Thursday, June 28, 2012

The Death of Freedumb


"We are now the Occupied United States of America."

...is Fox Nation's take on the darkest day in Jesusland history since Barack Obama traveled back in time and forced Ronald Reagan to raises taxes and give amnesty to illegal immigrants

Ben Shapiro (syndicated columnist, bestselling author, Harvard Law grad, Breitbart.com Editor-At-Large, Freedom Center Shillman Journalism Fellow) has a slightly less nuanced take:
"This is the greatest destruction of individual liberty since Dred Scott. This is the end of America as we know it. No exaggeration."

Senator Rand Paul (R-Galt's Gulch) explains how the law works in Jesusland:
“Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional."

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-Bedlam):
“We lost religious liberty – that is a fundamental right under the constitution. We lost economic liberty – that is a fundamental right under the constitution. We lost our individual liberty to set our course in this country. This court has forced us now to pay for their utopian dreams. Ones we simply can’t afford to pay for.”
The "Daily Caller":
"Congratulations, Americans: The government owns your bodies"


The fact that this kind of instant, lockstep, hyperbolic Conservative bedwettery is always so 100% fucking predictable is why we are so screwed.


15 comments:

blackdaug said...

CNN: Never disappointing when it comes to disappointing...

watchdog said...

And yet I sure he had no problem with the Citizens United ruling, because thats only giving free speech to corporations after all. Health care for everyone is just so terrible after all.
What a dumbass.

Nangleator said...

How to shut up all wingnuts complaining about this: "Huge, wealthy, important corporations wanted the mandate to stand."

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

I am especially amused by the panicky sorts who are threatening to move to Canada so they can escape the Socialist Healthcare Tyranny.

Canada, of course, has declined to comment.

Ufansius said...

Honestly, I don't get what the big deal is. Most states have been forcing drivers to buy car insurance for decades and the right wing never cries about that. Call me a moron, but what's the difference, aside from one being a state requirement and the other federal?

driftglass said...

Ufansius,

The entire Constitution is predicated on limiting the power of the federal government to compel state & local governments and individuals to do stuff.

It is the reason we have the 10th 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."

Anonymous said...

Well, to paraphrase a quote by Bruno Bettelheim:" "The dark night of tyranny is somehow always falling over the U.S. (but always lands somewhere else)." He was a survivor of the Nazi death camps, y'know....

These crybabies wouldn't know real "fascism" if it came up and bit them on the ass.

Anonymous said...

...doesn't Canada already have some form of universal health care?

bluicebank said...

To channel the conservatives, once again the Germans bomb Pearl Harbor.

chrome agnomen said...

the galt gulcher is correct! the america we know has ended--replaced by a better one.

knowdoubt said...

With all due respect, I don't get the response to Ufansius? There is a bill of rights, so I would have to say that not all the constitution is predicated on curbing the power of the Federal gov't to compel the states "to do stuff." Regulation is important and states are required to honor certain constitutional protections of the citizenry and rights of individuals.

knowdoubt said...

With all due respect, I don't quite get your response to Ufansius?

"The entire Constitution is predicated on limiting the power of the federal government to compel state & local governments and individuals to do stuff."

Surely not, what about the bill of rights? There are individual rights protected by the constitution against state violations. There is a role for regulation to be played by the Federal government. Federalism (all states rights)is what the repugnutins want to the exclusion of the protections of individuals against offered by the constitution and Federal regulations. I really don't think you got that one right, but I'm just wondering out loud, maybe I misunderstood your point?

Grung_e_Gene said...

From the same Ben Shaprio in August 2005, conspiciously not serving in Iraq or intending to enlist in his life,



Did Iraq pose an immediate threat to our nation? Perhaps not. But toppling Saddam Hussein and democratizing Iraq prevent his future ascendance and ended his material support for future threats globally. The same principle holds true for Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, Pakistan and others: Pre-emption is the chief weapon of a global empire. No one said empire was easy, but it is right and good, both for Americans and for the world.

That's freedom!

preznit said...

you forgot "doughy pantload" re jonah

Anonymous said...

Ol' Crazy Eyes: "Ones we simply can’t afford to pay for."

I thought teahadis like her were all about "MERICAN EXECEPTIONALISM" - if we're so super awesome, why can't we accomplish what EVERY OTHER developed country in the world has?

More directly, why does Rep. Bachmann hate America? ;)