While claims of communist influence were utilized by the government to investigate civil rights leaders it was never the foundation of any broad resistence.

 

The vast majority of the civil rights advances resulted in eliminating a fail society view that 'seperate but equal' was viable and acceptable. It was not. Brown vs. BoE, CRA and Bussing ripped away a long held belief by the American society that could not last in free society. These acts and action did not expand government or bring forth fundamental economic changes as a whole.

 

Medicare/medicade/Social Security, etc. are somewhat fundemental changes in political/economic structure. But at their core, these are merely well named and well marketed welfare programs. The funding is paid as a mandatory tax - on earned income. They are not paid for via mandatory fee that not tied to enconomic activity. These do make us more of a welfare state and are certainly a wealth redistribution program.

 

The equating of opposition to the current healthcare bill passed by the House to opposition of the Civil Rights movement is race baiting. The two are different and opposed for different reasons. If anyone advocates the return to 'seperate but equal' they are fair game to be labled a racist. When someone opposes the current healthcare bill as passed with the house it probably has absolutely 0% to due with race. It is about the federal government taking over a function that it has no constitutional right to do. And a government that will use the threat of jail to force you to pay a minimum tax completely unrelated to your income or economic activity. As I stated in a previous post. This act, as is, if passed would turn the public into surfs to a king.

 

Lets put the race card back in the deck on this issue. This is from a bussing participant in the late 70s.

 

So, we're not allowed to mention those topics that nWo brought up without being called race-baiters?

Because so many insurance companies are going bankrupt.

 

One of the reasons they aren't is because they have those caps and limits. Like it or not, insurance companies are just like every other company in the world, they exist to make money. They'll do what allows them to make the biggest profit, and sorry, but you can't blame them for that.

I didn't bring up the 4 items to play the race card. Far from it. Communism was used just as some are using it today to turn people against the proposed change.

 

Also when I did mention racism I was trying to let people know how some feel about Obama being labled a socialist or communist.

 

So resisting the passage of this Healthbill is not racist but declaring it a major step toward toward one of the left wing '-isms' is hyperbole - correct?

 

While the government may have investigated individual civil rights activists as suspected communist it was not the main resistence claim. Though the civil rights was a major upheaval of American society and created fear amongst many, it was far more of social movement and far less of an economic structure change movement. At the end, having all members of society participate in a single, integrated fabric did not move us toward any of the '-isms'.

 

Medicare/medicade, Social Security - there were shifts toward a welfare state. But they did not transfer direct control of industries to the government. So they it is hard to say that they moved us toward any of the actual '-isms'.

 

What you have in the Healthcare bill IS a massive economic structure change and certainly a major shift toward the '-isms'. The government wants direct control of 1/6 of the economy. This has no precident in America. The government already uses TARP to control the financial industry. It took over the largest manufacturing company in the country. It is dictating salaries of all these entities. If the government controls the health industry it will have direct control of 3 major sectors of the econmy. That is at a minimum - socialism.

 

As for the labels applied to Obama. You are measured by the company you keep. Go look at the backgrounds of the Czars or nominated Czars (Van Jones). A number of them are self-declared socialist and marxist. That is probably a whole different thread.

So resisting the passage of this Healthbill is not racist but declaring it a major step toward toward one of the left wing '-isms' is hyperbole - correct?

 

While the government may have investigated individual civil rights activists as suspected communist it was not the main resistence claim. Though the civil rights was a major upheaval of American society and created fear amongst many, it was far more of social movement and far less of an economic structure change movement. At the end, having all members of society participate in a single, integrated fabric did not move us toward any of the '-isms'.

 

Medicare/medicade, Social Security - there were shifts toward a welfare state. But they did not transfer direct control of industries to the government. So they it is hard to say that they moved us toward any of the actual '-isms'.

 

What you have in the Healthcare bill IS a massive economic structure change and certainly a major shift toward the '-isms'. The government wants direct control of 1/6 of the economy. This has no precident in America. The government already uses TARP to control the financial industry. It took over the largest manufacturing company in the country. It is dictating salaries of all these entities. If the government controls the health industry it will have direct control of 3 major sectors of the econmy. That is at a minimum - socialism.

 

As for the labels applied to Obama. You are measured by the company you keep. Go look at the backgrounds of the Czars or nominated Czars (Van Jones). A number of them are self-declared socialist and marxist. That is probably a whole different thread.

Well said.

While claims of communist influence were utilized by the government to investigate civil rights leaders it was never the foundation of any broad resistence.

 

The vast majority of the civil rights advances resulted in eliminating a fail society view that 'seperate but equal' was viable and acceptable. It was not. Brown vs. BoE, CRA and Bussing ripped away a long held belief by the American society that could not last in free society. These acts and action did not expand government or bring forth fundamental economic changes as a whole.

 

Medicare/medicade/Social Security, etc. are somewhat fundemental changes in political/economic structure. But at their core, these are merely well named and well marketed welfare programs. The funding is paid as a mandatory tax - on earned income. They are not paid for via mandatory fee that not tied to enconomic activity. These do make us more of a welfare state and are certainly a wealth redistribution program.

 

The equating of opposition to the current healthcare bill passed by the House to opposition of the Civil Rights movement is race baiting. The two are different and opposed for different reasons. If anyone advocates the return to 'seperate but equal' they are fair game to be labled a racist. When someone opposes the current healthcare bill as passed with the house it probably has absolutely 0% to due with race. It is about the federal government taking over a function that it has no constitutional right to do. And a government that will use the threat of jail to force you to pay a minimum tax completely unrelated to your income or economic activity. As I stated in a previous post. This act, as is, if passed would turn the public into surfs to a king.

 

Lets put the race card back in the deck on this issue. This is from a bussing participant in the late 70s.

 

Well said!! :thumb: