Lenin on ObamaCare

[Poimen]

Check out my blog post at The Confederate American on Lenin and Obamacare. Blog comments welcomed.

[macgulley]

Could you cite your source for the Lenin quote? I've been trying to find a credible source and haven't had any luck.

[Poimen]

Could you cite your source for the Lenin quote? I've been trying to find a credible source and haven't had any luck.

http://socialistworker.org/2009/08/06/t ... f-medicare


I originally got the quote from the tenth amendment center. However, the socialist worker refers to the quote in the article linked above.

They refer to a pamphlet the AMA put out way back when decrying the dangers of socialized medicine then. The quote is taken form the pamphlets contents. Unfortunately, I've not been able to yet find the pamphlet or a work of Lenin to reference.

[macgulley]

Unfortunately, I've not been able to yet find the pamphlet or a work of Lenin to reference.

Same here. It would be a great quote but I haven't used it anywhere because I can't verify it. I'll keep looking.

[Full Quiver]

How will the South rise again? How would one propose that happen?

My point is that several southern states are poor and heavily dependent on the federal govt.

Now maybe this is because they are so heavily taxed and burdened by the fed but it should looks like wishful thinking.

[one love]

guess i need to read the blog but what do you really mean when you say the south shall rise again?? war with north? certainly not......

I have never really looked at things in a dividing way whether north , south, black, white, asian etc.... i dont get the south shall rise again

[Poimen]

How will the South rise again? How would one propose that happen?

My point is that several southern states are poor and heavily dependent on the federal govt.

Now maybe this is because they are so heavily taxed and burdened by the fed but it should looks like wishful thinking.

She's rising now all around you, and in places both within and without the Southland. It's called the reassertion of State's right's and sovereignty. THAT was the Southern cause, and that is what President Davis said would reassert itself again (i.e. the rise of the South).

However, I would welcome a more literal resurrection of the South as an independent and free nation. How would it happen? Secession of course. And secession need not mean war now anymore than it did then.

Don't forget the South withdrew from the union peacefully. Lincoln forced war by invading the Southland. The South had no intentions of conquering the north or of taking over the government in DC. They were not struggling for control of the nation (which is what a Civil war is), they were preventing the invasion of their own states and homes by foreign forces intent on taxing them heavily and redistributing the wealth northward, protecting their independence.

It might mean the same today, but I doubt it. I actually believe the time is opportune for secession and that many states would welcome the notion if their leaders would be willing to make the sacrifices necessary to cut ties with the feds. I even doubt the federal government would employ force to try to reunite them with those states remaining in the Union.

If the South seceded, it's income today would be roughly the 3rd or 4th largest in the world. It has the resources, might, and structure to do so effectively and peacefully. Once the efforts to reform the federal government are proven worthless secession will be a viable option even to modern political minds.

I imagine seceding states would reunite under a compact more suitable to their desires and protective of the blessings of liberty -- just like the Confederacy did in the 1860's. I imagine almost all of the contiguous States would withdraw and establish a new nation (if you will) except for the west Coast, New England, and maybe the great lakes border states. basically all of the original south, the border states, the non-coastal western states, ans even some mid-western/northern states would likely withdraw and reunite as a new nation if the federal government persists in its abuses and their local leaders would have the backbone and fortitude to give them them option by formally seceding.

Virginia has taken the first step by essentially enacting nullification of the healthcare bill. Other states are close behind with the sovereignty resolutions and lawsuits over Obamacare.

[one love]

Brother The south crossed the line did they not with their soldiers?

VA would never support leaving the U.S. you do not know the area well enough. If this happened we would be the weakest nation in the world and CHINA would be the super power. The south would be poor.

Yes the south was the richest prior to the civil war. VA being one of the wealthiest states I know...I know
Hmm VA is still pretty wealthy If they left the Union they would be POOR.

[Poimen]

Brother The south crossed the line did they not with their soldiers?

What??? I have no idea what you mean.

VA would never support leaving the U.S. you do not know the area well enough. If this happened we would be the weakest nation in the world and CHINA would be the super power. The south would be poor.

Well, they did it once. Actually twice (if you count England). And it is the Virgina legislature, under the influence of Jefferson, who officially recognized the right of nullification and secession long before any such took place.

As for the south being poor -- hogwash! I've already told you, the south economy (apart form the rest of the union) is the 3rd or 4th largest (depending on how you calculate it) in the world. Larger than Britain, larger than Germany, larger than France. If other states pulled out and went with the South (as I suspect would be likely), I think the South would easily be 1st or 2nd in the world.

I'm telling you now, the only way to stop encroaching socialism, to thwart Big government, and put the federal government back in it's place is Secession -- that or revolt. Secession is, and has the ability to remain, peaceful. I'd rather have it.

The powers that be will not give up their perks and control. It's not likely we will ever assert enough voice or vote to effect any serious needed reformation, nor reassertion of Constitutional limits on the federal government.

If "the South" does not rise (State's demanding recognition of their sovereignty, or else secede) then essentially the USSR will, only this time it will assume the title "The United States of America." China, nor any other communist or socialist nation, will need fire a shot. America will surrender to their philosophy through her own corruption and federal dependence.

[one love]

Brother The south crossed the line did they not with their soldiers?

What??? I have no idea what you mean.

VA would never support leaving the U.S. you do not know the area well enough. If this happened we would be the weakest nation in the world and CHINA would be the super power. The south would be poor.

Well, they did it once. Actually twice (if you count England). And it is the Virgina legislature, under the influence of Jefferson, who officially recognized the right of nullification and secession long before any such took place.

As for the south being poor -- hogwash! I've already told you, the south economy (apart form the rest of the union) is the 3rd or 4th largest (depending on how you calculate it) in the world. Larger than Britain, larger than Germany, larger than France. If other states pulled out and went with the South (as I suspect would be likely), I think the South would easily be 1st or 2nd in the world.

I'm telling you now, the only way to stop encroaching socialism, to thwart Big government, and put the federal government back in it's place is Secession -- that or revolt. Secession is, and has the ability to remain, peaceful. I'd rather have it.

The powers that be will not give up their perks and control. It's not likely we will ever assert enough voice or vote to effect any serious needed reformation, nor reassertion of Constitutional limits on the federal government.

If "the South" does not rise (State's demanding recognition of their sovereignty, or else secede) then essentially the USSR will, only this time it will assume the title "The United States of America." China, nor any other communist or socialist nation, will need fire a shot. America will surrender to their philosophy through her own corruption and federal dependence.

Here is a interesting time line . Noticed when they left as well...


November 6, 1860 - Abraham Lincoln, who had declared "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free..." is elected president, the first Republican, receiving 180 of 303 possible electoral votes and 40 percent of the popular vote.

Dec 20, 1860 - South Carolina secedes from the Union. Followed within two months by Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana and Texas.

Auction and Negro sales, Atlanta, Georgia.

1861

Feb 9, 1861 - The Confederate States of America is formed with Jefferson Davis, a West Point graduate and former U.S. Army officer, as president.

March 4, 1861 - Abraham Lincoln is sworn in as 16th President of the United States of America.

Fort Sumter Attacked

April 12, 1861 - At 4:30 a.m. Confederates under Gen. Pierre Beauregard open fire with 50 cannons upon Fort Sumter in Charleston, South Carolina. The Civil War begins.


-------

why form a army if they were not preparing for war????? We were one south left, war started, ended and the union (thank GOD) stands

Brother the south had much more power then, how did it turn out? This would not be peacefully. Their would be riots, chaos and if you think some would leave and all would be well you are fooling yourself. All states are split, no southern state fully wants this. Most would not even entertain it. VA would never do it bro they are making a political move. Yes they did over hundred years ago.

[Poimen]

You edited your reply as I was making this ne, so...

Let me remind you that fort Sumter was Southern property. Lincoln forced gun fire by sending troops into the South (invasion) and seeking to usurp authority and keep armed presence in the sovereign state of SC. H e was counting on the South being willing to defend themselves, and used it to levy the trump charge that they started the war.

If China attempted to arm, resupply, and man a fort in present day Virgina, against the clear warning of it's leaders, and Virginians took to arms would you consider the Virginians as instigators of bloodshed or the Chinese?

The fact is, like it or not the States have the right secede and to institute a form of government to their choosing. Lincoln couldn't have it because New England thrived on federal tariffs that redistributed southern wealth to them, and to the federal government, by disproportionately taxing the south.

As for the army -- then there was no national standing army North or South). Each state had armies and/or militia. Besides any raising of any army by the South, was to defend their borders homes, and nation -- the Confederate States of America. They were repelling an invading force -- not trying to conquer the North. They only wanted their freedom -- which right is guaranteed them by the Charter, and affirmed by the Constitution. A right the states retain to this day, despite the yankee-propaganda machine. A right the states may, and very well need to, reassert in order to counter this wayward and uncontrollable federal monster.

You've swallowed the "preservation of the Union" myth hook, line, and sinker, and have unwittingly forfeited the blessings of liberty bequeathed to you by the founding fathers and the States themselves.

[Mole_J]

If the South seceded, it's income today would be roughly the 3rd or 4th largest in the world. It has the resources, might, and structure to do so effectively and peacefully.

You have good old FDR to thank for this. Up until FDR, the South was a very poor area in the country. Much of the South had not even recovered from the Civil War that happened 60-70 years earlier. It was one of the poorest areas in the US at that time.

After the war, there was nothing left in the South, what little industry the South had was gone, big cities burned down, much of the agriculture gone also.

During Reconstruction, there was some development, but for the next 70-80 years the South for the most part remained an agricultural and very poor area.

FDR was the first President to take a serious interest in the South. The New Deal and many government programs FDR started benefited the South the most.

In order for the South to have won the war militarily and still be a world leader today, is to have a massive amount of money poured into the area from other countries. Since slavery would have still been in practice, this would have isolated the south from much of the world.

As the South found out during the Civil War, King Cotton would not have helped out. Much of the world could get their cotton from other places like India.

The way I see it if the South would had won the war militarily, the US would be several different countries, and most likely always fighting against each other. Very similar to the countries in Central and South America. Most of the areas in the US except for the North and California would be mostly agricultural with very little industry and probably very poor.

Europe would be controlled by the Soviets, and Asia would be dominated by Japan.

[Poimen]

MoleJ,

I understand your argument, but disagree on many points. I want to address it, but I'm gonna hold off here. Besides, we're hijacking this thread at this point.

Your welcome to join the blog, & share your thoughts there. That's why I started it.

[one love]

If the South seceded, it's income today would be roughly the 3rd or 4th largest in the world. It has the resources, might, and structure to do so effectively and peacefully.

You have good old FDR to thank for this. Up until FDR, the South was a very poor area in the country. Much of the South had not even recovered from the Civil War that happened 60-70 years earlier. It was one of the poorest areas in the US at that time.

After the war, there was nothing left in the South, what little industry the South had was gone, big cities burned down, much of the agriculture gone also.

During Reconstruction, there was some development, but for the next 70-80 years the South for the most part remained an agricultural and very poor area.

FDR was the first President to take a serious interest in the South. The New Deal and many government programs FDR started benefited the South the most.

In order for the South to have won the war militarily and still be a world leader today, is to have a massive amount of money poured into the area from other countries. Since slavery would have still been in practice, this would have isolated the south from much of the world.

As the South found out during the Civil War, King Cotton would not have helped out. Much of the world could get their cotton from other places like India.

The way I see it if the South would had won the war militarily, the US would be several different countries, and most likely always fighting against each other. Very similar to the countries in Central and South America. Most of the areas in the US except for the North and California would be mostly agricultural with very little industry and probably very poor.

Europe would be controlled by the Soviets, and Asia would be dominated by Japan.

You are correct about FDR as well. You have made my point well just stated better.

Chris I bought nothing I am a realist.... I am one that wants what is best for the nation not just some states... sorry I know this maybe popular to some you know and I know the civil war history is huge in alabama as it is in VA but we seemed to enjoy one nation untied.

[Poimen]

Chris I bought nothing I am a realist.... I am one that wants what is best for the nation not just some states... sorry I know this maybe popular to some you know and I know the civil war history is huge in alabama as it is in VA but we seemed to enjoy one nation untied.

A realist after the fact, perhaps. But not very realistic about the rights t self determination, consent of the governed, sovereignty of states, and limitations of the federal government, and the impact both then and now in relation to both the South and any State in the Union who resists and finally tires of an oppressive usurping government that has become injurious of the ends to which it was created and oppressive of the states whom helped to establish it.

I don't want what is best for the "nation", because these United States are not a single nation in and of itself. That's another mistaken federalist notion and Lincoln construct. I want what is best for Alabama (and by extension the South) first, and then any "national" association under the Union. That's the way the founding fathers created it to work. It's an essential check and balance to our federal system. I still hold the States as sovereign and the creators of the union, which union is designed to serve there best interests not it's own. The Constitution established no national government. It established a federal government through the delegation of authority by and compact between sovereign nations each there own, the states. I firmly believe wanting what is best for the states is what is best for the Union, and denying their rights or usurping powers not delegated by them through the constitution to the federal government is NOT best for the republic in any shape, form, or fashion. It is diametrically opposed to everything we stand for as as free people.

We are not, in fact one indivisible nation, nor have we ever been. We are and always will be, so long as the Charter and Constitution exists, a union of sovereign states (nations in their own right), existing as a federal republic via legal compact.