1911Forum banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,824 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Thanks to Nicki, at the Liberty Zone, for finding and sharing this.

I would probably use the term "statists," rather than liberals, but other than that, I think it's right on.

Liberals actually love guns

By Special guest Columnist Craig Cantoni

The conventional wisdom says that liberals hate guns. Actually, the opposite is true. Hillary Clinton proves the point. She advocates nationalized healthcare.

Huh? What does that have to do with guns?

Everything.

Nationalized healthcare would not be voluntary, which means that it would be required and depend on government force for compliance. This means it would be backed up by government agents with guns. For enforcement.

Under nationalized healthcare, if a physician were to refuse to participate in the system and set up his own practice, he'd be fined and receive cease and desist orders. Eventually, if he continued to treat patients outside of the socialized system, he'd be arrested by agents with guns. Liberals support this pro-gun approach.

The same with patients. They would be arrested by agents with guns if they were to have the audacity to act like free people and pay private physicians for medical treatment out of their own pockets.

If you think this is just hype, I respectfully suggest you read Medicare's regulations.

Every government program near and dear to liberals (and millions of ersatz conservatives) depends on putting guns to people's heads — Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, public education, minimum wages, and PBS, to name several out of hundreds.

The nation was founded on the libertarian (classical liberal) belief that the only legitimate use of government force is to protect life, liberty and property. By extension, that means government has legitimate authority to prosecute murderers, thieves and con artists.

But now, the government uses force to take property (money) from respectable citizens and then spends the loot on fraudulent Ponzi schemes such as Social Security and Medicare. (If you don't believe that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme, then please show me the Social Security Trust Fund.) Ironically, the government that is supposed to prosecute con artists has become the biggest con artist of the land.

Without a gun pointed at my head, I would not let the government take 15 percent of my income for the schemes. I wouldn't pay protection money to a Mafioso unless a gun was pointed at my head either. Most intelligent, freedom-loving people wouldn't.

Unfortunately, most intelligent, freedom-loving people now engage in policy-wonk debates with the likes of Clinton about nationalized healthcare and other programs — that depend on guns. They debate the efficiency of socialism versus free markets, putting people to sleep with statistics and economic theories. What they should do instead is say, "A healthcare system that depends on government coercion for its existence is by definition unconstitutional, un-American, and likely to make things worse."

If government-run health care will be so good, why is the Veteran's Administration health care system so bad?

The Founders wanted citizens to own guns to protect themselves against a government that used guns for other than protecting citizens. That's why liberals love government guns but hate the Second Amendment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
556 Posts
I would say they love them by proxy. They believe they are above such common behavior but it's fine to have others do your bidding with them. Sorta like enjoying your freedom of speech while condemning those fighting for it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,045 Posts
The state should have a monopoly on force. Every leftist will agree with this, after all it was Chairman Mao who said "Political power emerges from the muzzle of a rifle ..".

And, all American leftists believe in a state powerful enough to make people do the right thing, a sort of "kind communism" (to borrow a phrase from Paul McCartney). The road to the left begins by promising "power to the people" and ends only with state power.

Best I can tell, there has only been one revolution which actually made good on it's promise of "power to the people", and since that day in 1776 many have promised but none have delivered.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
I always found it intriguing that Bill Clinton used to be frequently seen with one of Stephen Hunters novels in his hand.

Add that to his previous NRA Lifetime Member status, you wonder how twisted these folks really are.
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top