Posted on 09/26/2009 10:44:14 AM PDT by livius
If nothing else, the Obama eruption in American politics is steadily revealing the stark reality behind the progressive movement - the totalitarian temptation is always there and, for more than a few, possessing the official power to compel sooner or later becomes irresistible.
Not everybody on the left, of course. Some of the folks I most admire in this town are liberals whose work on behalf of values like transparency in government and protecting civil liberties is remarkable and essential.
Still, that this danger is real and growing becomes more obvious as public opposition grows to the president's across-the-board campaign to turn Washington into the all-powerful, centralized behemoth that Woodrow Wilson and FDR could only dream about.
Consider: Nowhere does the Constitution grant Congress authority to require every American to buy a particular private service or product on pain of forfeiture of a significant portion of their wealth. Yet, every version of Obamacare currently being discussed in Congress requires just that.
Forcing all of us to buy officially approved health insurance is essential to a functioning government-run system. As Obama told Congress, "many of insurance reforms we seek - especially requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions - cannot be achieved" without the individual mandate.
Why? Because the politicians and bureaucrats who will manage the government-run health care program know that, without the force of government behind them, they won't be able to make the rest of us do what they tell us to do.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
He thinks we have time to stop this in 2010 or 2012, but I'm not so sure. Things are moving very fast.
Think of “progressive” poster boys Rahm and Ezekiel Emanuel - who are both extremely influential Democrats and Obama insiders - and the kind of sick and twisted anti-human activities they promote.
Such as this demented little screed from Dr. “Mengele” Emanuel, printed in the July 1, 2009 issue of the Journal Of The AMA.
According to Dr. “Mengele” Emanuel, we and our bodies are “public goods” that can be seized for medical research.
You think I’m exaggerating? Read on:
The Obligation to Participate in Biomedical Research
G. Owen Schaefer, BA; Ezekiel J. Emanuel, MD, PhD; Alan Wertheimer, PhD
JAMA. 2009;302(1):67-72.
Abstract: The current prevailing view is that participation in biomedical research is above and beyond the call of duty. While some commentators have offered reasons against this, we propose a novel public goods argument for an obligation to participate in biomedical research. Biomedical knowledge is a public good, available to any individual even if that individual does not contribute to it. Participation in research is a critical way to support an important public good. Consequently, all have a duty to participate. The current social norm is that individuals participate only if they have a good reason to do so. The public goods argument implies that individuals should participate unless they have a good reason not to. Such a shift would be of great aid to the progress of biomedical research, eventually making society significantly healthier and longer lived.
“Things are moving very fast.”
As our beloved president has said, “You ain’t seen nuthin’ yet.”
Look into a liberal’s eyes and you’ll see a snickering, sneering, smug, adolescent psychotic.
IMHO
Are Joe Sickspak and Jane Costco listening?
We share the same fear. I believe this bunch came into office with a plan to create totalitarian control before the 2010 election. The method involves jamming restrictive legislation through Congress with the Democrat majority and using Czars and judicial appointments to nullify normal democratic processes. While the frog may be more aware it's being boiled to death, comments here on FR make me wonder if it's really awake yet. Time is running out.
Yes, Tapscott points out that “progressives” make a very smooth transition to totalitarians and that this is latent in their every thought.
When people refuse to accept that progressives know what’s best for them and refuse to go along, they rip off that velvet glove in no time at all.
I’ve read Jonah Goldberg’s book, LIberal Fascism, but I haven’t read the Paul Johnson book that Tapscott mentions in his article.
I really wonder if it isn’t too late to reverse this; if any of these programs, such as the Obamacare or Cap and Trade, pass and are enacted, I think it will be too late to stop the process.
I wonder about that too. I think they're actually feeling a little uneasy, but they can't quite put their finger on the reason.
It is not much different than jury duty. I detest jury duty and do not participate unless a judge compels me. I understand that the constitution guarantees a jury of peers but I do think that clause requires mandatory jury duty. Jury duty and forced participation in biomedical research are not far from slavery.
I would have thought this was an outlandish idea only a few months ago.
But the speed with which they are moving makes me think that they don't even want the 2010 election to happen. I don't know what they're going to do to stop it, but I'm sure they've got a plan...
Orwell explain leftist “progressives” best: “One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish a dictatorship.” 1984
I've studied this bunch over a long period. Living in the San Francisco Bay Area during the 1970s left an indelible impression of the totalitarian tactics these groups use almost reflexively. The only thing they understand is power.
My faith in American good sense faltered when I saw radical fascists like Angela Davis, Bill Ayers and Black Panther murderers welcomed into the academic and social elites. I've feared this time would eventually come because of voter apathy.
>>> Look into a liberal’s eyes and you’ll see a snickering, sneering, smug, adolescent psychotic. <<<<
Calling human beings “public goods” to be forcibly used in medical research is psychotic.
See #2 above.
Very good quote! It’s true, every progressive knows in his heart that he is right...and this in turn gives him the justification for imposing his will, which in turn gives him the motivation for the revolution. But power has been his been his goal all along.
>>> It is not much different than jury duty. <<<<
Oh, I think forced medical experimentation is a great deal “different” than “jury duty.”
It’s too obvious and monumental a difference to even discuss.
You should ask the mods to delete your very silly comment.
I lived in SF in the 70s, too. It still stuns me that Angela Davis, involved up to her eyebrows in that bloody Black Panther attack and kidnapping at the Marin County Courthouse, became the hero of the supposedly moderate left and ended up with a comfortable academic job. People like her rejected our legal system, the rule of law and our values, and they were rewarded with teaching positions so they could spread their poison.
Quite true. Scratch their veneer of 'compassion' and you will find the Khmer Rouge.
I’m every bit as concerned about the Hitler.
DEFINITELY NOT PC!!
Barack Hussein Obama is THE ONE.
Just as your government schooled child!
Under 3 minute video depicting how the Obama cultists resemble Hitler cultists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7u0GJSZttZE&feature=channel_page
“Scratch their veneer of compassion and you’ll find the Khmer Rouge.”
You said it. But, the biggest problem is that a large part of the “electorate” loves them. (I wonder if anyone loved the Khmer Rouge when they got through with their “reforms”.)
“Calling human beings ‘public goods’ to be forcibly used in medical researth is psychotic.”
Notice how the so-called mainstream press never mentioned anything about the writings and thoughts of those two “brothers”. (Absolutely amazing.)
IMHO
You would not be forced into medical experiments. The authors are not talking about Nazi like experimentation. You would have a requirement to participate in some medical research similar to periodic calls for jury duty. You would have a reasonable choice so that no one would be forced to undergo any non desired procedures. Most of the participation would be surveys and background information.
My comparison is reasonable. You are overstating the medical side. I am consistent as I am opposed to both. I do not want to be compelled into participation for any reason except times of national emergency.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.