The British mercantile system, some could argue, was the catalyst that brought to fruition the act of revolution, which in turn, birthed the framework upon which this great Nation is founded.   The English government so controlled the marketplace that its citizens, including the colonists, had their purchase choices made for them.  In essence, if the government can control what products can be sold, it can control what you buy.  This was intolerable to many colonists who, much to the chagrin of English monarchy, had been infected by an incurable strain of freedom.  With the carrot of Liberty dangling with tantalizing clarity on the horizon, our forefathers fought, made history and set about establishing a founding document, which would substantially widen the course of history.  The stream of Liberty’s hope burst forward cascading down into the mammoth river of Liberty’s reality.  This document was the Constitution.

We have all watched with, first, utter disbelief and, now, seething rage as, over the years, progressives have trampled and disdained our Constitution.  Now, we are faced with the ultimate test of our resolve.  Will we, as citizens, hold to said resolve and demand our government adhere to the wisdom of our forefathers or capitulate like sheep and become European?  Since the War of 1812, Europe has been maneuvering to regain control of America.  A quick read of most European newspapers will find editorials filled with consternation to why Americans don’t want to be like them.  They often admonish Americans to embrace socialism while they themselves struggle to find ways to get free of it.  In truth, Europe wants control over what we have and they do not, wealth and the ability to make wealth.

With the oppressive confines of English mercantilism still fresh in their minds, the framers of the Constitution established the Commerce clause to protect and encourage free trade between the States.  Recently Judge Henry Hudson, after his ruling that The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional, wrote in his opinion “the unchecked expansion of congressional power to the limits suggested by the Minimum Essential Coverage Provision would invite unbridled exercise of federal police powers”.  The Minimum Essential Coverage Provision is the fundamental tenant of ObamaCare.  It is essential to its intended implementation.  This begs the question.  Do the Democrats believe in freedom of choice the same as our forefathers?

Health and Human Services Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, warned insurance providers on September 9th that any messages sent to the public warning them of the dangers of the new healthcare law would be punished.  What about free speech?  Can you hear the soldiers tramping in Valley Forge?  How can the Government be so brazen?  They control the product so they control the producers.  Although the government has added new provisions to mandated healthcare, they are calling them basic.  Karen Ignagni, president of America’s Health Insurance Plans, warns, “It’s a basic law of economics that additional benefits incur additional costs”.  Secretary Sebelius’ response is to say shut your mouth, deal with it or be punished.

In Maine, we have a health mandates similar to ObamaCare.  In this plan, men are required to carry maternity leave.  This, I do not consider a basic service for my person.  I do not believe child bearing is in my job description nor do I want it to be.  This is what happens when government tries to control your personal decisions.

We were told that the elderly and infirmed would be neglected if we did not pass this bill.  Now we learn that the elderly and infirmed will be neglected, by reduced coverage for them, to pay for the high costs of ObamaCare.  This is too dastardly to simply call ironic.  There is much more information on this new law that you can research at www.ncpa.org.

Never trust what a politician says.  Look at his record.  Those old sayings still hold true like “you can’t judge a book by its cover”, “actions speak louder than words” or, my favorite, “by their fruits you shall know them”.  It is still our choice.  Is it the Constitution or Europe?


One comment on “Enslavement

  1. The great benefit of the 2010 election was that it presented the electorate with a clear outline of the liberal agenda of an ever-expanding and unrestricted government. And there followed a clear expression of the leftlurchers’ intention to proceed with this agenda without regard to public opposition.

    The great benefit of the 2010 election is that is stripped the Democratic Party of most of its Blue Dog cover, leaving Barry, Harry and Nancy as the true face of that bizarre coalition.

    Now the voter will have to decide 1) if the GOP is an effective barrier to that agenda; 2) if, after all, they want to return to the default position of the human race for most of its history, i.e., servility and dependence.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s