Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., says it's “un-American” to not encourage people to sign up for ObamaCare. Allow us to translate: The congresswoman believes that it is “un-American” not to encourage the public to embrace nationalized health care, which, by many assessments, will offer worse care at a higher premium and, by any other characterization, is nothing but the creeping crud of socialism. We guess there's “un-American” and then there's “un-American.” ... “(I)t's remarkable how many people are now willing to submit to government authority without question or without much in the way of expectations,” says John Hayward, writing at RedState.com. He says “serfdom is making a big comeback these days.” Actually, Mr. Hayward, and sadly, it never went very far away. ... CNBC's Larry Kudlow distills the IRS scandal to its essence: “There can be only one reason for the stalled-out approval process for conservative groups. The IRS was trying to put them out of business.” He calls for the appointment of an independent counsel to investigate. The sooner the better and the sooner we'll know if we do or don't have a crook in the White House. ... Fly Old Glory this weekend in memory of those who gave the last full measure to our country, of course. But fly a second flag or display some other patriotic symbol this weekend to show the government that you're on guard — against its tyranny.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Orphan sinkhole
- Confidentiality & carnage: Something has to give
- Work’s the thing
- ‘Canary in a coal mine’: The SSDI dilemma
- Pittsburgh Tuesday takes
- Greensburg Tuesday takes
- Mon-Yough Laurels & Lances
- Mon-Yough Tuesday takes
- Alle-Kiski Tuesday takes
- A school choice victory: Follow the child
- Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances