[ April 19, 2024 ]
It only stands to reason that where there's sacrifice, there's someone collecting the sacrificial offerings. Where there's service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master. Ayn Rand
155 years ago, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in favor of slavery, in one of the darkest moments in American history. Last week, the United States Supreme Court ruled again in favor of slavery — more subtly, of course.
Chief Justice Roberts’ Dred Scott MomentStory continues below advertisementPamela Geller, PJ Media, July 4, 2012
Back in 1857, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that forever changed the course of human history. Infamously known as the Dred Scott Decision, the U.S. SCOTUS ruled, according to Wikipedia, that states that outlawed slavery could not forbid slaveowners from bringing slaves into their states and holding them as slaves there. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney wrote that blacks were “beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.”
This was a shocking violation of the founding principle of our great republic, individual rights. Clearly this was motivated by personal subjectivity and partisan politics. And here we are again, courtesy Chief Justice John Roberts.
The issue of slavery was always a contentious issue that our Founding Fathers battled with and only acquiesced to the South’s demands when it became painfully clear that there would be no United States of America if they banished slavery. The thinking, of course, was that it would be determined at a future date. And it was. It was bloodily and brutally settled with the Civil War.
Judge Roberts’ decision will have the same deleterious outcome. His unconstitutional decision on Obamacare mandates the slavery of the American people to the U.S. Government, forcing us to make decisions about our health care in accord with government fiat. And the taxes will prove to be so prohibitive as to enslave the people and make all productive Americans wards of the Federal Government. “To be a socialist,” said Josef Goebbels, “is to submit the I to the Thou. Socialism is sacrificing the individual to the whole.” Is that not what Obama is doing?
“Socialism,” said Ayn Rand, “is the doctrine that man has no right to exist for his own sake, that his life and his work do not belong to him, but belong to society, that the only justification of his existence is his service to society, and that society may dispose of him in any way it pleases for the sake of whatever it deems to be its own tribal, collective good.” Obamacare mandates exactly that: the productive exist for the aid of the non-productive, and all must change their behavior to conform with what the state prescribes as the good.
Roberts’ decision, like Taney’s, will not be without consequences. I fear that it will result in rage and the blind violence of a civil war. The American people cannot be cowed into resignation, submission, or passivity. As Ayn Rand said: “Defiance, not obedience, is the Americans’ answer to overbearing authority. The Nation that ran an Underground Railroad to help human beings escape from slavery, or began drinking on principle in the face of Prohibition, will not say ‘Yes, sir,’ to the enforcers” of socialized medicine. Not yet, anyway.
“It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices,” Roberts wrote. It is not his job to make that determination. It is his job to determine the Constitutionality of particular laws. The only good thing that can be taken away from the Dred Scott Decision was that they ruled, for the very first time, that an act of Congress was unconstitutional – so a precedent had been set, even if it was a horrible decision. Obamacare undermines and nullifies states’ rights, much the way the Dred Scott Decision did.
It gets better. Go here, read the whole thing.
The Truth Must be Told
Your contribution supports independent journalism
Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.
Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.
Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.
Please contribute here.
or
Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.
Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.
Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America's survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.
Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.
Follow Pamela Geller on Trump's social media platform, Truth Social. It's open and free.
Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.
Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spammy or unhelpful, click the - symbol under the comment to let us know. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
If you would like to join the conversation, but don't have an account, you can sign up for one right here.
If you are having problems leaving a comment, it's likely because you are using an ad blocker, something that break ads, of course, but also breaks the comments section of our site. If you are using an ad blocker, and would like to share your thoughts, please disable your ad blocker. We look forward to seeing your comments below.
14 Comments
11 years ago
This is so evil to equate health care to slavery.
Reasonable people can argue about the merits of universal health care.
But to call it slavery is evil.
11 years ago
@Matthew: So how and to whom one is enslaved isn’t important? The last 80 years of American history is the record or a slow but inexorable march back to serfdom. If you don’t recognize that we are here to educate you.
11 years ago
The point is it isn’t slavery. I bet you had the opportunity to vote.
11 years ago
Your second last paragraph is prophetic I fear. I can’t believe some of the normally good law abiding people I’m hearing say that they will not pay this tax, premium, or whatever they want to call it on moral or religious grounds. Nor will they pay a fine since it goes into the same pot.
We’ll see what happens when the SWAT teams start showing up.
G-d help us.
11 years ago
i think it’s more apropos
to compare it to
” separate but equal ”
because of the obvious
pragmatically contorted
” reasoning ” to justify
an obvious breach of
the people’s rights
the power to tax is
the power destroy
to permit unbridled taxation
is saying the gov’t has the right
to destroy its own people
this is a form of national suicide
for the creature ( gov’t ) to destroy
its creator ( the people )
11 years ago
Well good people, it seems your Pres is determined to start you off on the road to socialist utopia. When this fails , as it will, even MORE taxes will be needed to pay for the next social experiment, or incoming dependents.
If you want to be like France UK etc etc, carry on with importing tomorrows social problems today, because their votes will ensure YOUR poverty tomorrow.
11 years ago
A fine piece of writin.’ Posted it to my facebook. Spread it around, folks, this dame can write. She talks a good speech, too. Very apropos on this great day. The future, as is usually the case, will be decided in the streets.
11 years ago
I completely agree this decision is about slavery, made poignantly so when the deciding Chief Justice joked about it the next day. A commenter who says this issue is only about “health care” is not well informed. It’s about many things but it doesn’t mandate timely delivery of health care. It mandates the purchase of insurance. It also mandates dozens of new taxes and transfers 20% of the private sector American economy to the public sector. In other words, to the people who run the DMV and the Post Office. The plan mandates at least 10 million new people be included in the “health” system without a single additional doctor. Commenter who thinks this is about “health care” should read up how this plan (parts of which were modeled after the UK NHS) is delivering “health care” in the UK–whether doctors are on strike or not. The fact that members of congress exempted themselves from this “health care” plan is another illustration of the new master-slave society. No annoying middle class to deal with. Just the “haves” and the “have nots.” It also enslaves medical doctors who after enormous time and expense of schooling will be ordered around by DMV clerks.
11 years ago
Everybody has the right to medical care. That assumes the there is still anyone left in the medical profession who knows the difference from your ass and your elbow. If Obama is re elected it will be time for rebellion by refusing to file an income tax return. If enough of us were to do that they would not be able to put us all in prison.
11 years ago
“Our Bodies, Our Selves!” We should use the same arguments that the pro-abortion crowd used to convince the Court to rule in Roe v Wade, PRIVACY!
11 years ago
Its funny. My first thought on hearing Roberts reasoning was-“this is our Dred Scott momment”. I hope that the aftermath isn’t as dire.
11 years ago
What a wonderful article.
“Defiance, not obedience, is the Americans’ answer to overbearing authority.”
The governors must do this. We don’t answer to someone named John Roberts who with the following statement, showed himself to be an arrogant, pompous, ass, who doesn’t belong where he is.
“It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices,” Roberts wrote.
His reputation is destroyed. He has to be pressured to resign sometime early next year. He’s lost the respect of those that matter in this country, by giving in to the enemy. Benedict Roberts is his new name. He should be ostracized now.
11 years ago
Warren,
Where are those big mouth leftists who are always claiming they have a right to privacy when it comes to their bodies? Not a peep from the useful idiots.
11 years ago
“Now that the Obama Administration admits that its argument on the taxing power was not valid and that the penalty upheld as a tax is not a tax, it is incumbent upon the Supreme Court to correct the erroneous decision made last week. All it takes is five justices to grant the rehearing — a number which must include one of those who was in the original majority. The obvious candidate for that fifth vote would be Chief Justice Roberts, who will undoubtedly wish to uphold the integrity and position of the Supreme Court within the American system of government. To do otherwise would be to inflict the sort of damage to the Court that Roberts apparently sought to avoid by voting to uphold ObamaCare in the first place.”
According to this blog (below), there is a “Rule 44″ that allows the plaintiffs to file a reappeal to the Supreme Court, on the basis that the defendants used fraudulent arguments. Reappeal has to be filed within 30 days.
http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/330634.php
