Cruz and tea party want to overturn the results of last year’s election

Thanks for visiting The Daily Sentinel

Subscribers and registered users, log in to continue reading for free*

Forgot your password?    

Register to read for free! Become a subscriber

* 7-day subscribers have unlimited access to online content.
Registered users may read 12 articles per month.


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Well, yeah.  It’s bull.  Your point?

Kudos to the Daily Sentinel’s editors for unequivocally calling for an immediate end to the current government shutdown (“Point made, now reopen government”).

However, having thrice endorsed Scott “Tea Party” Tipton for election to Congress, the Sentinel’s editors are much too circumspect in refusing to criticize their dubious choice of another Tea Party lemming.

Even if Tipton “is just keeping his head down”, he does so purely because the 3rd C.D. is one of the few “competitive districts” remaining in our country, such that he must both preclude a primary challenge “from the right” next year (by “playing to his base”), and also avoid alienating too many “moderates” and “independents” while doing so.

Consequently, as Dr. Michael Pramenko’s timely column (“Cruz and tea party want to overturn the results of last year’s election”) clearly demonstrates, Tipton remains part of the problem, not the solution.

Likewise, in his regular “reports” to the Sentinel’s Gary Harmon (see, e.g., “Tipton blames officials for aggravating situation”), Tipton repeatedly relies on simplistic “one-liners and factually challenged rhetoric” to disingenuously avoid his own “personal responsibility” for deluding his constituency and voting to shut down the government over a “conservative” program that offers 45 million Americans access to health care. 

Indeed, Jim Ciha’s letter (“Obamacare doesn’t do enough for affordable care”) is closer to the truth than any of Tipton’s pronouncements about the Affordable Care Act – which was originally the Republican “market-based” approach to combating incessantly rising health care costs and egregious abuses by for-profit health insurers’ “death panels”.

Thus, the Sentinel should get Tipton “on record” as to whether he will support a “clean C.R.” and/or would sign a “discharge petition” to bring one to the floor.  If not, Sentinel readers should properly conclude that Tipton is both unworthy of his position and undeserving of re-election.

Instead of paying any attention whatsoever to meaningless and manipulative ad hominem blather from clueless propaganda-fixated leftists such as Michael Pramenko and Bill Hugenberg, why not first compare their opinions to the opinions of world-class intellects and whistleblowers such as investment advisor, entrepreneur and investment banker, Catherine Austin Fitts and former (until she blew the whistle) chief counsel for the World Bank, Karen Hudes (PhD and JD from Yale). You can read Fitts’ resume at, and you can read about Hudes at Fitts’ website is at, and Hudes’ website is at Both are featured in a number of video interviews in the alternative media on the internet.
Arguably Fitt’s interview most relevant to Obamacare is titled “The Economic Truth About US Healthcare,” and can be viewed at I consider Fitts’ remarks so important that I took the time to transcribe them and have posted that transcription on my own website.
Let me try to couch the harsh economic realities in as leftist-friendly language as possible: Obamacare represents several things, none of them good — in fact, some of them downright evil. It is symptomatic of a political nonalignment between corporations who want more profits and people who are getting sicker and can’t afford healthcare. The more profits Big Pharma, Big Medicine and Big Insurance make, the more Americans, health deteriorates.
As Fitts put it, “the way the corporations have resolved that is to go to Washington and get Washington to pass rules that force the customer to pay the corporations, whether they need them or not, or whether they can afford them or not. And it’s really a way of liquidating the wealth of the people [middle class] to prop up these corporations.”
Fitts continues, “Now, in the backdrop, there’s a third agenda which, to me, is the most important agenda in the mix on healthcare reform. And that agenda is the desire to have much greater control.”
“Now, you can say it’s the government, but in fact, if you look at who really controls and operates and runs the government, it’s not the government. It’s very powerful private interests behind the government. You know, some people call it the ‘shadow government’, but there are groups behind that. And if you look at the provisions that have been discussed for controlling doctors, dictating to doctors what their policies will be, requiring disclosure to the government of all sorts of confidential private information
about people and their health, you’re looking at one of the most effective tools to implement fascism that I’ve ever seen.
Obamacare is a lie. It is unsustainable. It is political theater. It is the result of corrupt politicians and a sick, self-absorbed culture of entitlement to steal the “other guy’s” labor.
Repeal it and start over.

I couldn’t help noticing that one angry post was removed. That was the Sentinel’s call. I disagree with that call, but it’s not my newspaper. (And it definitely is not “the people’s” newspaper any more than corrupt politicians are “the people’s” servants. It’s Jay Seaton’s newspaper.)
For myself, I very much appreciate seeing what people are thinking. To me, angry reaction to Pramenko’s socialistic “bread-and-circuses” blather is just as interesting as the original blather itself.
In the long run, censorship of other than obvious profanity doesn’t really work. In the minds of all but elitists, whatever inhibits the free flow of information is destructive for society. Maybe I just trust the common sense of the common people more than the Sentinel trusts the common sense of its readership.
As a free speech absolutist, I tend to agree with Thomas Jefferson, who believed that the crazed utterances of a few lunatics are most effectively countered, not by government/media regulation/control of speech, but by the common sense and logic of other speakers who are free to expose and ridicule the lunacy of a few.
P.S: I don’t buy the “striving to improve the civility of the discussion” talking point. Not when the disagreements are so profound that actual civil war is realistically conceivable.

Search More Jobs

734 S. Seventh St.
Grand Junction, CO 81501
Subscribe to print edition
Sign in to your account

© 2014 Grand Junction Media, Inc.
By using this site you agree to the Visitor Agreement and the Privacy Policy