Thanks Straycat. Sometimes you just have to speak from the heart and I have a big heart.

I think sometimes my passion for what needs doing gets in the way and makes me come across as a hot head. When really, Im a serious contender, not a flail er.

Pisses me off that our Republic is getting smoked, when the traitors need smoking.

Out here

- Thomas Jefferson

I'll probably try to scam, gaff off or just plain break that law if I feel I can get away with it, but not to the point of going suicide trooper to the nearest federal building.

If I go to work for a regular employer who deducts that from my payroll, I'll just pay for the health insurance. Never know when I might need it, but then I served the government several years anyway, voluntarily, so that I could get on the regular VA medical program for free just in case later in life I could afford nothing else.

I don't have a major problem paying for the benefits of citizenship when they are tangible, and health care is, it is the big fat insulting violation of the social contract when you pay for services and benefits of citizenship and get stabbed in the back for it, with the fuckers taking your money and using it against you.

Far as I am concerned, most of the money going to the Justice Department and its spinoff shit is mostly stolen money, ripped off from entirely affordable social services and public benefit programs and possibilities. Roads, bridges, libraries, parks, public pools, recreation centers, schools....hospitals. Its all feel good stuff, I don't have a major big fight over it.

Prisons and gulags at a level beyond what the Soviets did, domestic spy agencies more pervasive than the CIA with they had in their most fantastic wet dreams during the cold war, cameras and thugs with guns and badges on everyone's back, well, that's where I get off the civic duty to contribute game. The 3rd amendment violation comes into play when you are forced to give up your sustenance to pay for government supervision and surveillance. Pitching in for clinics and hospitals, just not worth killing over.

Resistance at the state.gov level is key to what remains of our opportunities to effect peaceful (read non-violent) change.

I also agree with Breacher that we should not attack the actual medical benefits, but instead focus on thwarting those agents of tyranny who steal our money through violence, and use the fruits of our labor in order to squelch individual liberty.

Yeah Debbie I got a reply for that:

http://freedomguide.blogspot.com/2012/07/fuck-obamacare.html

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

UPDATE

One of the moderators seems to have a bigger issue with a naughty swear word than with our enemies or sticking together:


J. Croft
Senior Member
Member # 3405 Icon 1 posted 07-07-2012 07:31 AM Profile for J. Croft Email J. Croft I don't know what your particular beef is with me and I really don't care but you censoring me as a Patriot-that's something I'm not going to tolerate.

I am going to repost my reply, again. Do not censor me again, a few spicy words are not worth acting like the enemy would and start something that needn't be started. Shouldn't have in the 1st place.

J. Croft

--------------------
Be your own leader

freedomguide.blogspot.com
freedomguide.wordpress.com
youtube.com/user/freedomguide
Posts: 1364 | From: somewhere-where am I? | Registered: Feb 2007
Imagrunt
Moderator

Member # 563 Icon 1 posted 07-07-2012 10:49 AM Profile for Imagrunt Email Imagrunt If your post has the word "***" in it, I will delete it again.

I gave you an opportunity to be civil with your discourse, and that particular word is beyond innapropriate.

I asked you simply to repost without that word.

I don't care what type of language you use on your own blog, but AWRM needs to maintain a certain decorum, so prepare for more censorship.


Putting it out there so everyone can make their own mind up about Imagrunt... I mean, really.

LePage calls IRS the 'new Gestapo'
The governor uses his radio address to attack President Obama's Affordable Care Act.

By Steve Mistler smistler@pressherald.com
Staff Writer

Gov. Paul LePage used his weekly radio address to blast President Obama's health care law and described the Internal Revenue Service as the "new Gestapo."


The IRS description was a reference to a provision in the Affordable Care Act that requires Americans not insured by their employers or Medicaid to buy health insurance or pay an annual penalty when filing their tax returns. The provision, known more broadly as the individual mandate, was the subject of a multi-state lawsuit, but was recently upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.

LePage said the court decision has "made America less free."

"We the people have been told there is no choice," he said. "You must buy health insurance or pay the new Gestapo -- the IRS."

Maine Democratic Party Chairman Ben Grant, responding to LePage's remarks, said, "We've come to expect a bunch of nonsense from Gov. LePage, but this is a step too far. There appears now to be no limit to the extreme language he will use to misinform, degrade and insult people. Somebody needs to explain to him that he's the governor of a state, and not a talk radio host. I demand a full apology on behalf of all those who suffered at the hands of the real Gestapo."

"There is nothing that degrades politics more than purported leaders who so cavalierly invoke the worst in human history when they can't get their way in legitimate, modern policy disagreements," Grant said.

The Gestapo were Nazi Germany's official secret police under Adolf Hitler, who imprisoned and murdered thousands of people without cause.

The debate over the mandate has become a political flash point since the health law was enacted. Republicans maintain that the requirement is an unfair tax. Democrats say the mandate was originally a Republican idea born from the conservative Heritage Foundation, which introduced the measure in 1989 as a counterpoint to calls for a single-payer health care system.

LePage also addressed another element of the health-care law that was immediately thrust into the public debate: Medicaid expansion. Originally, the Affordable Care Act required states to increase eligibility for low-income residents or pay a penalty. The court decision struck down the penalty; however, the federal government is still offering to pay for the expansion.

The federal government will fund 100 percent of the expansion from 2014 to 2016, gradually declining to 90 percent after that.

LePage says he needs more answers before making a decision about the Medicaid expansion, which has been assailed by fellow Republican governors. At least 15 have said they'll forgo the federal funding.

LePage said the state doesn't know how the federal matches will be paid for and how the newly eligible recipients would be defined.

"However, Maine is already a welfare expansion state because of the generous benefits offered," he said, adding that Maine's welfare costs are among the highest in the nation because the state had expanded Medicaid prior to the Republican electoral sweep of 2010.

The governor also appeared to preempt potential pressure from hospitals to support Medicaid expansion.

Hospitals may end up supporting the expansion because increased Medicaid offerings lower uncompensated, or charity, care levels.

Uncompensated care is health-care costs that hospitals absorb because people can't or won't pay. A recent report in the Portland Press Herald showed that uncompensated care by Maine hospitals has doubled over the last five years, from $94 million to $194 million.

LePage said that increasing Medicaid may make it more difficult to pay hospitals the $500 million the state already owes in reimbursement.

The governor added that Maine will not move forward the ACA's insurance exchanges -- the marketplaces where individuals can shop for health plans from private companies -- until the proposed $800 million tab to pay for them passes Congress.

"With these looming uncertainties circling around this issue, Maine cannot move forward right now with Obamacare," LePage said.

The governor finished his radio address by outlining his ideological opposition to the health-care law, which he said "raises taxes, cuts Medicare for the elderly, gets between patients and their doctors, costs trillions of taxpayer dollars, and kills jobs."

"Even more disheartening is that reviving the American dream just became nearly impossible to do," he said. "We are now a nation which supports dependency rather than independence. Instead of encouraging self-reliance, we are encouraging people to rely on the government."

State House Writer Steve Mistler can be contacted at 791-6345 or at:

smistler@pressherald.com

Twitter: stevemistler

J. Croft, you posted Imagrunt's PM to you, so...

If a fellow patriot came into my home and began using foul language, I would ask him to stop using foul language. If he refused to stop, I would politely ask him to leave. If he refused to leave, I would use force to remove him.

It has nothing to do with his views or his patriotism. It has to do with me wanting to maintain a particular kind of environment in my home.

As I understand it, AWRM is not equivalent to a street corner outside a convenience store where there are no rules. It is a privately owned space on the Web. The owners of this privately owned Web space have, whether for good or for ill, decided that the use of foul language in the discussions on this site adversely affect our image.

What is so difficult about using different words or omitting the offensive words when you post here? Is it really such an imposition? I honestly don't get it. You're coming into their "house", you're violating their rules, and you're laying down the law for them, forcefully telling them to submit to as if you own this space. There are a number of choice words to describe that kind of behavior.

Aren't we already too much divided against one another to let something as insignificant as this get us riled up?

What's really at stake in your view, and is this, in your view, a my-way-or-the-highway issue?

Ah Flick I was wondering when you'd chime in...

If a "fellow patriot" censored you in your hour of outrage-in this hour where we all need to be outraged instead of hemming and hawing and rationalizing Obamacare and it's imposition of more tyranny-if that "fellow patriot" CENSORED you for a "naughty word" when others on this board curse the enemy... and get away with it(have to get away with it-on a patriot board?!)

Okay, if someone billing themselves as a "fellow patriot" censored you for some rough language in this hour of righteous outrage, would you not call him on his BULLSHIT?

I did.

Flick, when you log onto a website, you are NOT at your home. In effect you are out in a more public space and sometimes those you are with are going to be pissed off, mightily pissed off as all hell about some outrage-like Obamacare.

Now, a Patriot can look at the word "cunt" and say, well that woman probably deserves. Or they might say whoa that's hauling out the heavy artillery for a gnat and perhaps that's a issue of taste...

Taste...

Imagrunt decided to play potty mouth po-lice over a word he personally considered 'tasteless'. He played the same BULLSHIT our enemies like to play-what does that make him?

AWRM is privately owned-but it's not owned by myself, Imagrunt and definitely not you. It is in essence a public space isolated from other public spaces by registration requirements for other Patriots... and I don't see Breacher, Greywolf, DoctorJeep, CSC, or any of the other Patriots having their posts censored by Imagrunt and his sensitive eyes. Mabye because they give the impression they'd make the car trip over to his house and knock his teeth in for pulling such crap-you think that's it? Perhaps I don't exude that, or enough?

You worry about AWRM's image-over me dropping the c-bomb on a cunt? A traitorous cunt who approves-do you remember what this post was about Flick? What was that... oh yes the title: "non-compliance with obamacare will not be tolerated".

We got tyranny being shoved down our throats and we got someone acting like a petty tyrant over some well-earned foul language-you don't see the disconnect?

See Flick, there's this thing in America we call Free Speech; something a Patriot would honor even though calling a cunt a cunt does melt the ears and eyes of those not used to such terms. I typically don't haul out the word, I save it for special occasions and for people that especially deserve the perjorative.

Aren't we already too much divided against one another to act like our enemies over some well-earned foul language?

So, Flick, what's really at stake in your view, and why is it you're the commanding officer of the J. Croft wet blanket brigade here at AWRM?

JC,

Everyone is fed up and angry with the current situation.

Sometimes I have to censor myself.

As one of the moderators here, I gave Imagrunt full authority to censor or delete anything he determines is out of line or over the top.

And, it is at his discretion.

Just trying to be helpful. I guess I just don't see much constructive or unifying in making threats to other patriots. So much for my budding career in conflict resolution.

Justice Roberts took some great pains to call the penalty a "tax," even invoking a hypothetica "window tax:"

What Justice Roberts did not do, however, was say just what kind of a tax it is. It is not an income tax, because accession of wealth is not a requirement before the tax is imposed. And it certainly is not a tariff, excise, or impost or duty tax. It can only be a direct tax, which is borne out by both past legislation and case law. And if we use his example of a "window tax," it becomes apparent that it is a direct tax.

On July 14, 1798, Congress passed the "Direct Tax Act," which ordered tax assessors to examine houses in order to make note of the number and size of windows on each house, so that Congress could impose a direct tax on windows. there was no dispute the window tax was a direct tax. Therefore, a tax on not having a certain type of window would also be a direct tax.

But the Constitution, under Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4, states that direct taxes must be apportioned among the States.

can the tax be challenged in court, on the basis that it is an unconstitutional tax? I'm starting to think that it can.

Onward and upward,
airforce

I appreciate your attempt, but once JC posted my PM on the board, I knew there would be no "resolution."

There are so many words one can use, and that particular word I personally consider to be highly offensive, and generally disrespectful to ALL females.

Restraint requires discipline and honor, especially when a self-proclaimed warrior patriot is reacting with "righteous outrage."

As to Obamacare:

The passionate reactions will all but cease once this epic travesty is renamed Romneycare.

Agreed. I'm a little late on this, but I'm in your corner.

Onward and upward,
airforce

J croft, bother

I understand your passion at Obama care..

What is happening in this country, makes my blood boil. I am sure there has been an occasion when I slipped in a word or two that shouldn't be said in front of children, or as We used to say mixed company.

But that's old fashion now.

I can pretty much say though 99% of the time. I write those words with symbols to replace letters leaving it up to your imagination.

Such as A$$ or F#ck...

Is that really cleaning it up... Probably not.

But I feel there in not much need to fill in the blanks and I really try to remember that kids and people, who already have a slightly bad opinion of us may read, what I post.

I try not to feed the trolls with too much they can post elsewhere and make us look bad by taking it out of context.

I mean think about it, we all get mad, we all say how we feel, and if their's an idiot using our posts to prove his point, that we are Racist sexist homaphobs with the desire to kill the president and over throw the government.

He or She can take pieces of our post and paste them together to lean that way...

Fair or not fair, that's how the enemy works...

I do try to check out sites that post things we say, and bad mouth us..I have on occasion even went on their sites and commented.

I did it just recently on The SPLC site and a couple others that were taking posts out of context to say we were planing a war.

So, what I am saying is many of you here, are look on as leaders by younger patriots, and some sheepies come on here to see what we are about, maybe decide to join up.

With that power comes responsibility..

The members who have been here a while and know more, must act with honor and dignity.

They are the guys that back home may be looked for as leaders when the SHTF.

So take it for what it is worth, we all are angry, we all say things that should be removed and we all should do a better job of setting an example.

Back on topic...

We are being tested by this administration..

Not just us, but all the people.

Obama care is not about health, it is about control, power, and how much the people will take before they buck the Feds.

President Obama has systematically put in executive orders and laws to strip rights, as Bush did before him, and the people are not in the streets...

Until they are in the streets, he is emboldened to continue.

Greywolf

There is no reason for dedicated members of the militia to talk, or write, like a bunch of street punks. We're better than that.

Onward and upward,
airforce

If you actually take a few days and download the Obamacare legislation to your desktop and get a cse of cold _____ and make yourself read it you will find very little healthcare and a bunch of Health Care "Control". There are in and outs in the bills because of terms used.
When I see a State pass legislation to remove The State from the law and I go look at their "TERMS" I see no references to "The People" nor any wordage that says the State will be proactive in protecting the people.
The Bar-Fly lawyers who write this stuff know this. When the feds come after Uncle Edie, and take his farm because he refused to be covered by Obamacare or pay the Taxes the state will probably provide backup Deputies and State police to help arrest him.
People have to learn that the federal Government is a 'Corporation'. The State of ______ is also a "Corporation".
The 14th Amendment prohibits any state from denying any US CITIZEN any right granted by the Federal Governmnet. So these bogus statements of " Non-Compliance " only apply to state requirements to perform and not to you and me unless they specifically state different and I have yet to see one do that.

I really wish someone would finally point out that "health insurance" and "health care" are two different things. I like to point out that if you're a terrible driver, having auto insurance will not make you able to parallel park.

Everyone in Canada has health insurance, and everyone in Britain has dental insurance, too. Ask anyone from those two countries how good their health care and dental care is.

Onward and upward,
airforce