Alaska and Other States Litigate Against Obama ‘Health’ Care in Defense of Liberty

Alaska Governor Sean Parnell decided to join several other states in challenging the Obama Health Care plan to require individuals to purchase health insurance from private insurers. That plan was a composite amalgam of bureaucratic compromise designed especially with the interests of the middle class in mind. In my opinion the poor were tossed in as a negotiating tool, and a Roman ‘turtle’ to hide behind morally as the bill was advanced toward the bastions of the opposition of the rich ultra-rightists, greed speaking.

Disingenuity and disinterest were basic reasons why neither the Democrats nor Republicans sought to construct a practical, free, public health service for the poor in the United States. Such a program would have created the most efficient and lowest cost structure for the provisioning of medical care.

Republicans would oppose that as socialism, and democrats would be afraid of being considered socialists after December 1989, and would do little to defend liberty and common sense. The cost of a failure to legislate rationally and responsively to forced existential options can work to bring down a democratic viability when it is a persisting characteristic of a government. The failure to comprehend the Adam Smith material orientation of capitalism instead of the current financial capital advantage, with a dysfunctioning monetary philosophy, is another ongoing failure to legislate a rational public sector response to the economic and environmental challenges of the age.

It is difficult to disagree with the Parnell administration and most Alaska Republicans on the fundamentally corrupting nature of the offensive element of the Obama Health Plan. It blows up the constitutional liberty of Americans from requirements that they buy anything from anyone just for existing. The Obama Administration and Democratic Congress have in effect overthrown the revolutionary spirit of the Boston Tea Party and the revolt against the Stamp Act.

Albeit excuses would be made that something had to be done. Both sides of the political coin of today-Republican and Democrat, are fettered in the hobbles of global corporatism. Most all Americans are ensnared in the financial services networks that have leveraged mere material trade, home owning and such to liquid assets. Financial traders have made abstract money able to create profit itself out of rational relational scaler–an enormity–regarding its intended function as a tool to permit easier trade. A sober economic theoretical college of philosophers would advocate that money be issued with a two year expiration date in order to restore primacy to material goods as real wealth.

In ones heart you know free health care for the poor is right. Those Alaskan Republicans that defend American liberty from a global corporate insurer aristocracy that would receive legally forced payments from the poor, or taxpayer substitutes, also do not give a rat’s ass about the financial and physical injury done to the poor who cannot afford ordinary medical services. Those opponents are generally comfortable, fully insured and have no experience as adults with poverty. In America the poor are real people too. Thus on both sides of the political coin a deceptive and inadequate reasoning is inscribed; in corrupt mammon and global we trust might be better than the ‘in God we trust’ idea of former generations when government and corporatism together had not created a Leviathan of greed and globalism to repress American freedom.

Scott Simon of NPR said that the majority of Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court are Jews and Catholics today. The Chief Justice is heavily invested on Wall Street–a corporatist. The founding philosophy of protestants in the U.S.A. and England have moved into the edge of the mists of time. Adam Smith-the author of ‘The Wealth of Nations’ published in 1776, was a friend and student of David Hume. We cannot be assured that today’s court still values the freedom that the founders fought to liberate the new nation from global aristocracy, from the restrictions on free trade, and from requirements that Americans purchase anything from anyone anywhere through aristocratic decretal. Perhaps the Democrats in Congress believe the court will be as fast to jetison liberty and join the gentle chains of global corporatism.

If the U.S. Supreme Court does revolt against the poison pill smuggled in plain sight into the Obama Health Plan, morality should require that a better plan–one that first creates a comprehensive public health service for the poor–and only the poor, is made law within a year. Then those fortunate enough to be able to afford health insurance can be given the attention they deserve within some kind of collective bargaining paradigm if they prefer.

Perhaps I shall need to write about the basics of taxation, and that a sales tax is a tax on sales, not a tax on spending or purchasing. If a tax on spending is made, that would comprise a back loaded double income tax in states that have income taxes. Internet taxation is fair enough on businesses established in the state doing the taxing, otherwise it becomes completely irrational, corrupt and simply a state claim upon one’s money within a format of a universal spending tax.