Kennedy's Legacy? The Culture of Death.

Universal healthcare was Kennedy's crusade. A terrible idea for any government, and like all terrible ideas, its roots are in the best of ideas: man's moral duty to his fellow man. But Marxism was rooted in the same noble idea, at least ostensibly, and it's nothing if not hell on earth. So common is this sense that there is a cliche for it: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

The man would never be president, but he was still one of the most powerful men in America. He was never to be the resident of the White House, but he influenced it. And he had a crusade. Suddenly, the wife of a president -- Hillary Clinton -- took up the crusade. Did Kennedy, wielding his tremendous power, offer her something to make his dream, his crusade, a reality? Did he offer to make her president? Was he that powerful?

And when she failed, and he backed Obama, did he anoint the Young Nobody from Illinois -- the man least likely to be president of anything -- his proxy to make his dream of universal healthcare a reality? And all the other pro-abortion Catholics in the administration, were those not also Kennedy proxies? And was the hurry to get the draconian legislation passed, as Ted Kennedy was diagnosed with terminal cancer, a coincidence? Is there any such thing as a coincidence, where power is at work?

Ted Kennedy, we learned, "loved to joke about Chappaquiddick." Imagine that. It was on Chappaquiddick Island that a young, spoiled scion of a powerful family took a young girl out for ride one night, drove his car off a low bridge over shallow water, and left her to drown in it (it is said that she actually suffocated). He joked about that.

To be able to joke about such a thing -- a death of young girl, at the hands of a spoiled rich kid who intended to be the president of the United States some day, and therefore might have had a motive, under certain circumstances, if he were chillingly pragmatic -- is it not a mark of contempt for human life?

This brings us back to the Crusade for Universal Health Care. The sum and substance of this effort is a bill also marked with contempt for human life, with its scientific terms and formulas and arguments about who is most productive and who is not, and who will be denied medical care and who will not. Just reading anything by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the intellectual firepower behind the "complete lives system" -- a "system" designed to prioritize medical care according to cost to the government, not individual need -- is a chilling experience that would be unbelievable if it weren't right there in black and white.

Kennedy's Crusade -- yes, it's even been suggested that it be renamed from "ObamaCare" to "KennedyCare" -- what was its animating spirit? Was it that fearful master, the tormented conscience? Or was it merely ambition, focusing on the closest thing to the presidential power that was almost his destiny? Or was it both? Was he trying to redeem himself in the eyes of his country and the Church, and at the same time prove that he was "presidential" after all?

Whatever it was, it has departed. That contempt for human life that made Kennedy laugh, and which was the defining characteristic of his life's work, no longer animates him.

Bury government healthcare, and the culture of death, with Ted Kennedy.

A picture is nice...

...even when you don't need a thousand words.

Not a coincidence.

...you'd think an enterprising copyright attorney could make a case.

Worth a thousand words...

Somebody gets it.

What if the Government Decides Who Lives and Who Doesn't?

Do you marvel at that possibility? You should - it's unconstitutional, on its face. And yet, this is the debate -- the ostensible debate, for it's this close to being codified in law -- that this constitutional republic is having today. It's unjust, isn't it, that the government is pushing laws that are patently unconstitutional? Of course it is.

Have you got your head around the implications? It only takes a few moments' realistic reflection, to see how fraught with potential for unimaginably chilling totalitarian scenarios a government controlled medical "industry" is. History has meticulously documented recent examples for us to learn from.

Do you marvel at the talk of "death panels," of "Quality Adjusted Life Years," of a "Complete Lives System," of the premise, under consideration for signing into the law of the land, that some people are allowed to receive medical treatment, and some not, based largely upon how many productive years they are likely to have left?

Do you recoil in horror at the idea that a dull, cold-hearted bureaucrat with a computer could someday look you in the eye and say, "it's been decided that you will get the pain pill, not the surgery," knowing it means the end of your life? Does your instinct for self-preservation, your God-given sense of justice, infuse you with adrenalin at the very thought of it? That somebody who doesn't care about you as a person has authority to dispose of your very life, and does so out of concern for costs, for utility to the state?

Have you ever wondered what it must feel like to be sleeping peacefully, to have your world invaded by a mechanism that is designed for one purpose: to eliminate you, and that because somebody who doesn't care to believe that you are a person has decided it makes more sense to him if you die, and the sooner you're out of the way, the better?

It happens 3,000 times a day in the United States alone; a million times a year. It's been happening for over 40 years. It's legalized abortion.

And it's about to come to adults. On what grounds can we call it unjust?

As long as

abortion is legal in the US, this country has no moral authority. You can decide for yourself if that matters or not. But with economic superiority past us, and solvency that much more so, that leaves us with little to stand on besides smoke and mirrors.

Consider the folly of this: our national debt is in the trillions and the country is "debating" (making a pretense of debating, really) the nationalization of 1/6 of the economy (the healthcare industry) -- that means making it a taxpayer-funded liability. With tax receipts falling because of increasing unemployment, how on earth with this ballooning debt be repaid?

Why, it's been assigned to future generations of taxpayers. But we currently abort about a million of them a year.

Not only that, but the command-and-control proposals for nationalized healthcare include plans to make abortion -- by diabolically twisted logic -- "healthcare," to be paid for by taxpayers. Recall the power of supply-side economics and ponder for a moment if abortions will increase once paid for by "the government." Remember, each aborted baby is one less "future taxpayer."

So, the plan that requires future taxpayers to fund it, funds the extermination of future taxpayers.

Does that seem like a good plan? Would you invest in a company that managed its resources in such a self-defeating way?

He's already had schools, streets...

and who knows what else -- probably entire galaxies -- named after him. Isn't it time he had his own postage stamp?



We like it.

Remember, dissent is patriotic!

Who's more KKK?

Heather Hogue, writing in The Examiner.com, reports:

Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) says town hall crowds remind him of the [Ku Klux] Klan.

Here's the clip, complete with the talking-head asking a question calculated to set-up the blustering, sanctimonious indignation of a man who must surely make the founders spin in their graves:

We can strip this utterance of its disingenuousness and reduce it to its bare essentials in a few tidy paragraphs. To wit:

First, these talking points, in which obama's spokespersons, formerly known as your representatives, demonize you for daring to participate in the American political process, have become cliche. The more these -- what can you call them besides "obama-bots" -- repeat them, the more ridiculous they all look.

But since they're bringing up the KKK (and Nazis, which we alluded to in the previous post on Fascism in America), let's remind ourselves of who really is more directly linked to the KKK, and who should be reminding normal, honest people about that wicked cabal.

By now everybody has seen the pictures and read the transcripts of Planned Parenthood's founder, Margaret Sanger, addressing adoring KKK members at some of their meetings.

I got your back!

By now everyone has seen footage of President Obama giving his valuable time to address Ms. Sanger's legacy organization during his campaign, and sending emmissaries there to speak continually.

And by now everyone's seen the stories and read the quotes from Hillary Clinton's acceptance of Planned Parenthood's Margaret Sanger Award for Achievement. That august event is recorded in three parts, conveniently presented below.

****

(During the first 60 seconds of part 3, the Secretary of State declares that "models" predict that nations most likely to suffer economic decline and social decay are those with the highest infant mortality rate. She then suggests that the solution is..."family planning." In other words, the cure for infant mortality is government funded abortion, and this is the price a society must pay for "economic growth" and social stability. This is consistent with Ms. Sanger's dictum: “The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923))

These people who have duped you into electing them, who see "abuse of power" as a privilege, who liken you to "KKK" and "Nazis", who have hijacked the American system to create a Fascist nightmare, are becoming victims of their own native sloth. They make it so easy to make them look ridiculous.

The Bad News

is that a reasonable person cannot fail to conclude that fascism is now the operative model of the US government.

We're not talking about SS troops in the streets. We're talking about a methodology enforcing an ideology. I'm not going to enumerate the proofs, it's been done by far more intelligent, eloquent, and readable people than we are. We're just gonna say what nobody else wants to say: our government is now fascist (absolute control of an ostensibly free society) by totalitarian methods (neutralize true religion, use capitalism against itself, etc) in its behavior.

We've all read 1984, most of us experienced that brief wave of terror when we did, and then we convinced ourselves that it couldn't happen to us. But it has.

The Obama administration is executing with absolute confidence a playbook that is detailed and thorough and time tested. We have no idea what's in it, but it's clear from its strutting arrogance, its abuse of power -- beginning with the media -- that the group in power is in possession of an agenda that imbues it with a sense of absolute...well, we said before the election: Power. It's all about power.

It should be clear to anyone who has observed (and has the courage to acknowledge) the de facto nationalization of the media that we have been attacked upon our own soil by weapons of mass destruction: ideas.

The way to fight back is with ideas. Truth, actually, which are ideas that cannot be trumped because they are truth. Truth inspires people. And inspired people can move mountains. America is an inspired country. Our constitution is an inspired document. Our Founders were inspired men. Inspired men will not give a vain thought about the cost of a worthy undertaking.

Speaking of The Founders, John Adams declared:

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net." — John Adams, October 11, 1798

As indeed it appears they have. Adams continued:

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." ibid.

Since it's a matter of casual observation that the expression of religion has been excised from the town square and the dogma of morality has been emasculated to list of "personal preferences," it's clear that, as a people in love with a culture of death, we're no longer fit for the one form of government that is the least-worst of them all. The worst of them, history tells us, are as fearsome and wretched as anything ever conceived in the wayward heart and deluded mind of man.

But we are a moral and religious people, most of us; a streetwise yet excruciatingly tolerant one, too. We now have our work cut out for us. Would that this generation would apprehend its inspiration, before the lock on power that the uninspired aspire to becomes absolute.