America the Pathetic

Is anyone else as tired as I am of having our country, and by extension ourselves, being put down and marginalized on the world stage? If you listen to the President and his far left advisory panel (Czars), America is the worlds ONLY true problem. The terrorists are only terrorists because of America. Dictators are dictators because of the failure of America's freedom. Global Warming, which in this writers opinion is a scientific myth, is due to the American producer and the American driver and the American family.

It is a sad state of affairs when your elected President goes in front of a Global Audience and just gives your country away practically lock stock and still smoking barrel. It is simply unacceptable and un-american to apologize to dictators, thugs and kooks for America's prosperity. Does it not just push you over the edge when American greatness is given the moral equivalence of a statist regime in Venezuela or a Rogue nation like Iran?

Where are the Ronald Reagan's when you need them most? Where are the ones who defend this country with their words, calling for all Americans to get up and make America the place that only it can be again? Raise your voice, Speak up, now is the time to demand that your elected representatives stop the bashing of our country and it's founding principles. Tell them to stop apologizing NOW!

When is a "Tax" not a "Tax"?

Tax: "A compulsory contribution levied upon persons, property, or businesses for the support of government" (Funk and Wagnalls Standard Desk Dictionary)

During his weekend media blitz, President Obama blatantly denied while talking to former Clinton staffer George Stephanopolous that a "fine" on an individual for a failure to obtain, at their own expense, compulsory (mandatory) health insurance coverage is a tax. Is this the Obama version of word definition? Is this the liberals new "is"? Is Obama trying to redefine words to help his troubled agenda?

Obama has some shelter on the tax issue. His "plan" might not raise taxes on all Americans mostly because the White House does not actually have, well, a "plan". That leaves us to revert to one of two plans currently in congress. The House plan, HR3200 is practically toxic waste and has all but been abandoned. That leaves us with the "plan" recently announced, with very little senate support, by Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D, Iowa). It is laughingly named, "America's Healthy Futures Act of 2009", and is rife with things actually called "taxes", that would negatively affect the personal economics of the vast majority of the American public.

Foremost in the "plan" is a plan which states the following, "The consequence for not maintaining insurance would be an excise tax." Now by my definition, and the definition of this bill, the penalty to be paid for failing to obtain "compulsory" coverage is an excise TAX. President Obama can call it whatever he wants but at least Senator Baucus was honest in calling it what it is. It is a tax which will be paid by all uninsured Americans who are not covered by health insurance at the time the law goes into affect. On a percentage basis the poor, and the middle class would bear a disproportionate part of the burden for Universal Coverage.

At the end of the day, any levy enacted by a government, regardless of the Presidents idea of semantics, is a TAX! That the taxes would be regressive and a disincentive to insurance companies and individuals alike is without question. Can we afford to allow our government to pass any legislation, forcing a free American citizen to do something against their will again? To belabor a tired point yet again, The copy I have of the US Constitution does not include any statements allocating Health Insurance as a right of the people. Does yours?

I Am a Racist?

To quote my 16yo son, "really". Does that fact that I, a white, middle aged, male who disagrees with the euro centric and socialist views of President Obama make me a racist. There is nothing in my history to suggest that I in fact AM a racist. Anyone who knows me personally and has heard my personal philosophy, knows that for me, Race, Gender, Sexual Orientation, Age, Disability Status, etc. are never even a consideration of someones value. And yet, since I began weighing in on my disaffection with the President's policies and legislative agenda, I, along with a multitude of others have been labeled as Racists and Bigots.


Funk & Wagnalls Standard Desk Dictionary defines racism as an "Irrational belief or advocacy of the superiority of a given group, people, or nation, on the basis of racial differences having no scientific validity." It follows that up by adding, and I quote, "social action or GOVERNMENT policy based on such assumed differences." The definition here is important when we consider the circumstances surrounding the current debate in this country over it's direction.

In any discussions of my differences with President Obama, I have never directed any commentary or opinion with regard to his racial status. I am not one who considers or opines on the legitimacy of President Obama to hold office. I don't concern myself with his religious beliefs except when said beliefs and associations shine a light on his character (IE Reverend Jeremiah Right) and call in question his ability to lead in a colorblind manner. What I do discuss and bloviate on is his policies and his associations with people and groups who seek to remake this Republic in their image, and it is an image that I can not accept or tolerate.

You see, we don't disagree because of race, but because of his political ideology as borne out in his proposed legislation. I could care less about the supposed validity questions about his birth certificate. What I do care about is an increasing series of statements and legislative proposals which are a danger to this Republic as our founders established it. I don't give a damn about Speaker Pelosi's gender. I DO care that she is obviously a strident, statist demagogue with no concern for those whom she represents. Look. I will be clear about what I AM. I am a Capitalist, a Conservative, a Christian, a believer in our Constitution as our founders wrote it. I am a former US Navy Sailor and father of a US Marine. I am a Patriot and an AMERICAN! What I am most decidedly not is a racist.

Many Americans are as I am. In fact, I would posit that the majority of Americans see it like I do. We are to busy managing our own lives and our own issues to even notice something as unimportant as a persons skin color. Does that mean that there is no racism? Absolutely not, in fact it exists in both directions in this country. The not so mainstream media only reports about it in one direction , white to black. It seems to this blogger as if all the charges and demagoguery are coming either old white leftists men or your white leftist women (Maureen Dowd). Is this some sort of guilt compensation for the realization that their longstanding policy and legislative agenda's are inherently racist in their own right for singling out a specific demographic based on race. By my dictionary that action meets the criteria of Racism. Who's a racist now?

Capitalism and the Left

Webster's defines capitalism as an "economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately owned, and operated for PROFIT". Notice the complete lack of mention of government in this definition. What is it that the left in this country hates so much about the very idea which allowed this country to become the dominant economic power that it was in such a short time? What logic prescribes a move away from this economic system at a time when our economy is suffering from far to much government intervention as it is.

It really comes down to the collectivist premise on which they base their ideology. The battle of the two competing ideologies has been going on since the very founding of this great country. Perhaps a better definition of this battle would be Collectivism vs. Capitalism, with collectivism being defined as the "collective (government) ownership and/or control of the means of production." The current economic ideology that identifies with collectivism is socialism, based mostly on the philosophy of Karl Marx and Freidrich Engels. Accordingly, when a government, under the guise of the "social good", seeks to take over property and the means of production it is labeled as socialist.

Whenever you see the words appear in discussions about the economy such as "the common good", or "social responsibility", or the "public interest", then free citizens beware. This terminology derives from the liberal axiom "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need". Distilled down this is the redistribution of your wealth. The only way that wealth can be redistributed is by taking it form one who creates it and giving it to someone who will not, at the point of a gun. In a free society, this is the very opposite of liberty and freedom.

A capitalist looks at the landscape, identifies a niche in the market where he can profit, and moves forward to do just that. The leftist/socialist looks out to determine where they can take the most from. A capitalist society glorifies rational self interest and the creation of wealth. A leftist/socialist, unable to create wealth of their own, drain it from those who do. A government based on a capitalist premise uses force only to protect the rights of it's citizens, including the right to property and wealth. A leftist/socialist government uses it's force to expropriate from it's able citizens under the guise of the "common good".

Now, where do you think Obama and his advisers (Czars) stand in this battle? Based on their words and actions I would not say they are on the capitalist side.

Obamanomics: The New/Old Theory

"Hope for the Future". "Change in Washington". This is the bag of goods sold to voters by President Obama on the campaign trail. Well, we clearly have change, but not in Washington.

Obamanomics began even before the oath of office was taken in January of 2009. At that time, then President Bush (43) was vacillating on whether or not to sign a massive bailout bill coming out of congress for the financial sector, which was suffering from the results of toxic mortgage debt. In an unprecedented move for a President elect, Barack Obama cajoled President Bush into signing this bloated bill. Soon, after the inauguration, the public was being sold a "Stimulus" boondoggle of over $700 billion in size. Tarp II followed shortly thereafter, another financial sector bailout.

When these measures failed to stimulate economic growth, before more than 10% of the first stimulus funds had even been distributed, we began to hear rumblings from presidential advisers and congress and liberal media types that another stimulus was needed.. Of course, as we all know now, that whole discussion was covered over by this debacle that is their attempt to take over the Health Care Industry, Lock, Stock, and Oaken Barrel. Can you begin to see what Obamanomics is now?

Obama and his "advisers" (Czars) have a RADICALLY different view of America and it's economy. Obamanomics has no place in it for Free Markets with minimal regulation. Their "euro-centric" view puts capitalism (such as it is in America) in a move to be the controlling force in the economy, IE: socialism. The economic plans of this administration seem to be based on a false premise that jobs and economic growth must be created by government.. That the money that companies make and employees earn is governments money first. That any balance left after regressive tax policies is a reward from government. To date, it does not seem to be working.

A government can not spend it's way out of a recession into prosperity. You can not encourage economic growth by placing ever larger burdens, be they regulatory of tax, on the engine of that growth, American companies. One of the problem with Obamanomics is the constant contradictions inherent in socialist economics (thank you Karl Marx). You can not insist companies hire more workers and then place a higher tax burden on them for doing so. You can not insist on more profitability and then increase their tax burden yet again. You can not insist that American companies continue doing business in this great country by increasing the ever burdensome regulator environment they already live in. Regressive tax policy and increased regulation are disincentives to growth.

To use an old saying, " You can't have your cake and eat it too". Obamanomics, due to its inherent contradictions and false premises is doomed to failure at the expense of the American people. No president of congress has ever spent their way out of a recession. The massive debt being heaped on the heads of American taxpayers and businesses will continue to weigh down and already overburdened economy, limiting growth and destroying wealth. In fact, tax revenues have been falling drastically this year as Obamanomics began to take hold. Look for a discussion about "additional sacrifices" needed by the American Public very soon. Higher Taxes? You bet...on everyone who pays taxes, not just the wealthy.

ObamaPolice, A Civilan National Security Force?

During a campaign stop in Colorado, President Obama clearly articulated to his followers that he needed a "Civilian National Security Force". One that is, in his words, "as large, as well trained, as well funded, and as well armed" as our current military members. Recently, with the comments coming from his congressional partners and veiled mentions of his own, he seems to be making another push for this type of program.

In reality this is just one part of the a multi-part strategy to subjugate the American public and overthrow our Constitutional Republic. This strategy began, in an unprecedented move, before Obama even took office by pressuring the Bush administration to sign the first TARP bill. Next we had the massive stimulus bill that was a front for political payoffs to unions and supporters and to date, has not been show to be stimulative at all. Then we had TARP II, of which only 10% has been spent with no job creation anywhere other than the federal government. Now we have the government taking over 2/3Rd's of the US Auto manufacturing industry, and the play that was made to take over 1/6Th of the US economy with Health Care Reform.

Oops, ROAD BLOCK. The good people of this great country woke up and started telling their elected representatives that enough was enough. To date we have succeeded so far on at least putting it on hold. Make NO MISTAKE, HR3200 has Obama, Emmanuel, and Alinsky all over it. Systematic, Incremental, one part at a time and hopefully the public won't catch on till it's far to late. Now that the public has figured it out, we see the rhetoric and name calling from the administration and congress which points to just what this "Civilian" organization would b charged with. Protecting them (the socialists) from us, the portion of this country that still believes in Liberty and Freedom.

You see, what we have witnessed so far is really just the tip of the iceberg that sank the Titanic. Cap & Trade (tax), Either banning entirely or requiring federal firearm registration, The tamping down of religious expression and watering down of Christianity, and there is more, MUCH more.

However, the public has awoken from it's slumber and has begun to see the lies told by Obama during his campaign. In fact, the only thing that does not seem to be disingenuous about the campaign was change. And in order for them to get all the changes they want, they need HR3200 to pass with it's language intact. Mark my words, this is not JUST a health care reform bill. It paves the way for further more massive takeovers of the US Economy and ultimately a "Civilian National Security Force".

The ObamaPolice would serve as nothing more than an avenue by which to enforce edicts on those of us who disagree and would revolt. Make no mistake, it would operate without constraint of any kind. It would not have to recognize States rights or local LEO's. It would function without any regard to the "Due Process" clause of the US Constitution. Miranda, a thing of the past. In fact, federalizing a prison in Michigan on the auspices of using it for Guantanamo detainees could pave the way for federalizing other facilities to use as interment and reeducation camps. All of this is real, and scary. It has been telegraphed because they don't think the American public has the stomach to stand up and fight them. My fellow Americans, lets reset the balance in Washington by using our constitutional right to vote for solid candidates who cherish and value the constitution.

Reason, What the Obamacommies forgot

Is it a flash of self awareness that ensures we do not forget humanity's ultimate goal? What answers are mankind searching so desperately for? Perhaps it is the feeling that our government is simply unable to function in a rational manner. That the answers are posited before the questions are formed and we are advised that thinking about the question is not the way to approach the problem, and that instead we should just be able to "feel" the answer is right regardless of the question.

Reason and logic must be the guide to determining somethings validity. We are after all the top of the food chain, the ultimate predator. Reason, when applied, dictates that we live our lives unencumbered by having to "feel" whether or not we are paying homage to the "social consciousness". Reason using beings strive to live their lives in a way which maximizes our return on investment without encroaching on another persons right to do so ,and to do that without force towards another reasoned being. Reasoned beings should ever strive to be free of any system which has as it's highest moral principle, "from each according to his ability, to each according to his NEED".

We must escape from the inconsistency in our own moral contexts which provide us with no end of conflicts. Escape from being led down a path where our reason conflicts with the public demand that we "feel with our hearts" what is good. Feel what and for whom.

Reason demands that we act consistent with our nature as human beings. Emotion or feeling demands that we often disregard our nature altogether. Reason posits that absolutes exist and are inviolable. Feelings claim that everything is subjective and in a grey area.

In this time of great debate about the direction of this country and the freedom's which are being systematically removed, reason is far more valuable a resource than one's feelings. Just because we "feel" bad for those with real health care and insurance issues, does not mean that we all should give up our freedom's in this area to fix their problem. Reason tells me that what is being proposed and promoted in an emotional way is antithetical to the liberty that I desire. Pressure your members of congress to do a better job than they have. After all, when reason was applied to this health care bill many of us were dismissed and called names. The American public deserves better from Washington.

A Funny Thing Happened While Waiting at the Tire Shop

An interesting observation struck me yesterday as I waited at a local tire shop for some work to be done on my car. A conversation broke out about health care. I am positive it was NOT organized by the RNC. No AstroTurf was in sight. Not even a single, solitary, synthetic blade.

Of the six individuals waiting for their vehicles, none wanted the Obama administration of congress running America's health care system. Six uniquely American individuals, seniors, middle aged, veterans, male, female, none of who wanted or trusted universal health care. As I believe I wrote in a prior blog, "you can dress up a pig and call it a cow but it is still a pig".

Another observation was that the conversation centered around distrust of governments ability to run health care and the costs associated with it. Treatment cost, insurance costs, Medicare costs, and Washington's seeming inability to pay for the obligations it currently has without the addition of at LEAST 1 TRILLION dollars of additional spending for health care. It was the consensus amongst us that 1.) Costs are out of whack with normal society, and , 2.) Government has shown itself unable to control any costs or afford any additional ones.

These were the two things that seem to be at the crux of what the American people oppose in the current proposals. Everyone I was speaking with had the understanding that nothing had as yet been actually decided in Washington. But HR3200 has made it out to the general public and, by a fairly significant margin in my observations, has not been well received.

Once HR 3200 leaked out it was crystal clear to most of us why the White House and Congress wanted this legislation rammed through in two weeks (before the August recess). What was supposed to be a break filled with feel good meetings touting the wonderful benefits of Universal Health Care has turned into a frank and oft times heated discussion by the American people on the flaws and fears HR 3200 has generated.

It is quite simple really. With medicare and social security bankrupt, Senior citizens are losing confidence in government. Those of us in our 30's to 50's are just seeing one financial boondoggle after another and we seriously doubt governments ability to be both honest and competent not to mention financial secure. This presents a problem to both the Obama administration and Congress. Should they be voted out if they continue to ignore the American public? Should we vote them out and replace them with people who have a better idea what being a public servant means? We will see what the public does at the polls in 2010.

The Democrats Incremental Plan

How do you implement a socialist power block, a far left socialist government, in a Constitutional Republic? How do you bypass the will of the people, violate their God given rights, take more and more rights away from the states and into some massive, bloated, overblown centralized government? The Answer, A Little Bit at a Time. Incrementally.

We are now seeing this very ideology, this method of governing, in its totality in Washington, DC. What, if anything, is amusing about this, is the Obama administration with it's attempts to reign in Congress back to the incremental stage. However, the hard left socialists in congress (Pelosi, Reid, Boxer, Frank, Waxman), have all but told him NO, realizing that now is the time. Obama has made it clear that he understands he can not ram his socialist agenda down the public throat all at once.

Medicare, Social Security, Employer Withholding of Income Taxes, SCHIP, the "Stimulus" boondoggle, Cap and Tax, Card Check, Health Care Co-ops, Incremental steps. Oh, did you manage to catch the co-op one? That's right, health care co-ops to be exact. What exactly would a health care co-op be? How would it function? How is it a part of socialized medicine? Quite simply, it is just another way of dressing up a pig and calling it a bird of paradise. It would be Government funded, and with government funding comes government mandates. If passed in any sort of health care bill, it would be yet another incremental step towards a full government take over of the health care system in this country and Washington fully in control of another 1/6th of the US economy. Make no mistake, if we allow Washington to foist a bill on us with any parts of HR3200 in it, we will not be able to turn back the clock on it and they know it.

This is, in a sense , A seminal moment in our founding fathers experiment in representative government. Never in the history of the Democrat party have so many been willing to sacrifice their seats in congress to further their socialist agendas. Perhaps it is because their own hubris has blinded them to their constituents desires. Or, more likely, they believe that with the administrations ties to Acorn, they can turn double digit negatives into re-election in 2009/2010.

Whatever their reasons are, it is crystal clear that this administration and its far left allies in congress will try their best to push this country away from it's roots as a constitutional republic and towards a socialist democracy, with 1 party rule (theirs), and no dissent. A Little Bit At A Time.

Why Liberals Love Democracy

Why is it that so many in the media, as well as so many of our elected officials, so enamored with the mis-identification of our Republic as a "Democracy"? This is a question which has been niggling at me for quite some time. It makes me wonder just what is actually being taught about our form of government in our high schools and college.

Now, Many of you will likely disagree with me and argue that I am simply splitting hairs here just for arguments sake. But I posit to you that their is a method to the liberals madness. The men who drafted the US Constitution were hyper aware of the dangers present in any type of "pure" democracy. We know that there were loud and vociferous arguments about the structure of a national government, and that there were some who even then had an affinity for "pure" democracy. Ultimately, the founders and the 13 states settled on a tri-partite system they termed a "Constitutional Republic".

Just about the only thing that even resembles a "democracy" in our system is that we hold free elections for our representatives (Senate, House, President). But instead of the public having a vote on every issue before them, our representatives are imbued with the authority to act on our behalf. This is where we diverge from a "pure" democracy.

A "pure" democracy has no checks and balances. Simply put, it is the equivalent of "Mob" rule. Whatever the majority of voters want, that's what happens. Let me provide you with an example of what happens when a "pure" democracy governs at it's extremes. A national referendum (or vote) is held on the issue of a mentally handicapped individuals value and benefit to society as a whole. The law before the voters is clear that as these individuals pose no palpable benefit to society as a whole, society has no obligation to provide support or assistance. 51% of the voters agree and a new law is enacted whereby those unable to meet certain mental standards are left without. You can extrapolate for yourselves the ultimate outcome of this vote. Is it an extreme example? It is, and yet one could see it written into the language of HR 3200.

The reason why the left in particular are so enamored with "Democracy" is due in large part to the thinking that they could could encourage the public to create their idea of a social utopia or a "pure" society. Now that sounds a lot like a certain individual by the name of Karl Marx does it not. Is there any doubt, when people (IE AL Gore in 1990) start clamoring to do away with the electoral college and elect our president based on the "popular" vote what the true agenda is.

Ultimately, complete loss of liberty and tyranny are the end results of "pure" democracy. It leaves a society crippled and unable to fend of the more aggressive powers and ultimately ends up broken up (see Athens, Greece). Beware America, when your politicians start yelling for a "More" democratic process.

The Health Care Stepping Stone

Why the full court press on " Health Care" reform by the Obama administration and democrats in congress? What's the hurry? Why is there such obfuscation and disinformation on the primary bill in the US House of Representatives (HR. 3200)?

The reality for me on this issue is less about the details of a 1018 page bill that most house members have not read, but the seeming desire of this administration to push through a massive and costly government takeover of the health care industry. This take over is the cornerstone of this administration in their incremental march to take over the US Economy.

Lets be very clear about something. In order to achieve their vision of America, they need almost absolute control over the US Economy. Former president bush, unwittingly of not, handed to them the financial sector on a silver platter by signing the first bailout bill.

Take a look at the steps taken by this current administration just since February. The passage of the TARP program, which essentially gave the Treasury department control of the Financial sector of the US economy. This was followed by an almost complete takeover of the domestic auto industry wherein 2/3Rd's of of US automakers are now under the control of this administration either explicitly (GM) or implicitly (Chrysler).

When you add the health care industry in with the automotive and financial industries, you represent a large portion of US GDP that is either directly or indirectly controlled by this administration. This kind of makes the idea of a "Free Market" economy a joke.

Health care reform, if passed, paves the way for Congress and the President to re-introduce and pass "Cap and Trade" which is another way of defining a massive nationalization of the Energy sector of the US economy. This policy would put the administration in the position of being able to "Dictate" who in the manufacturing industry and produce and who gets penalized. The overall consequences on domestic manufacturing would be catastrophic both for the average consumer and the US Economy.

This administration and the democrats in congress see this as a necessity. Control, power, subjugation, consolidation of power. Health care reform passage makes the rest of their socialist agenda easier to be forced on the American public. The speed at which they are trying to move is indicative of their own understanding that the vast majority of Americans won't accept their version of this country and will show their displeasure at the ballot box in 2009/2010. My friends it is time to write your elected representatives NOW and urge in the strongest way possible that they defeat the passage of the Health Care bill as we currently know it.

A Sleeping Giant

Ladies and Gentlemen, to use the lie of a fellow "Politcal Terrorist", "A Sleeping Giant has been awakened". I have not blogged in some almost a year. The whole media controlled election left me disillusioned and weary. HR3200 was the last straw for me.

With federal spending having quadrupled in the last seven months creating a deficit that broached the Trillion dollar mark for the first time in our history. Federal Tax revenues dropping like Granite in a quarry. Tarp funds just plain missing. An 800 billion dollar stimulus package of which only 10% has been spent. An unemployment rate at almost 10% (9.4% if you believe the White House). We have elected representatives trying to force a bill that conservative estimates show would cost at least 1 trillion dollars. Quite frankly, our economy simply can not bear it.

HR 3200, the house version of the health care proposal is downright draconian it both its scope and it's intent. If one FULLY reads this bill (all 1018 pages) it becomes clear that the ultimate goal is a single payer system with that payer being the federal government. (ie: socialized medicine) It creates a position, appointed by the president, to set the guidelines by which private insurers must operate. Now if I was going to set up a system, and didn't want to really have to compete, I would fix the game so that competition in the private sector can't happen. The bill also would place either a one time fine ($750?) or an 8% tax on healthcare premiums paid said tax to be paid by the employer. Now I don't know about you, but if I was an employer I would cancel my employees insurance and push them off on the Public plan while only having to pay a one time fine.

Now, when you add in all the people "Forced" into the public option by this portion of the bill, the cost could very well exceed the ability of the government to cover it without drastic measures. Into that you would have to agree that rationed care and reduced access to care would be exigent to stave off collapse of the system. Doctors would no longer be able to make the necessary decisions for their patients unless approved by a beaureaucrat. Patients would wait in line for even basic services. Doctors, who find the their ability to earn back the cost of their educations due to mandated cost restraints would find another line of work or leave here for locations where fee for service still abound (is there anywhere left?)

When you start doing the math, fewer doctors, less and less private insurance coverage. That means more people using resources which would continue to dwindle. Ultimately, people would begin to expire due to a lack of available treatment options. Since the Beaureaucrats in washington would be immune to medical malpractice and likely not subject to wrongful death litigation, how would a family in the above situation redress their frievance. All of this is just the tip of the iceberg looming in front of the Obama Titanic. End Of Life review boards, a mandatory provision (that means no option NOT to do) in HR 3200 would require (not request) senior citizens to obtain counseling as they approach the twilight of their lives. It is easy to see how this would be forced on those with special needs or limited abilities.

Let me leave you all with a little scenario. You are at your elderly parents home. An accident occures where you or you parent is seriously injured and a 911 call is made. The local law enforcement officer shows up on the scene and begins his inquiry with " I need to see your identification and Health Insurance card". "I don't have insurance" is your response, "didn't think I would need it". "I'm sorry the officer says, I am going to have to cite you for being in violation of federal law requiring you to have health insurance."

Is this the direction we wish to go in this country?