. Sure wouldn’t have said this three years ago but I’m now glad it happened. It’s been hard won but I’ve never been more comfortable with the truth of who I am, the objectivity of what I see, and what I believe as a result.
Zaldonis, I stare at trees now. There are some amazing hairdos on trees out there. Just in the past week, I’ve parked, done the task I had to do, and as I was getting back into my car, noticed an amazing looking tree and went to take a closer look.
Sic transit gloria.
Maybe we all have a Dorian Gray moment, we just don’t remember them as well as you do. I know I’ve had several, catching a reflection of one’s imagined youthful self in a store window is one example. It is always a shock. At least our pets don’t notice, and our friends still love us . It’s good to know we can still give a damn, even if it’s a different, more modulated damn,one that isn’t exhaustively all-consuming. It’s so comforting to finally understand that nothing is all one way or another, but many different shades in between, and one can live with that, considering the alternative.
Thanks for sharing.
Jay, I so understand your journey. Many of us are feeling our way along a dim and narrow hallway, it’s nice to have company along the way. Letting go of the need to be the hero of our own story, is hard, but very liberating.
Three cheers for Jay’s comment above. I think it reflects many people’s journey and largely reflects mine. I voted for 2 GOPs in my life before 2008 – both in lower level races – and regretted one of those votes quickly. My own “nativity” story on breaking away from Dem group think was in late Jan. of 08 when upon looking into Obama I realized I could never vote for him. He was and is corrupt down to his bone marrow. This is not to say that the Clintons have not been corrupted to a degree, but neither presented as saviors. Obama took away any pretense of reality and for a season a majority bought it.
In all previous Dem primaries of my adulthood my choice lost and I made peace with the nominee. In Clinton’s case (he was my 3rd choice in 92) I became enthusiastic by May or so of that year. As for the rest – Mondale, Dukakis, Gore and Kerry – none were my favorite (yes, I wanted Bill Bradley in 2000) but they all got my vote in November. What 2008 gave me was a sense of freedom and integrity – and an ongoing sense of futility about the system. Everything changed in 2000 – Bush was handed the win, and Obama is an extension of Bush. Certainly on the wars and I’d even argue that Obamacare is an extension of medicare part d in a broad sense – a furthering of the marriage between government and corporations. What Obamacare finally does is bring an end to the New Deal once and for all. Everyone is missing this. If it stands the contract between the government and the people is altered for ever. We can now be taxed into supporting Blue Shield’s bottom line. That is new.
The next step is to rework the rest of the remaining New Deal/Great Society so that it benefits corporations. This will happen – no matter who wins this time. If programs need to be killed they will be, most will be saved and redirected to maximize the amount of money large corporations can glean from them. Watch. I write this with little passion because I’m not sure the end result will be horrible. The New Deal has been gasping for air for a while now. “We’ll all be libertarians in the end.” is a crack that still rings true to me. Those celebrating Obamacare’s win this week won’t be when they realize the line that’s been crossed will be weaponized against them too. Both Bush and Obama have altered our relationship to government. Bush with the Patriot act, Obama with Obamacare. The Right will attack this new normal from one hilltop, the Left another. For now they are picking off each other. But I do hold out hope that eventually both sides will realize the enemy is the same: corporate government. In the short term, I have no hope however.
I still don’t know who will win this time. But I’m more convinced than ever that whoever it is it will be because he was chosen, not because he was elected. I’m relieved to understand this now. It’s also depressing.
Here’s the thing about Hillary in particular. You get the sense that we’d still be in this mess if she’d been elected (including with healthcare, which I still hold a grudge against her about), but that at least SOME protections for the people (like a HOLC) would be in place.
You get none of that with Obama. He’s 100% for the 1%, 0% for the rest of us, and he’s done his job well. We’re 4 years into this Depression (I refuse to lie about it anymore) and this is the first month that corporations have posted a loss. Meanwhile, my wages have been cut by more than half, and all the benefits that went with my job. I make significantly less and am entirely unprotected now. I would have gotten something if Hillary had been elected.
The scariest part for me is that I realized recently that McCain really was my best choice, because we would not have gotten this health care debacle, and he would have made the banks and Wall Street eat their own sh!tpile. We might have been experiencing a real recovery by now, or close to it, instead of teetering on the edge of a global financial meltdown.
this is for lola below…. i agree about hillary… the difference is that the bill would have been better because she actually did have a plan. she did want the mandate, but i don’t think it would have gotten this messy because she would have listened when people pushed back on it… and unlike ob, she would have actually worked on the bill herself instead of passing it off to another kid in class to do their homework to play golf, the way ob did. the biggest problem is that ob didn’t want to take responsibility for this thing and so he didn’t oversee it so then it turned into this out of control huge bill that no one even had time to read before nancy was pushing to pass it through that crazy voting policy she used. basically, i just think hillary knowing how she is she would have taken control of this thing in the beginning to the end… she definitely wouldn’t have trusted nancy or harry reid with it. also, she would have focused on the economy first and foremost until it was better, then worked on healthcare, unlike ob who wasted all that time on healthcare when the economy was ailing so badly. anyway, just knowing the differences in their characters point me to see that the scenario in this whole thing would have been different and on a different time table under hillary than ob. i personally think the bill just would have made more sense and that hillary would have compromised in ways that ob wouldn’t and she wouldn’t have turned this into a healthcare insurance company payoff…
I totally agree, kanaughty. Thanks for your comment.
Zal, can’t tell you how valuable your remarks above are to me right now. I’m having that moment this summer. I’ve looking in the mirror a few times of late and noted that I am, in fact, 49 in realty. Though in my head I’ve been 30 for a very long time. It’s a shock…and a relief. And I need very much to hear that we can keep creating our lives…and I am.
And that is as direct and personal as I’m libel to get on here for a long while. Ever.
I’m glad it was valuable to you, John. And thank you for saying so; that means a lot to me.
Also, thank you for letting me post here unfettered. To borrow from sophie’s recent take: your party’s the best one, and it’s because there’s free and open discussion including anyone with an unconventional view, better because it’s not an echo chamber. Narcissus loved echo, narcissists love echo parties; yours is a party with disparate voices and that’s the most interesting kind. Thanks, really.
Sorry to be so late to the conversation- just wanted to chime in on the “poll tax” lol- here in bitter clinger country we have what is called a “per Capita tax” – a yearly tax everyone over the age of 18 pays just for living and breathing here. This is on top of the school tax, county tax, city tax and the “right to work tax.” Yes- we have a right to work tax.
Excuse my ignorance, but what is a right to work tax?
https://mobile.twitter.com/MissAudMae/status/219270699976626176?photo=1
The above nails it, who knew Donald Trump would be the one to do it ?
Oh, snap!
NICE:
http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_20990296/glaxosmithkline-pay-largest-health-care-fraud-fine-history?source=rss