A blow to the gut tends to be mightier when delivered by the fist of unintended consequences.

In 1923, five years after the implementation of the 18th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that effectively banned alcohol, Americans felt disillusioned with Prohibition. None of the grand promises of what would follow its passage had come to pass – not even close.

Drunkenness and spousal abuse had increased, as had crime in general; the cost of federal and state government had grown at a pace no one foresaw, and respect for the law at all levels had largely evaporated.

Those and other effects of Prohibition contradicted every reason given for enacting the constitutional amendment.

The economic impact on Main Street was strikingly harmful as well: Breweries, distilleries, hotels, restaurants and pubs closed, leading to the loss of thousands of jobs. Those losses were compounded by cutbacks in industries that supported those businesses, such as truck drivers and skilled tradesmen.

State tax revenues suffered immensely; before Prohibition, excise taxes from liquor sales had funded many state budgets.

Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/10/20/obamacare_coul... 

Views: 675

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Nothing like people with dead black eyes and looks of confusion making laws the control us the citizen but not themselves!

The little rainbows of hope.  The rainbow coalition. Brought to you by the federal gov't/ all your health care needs are taken care of.  We have you covered.  WE are looking out for you.  Take care of your family on a collapsed economy and, get in line like the rest of us.  That drove people to drinking during the prohibition era and they have better drugs for you now.  Pain management clinics are all full on monday mornings.  Find your tolerance level and, join the marches on DC.  

  Stop being sheep.  

We need men who can print more money. The Weimar wheelbarrow's are empty.  The sad sad story of America. Bring in the clowns. The joker is working in the Senate and, the White House you gonna be OK America.  

 Stop being sheep

Surround them.  They have better programs waiting.  Hairy Read and, Joe Biden are gonna back it all up.  McConnel and McCain they got a four leaf clover in their pocket for you.  

Print us up some more Casino cash their Harry. Do you actually think there is someone in DC who has a plan?  Steve the dead black eye's are on a set of dice.  If you bet right you can beat the stock market.  

Get in line folks.  The line is getting longer.  Would you line up to vote for any of these clowns.  Hillary will save us.  She got her village people all ready to vote for the salvation of America.  She knows how to get Bill to go somewhere else for his sex while she screws America.  

One can only hope enough wake up and smell the stink.

Interesting headline.  Haven't gone to article to read the whole thing, but I'll toss in one objection:  Prohibition was created by and ended by amendments to the Constitution.  The ACA is a "law" which is a much wigglier proposition and not amenable to death by amendment.  It might be interesting if someone -- anyone, please! -- could get the "current" version of the ACA (the one with all President Hussein's orders changing it all over the place) before SCOTUS for another opinion, but that doesn't seem likely to happen.  As Rush Limbaugh points out, almost never in history has a regulatory statute been removed from the books.  All that's ever happened is further regulation to "fix" the problem(s).  And we thought the ACA was huge enough to begin with, then more than doubled with orders, then more 'laws' for fixing it . . . maybe it will reach critical mass and detonate?  We could hope...


Let them run free. They got you surrounded have they.  Freedom just another word doesn't mean a thing,  Surround them your freedom means nothing to them.  Surround them every time they have a meeting plow the doors down.  Stop the crap.  Fixing it is simple.  Stand up to corrupt government.  Railroad Bill is gonna run it down the track with high speed rail. He gonna take care of you.  Railroad POTUS got a faster way to end your economics than anyone.  

The broken city's are really gonna be helped by this program.  High speed rails and, ACA.  what a deal.  

Well maybe, but it took thirteen years to repeal prohibition.

Yah but everyone wants the free stuff.  FREE FREE FREE


I have concluded the biggest difference in a liberal and a conservative is the liberal believes in big government to solve all their problems.  The conservative distrusts the government in any form and would prefer to keep it small and out of their personal lives.

Conservatives are much older and experienced with the government programs. I'll speak for myself here since i set  squarely in the conservative group. I have never seen the government make any thing better with their involvement. NOTHING! Social Security and medicare being prime examples of this. Both programs operate deep in the red, even tho the money to fund them was paid into these programs  for years before qualifying to drew one cent, today these programs operate on a month to month base, supported by taxes being paid in NOW! The government created medicaid which draws it's money from Medicare funds even tho it is a government medical welfare program. Social Security was never designed to be a free government welfare program. Social Security has the disability program, which again draws from the Social Security general funds. You can work as little as five years and draw full benefits from Social Security funds for the rest of your life.  So understand my upset when I'm told the program is broken and running out of funds. I paid into the program for 42 years, when it's my turn to drew "The money is gone!" Excuse me if my distrust in the government and government ran programs runs strong. Now Obamacare is rolled out as the answer to our broken Health system system; I know who broke it and why!

You are spot-on about the diff. between libs and conservatives.  To your definition might be added that libs are not reality-based, fiscally speaking, and conservatives tend to be at least somewhat more oriented toward the realities of economics and money and all.

That said, I'd like not so much to disagree as to add a bit more to your discussion of Social Security.  Originally SocSec was set up with that famous trust fund or whatever it's called, but as soon as it was established it was raided by congresspersons who have never collectively sniffed any possible monies they didn't do their best to help themselves to.  The trust (whatever it's called) holds IOUs which Mark Levin says it can call in and effectively drop the debt -- but of course not really because the debt is just moved offshore (i.e. increased again by borrowing).  And of course the ages and income tests were #Foxtrotted with, and disability was added when it was obvious NO ONE was going to believe the government-provided insurance fiction any more.  Medicaid, medicare -- forget it. Having just reached 65 yoa and now belonging to Medicare (plus private insurance) I reflect on the fact that the money that was taken from me to nominally fund Medicaid/Medicare, not to mention SocSec, would have been what I could have put aside to fund my own retirement and post-retirement health care insurance.  And what choice does that leave me now . . . HOWEVER if your last remark about paying into "the program" for 42 years refers to Social Security and you yourself, and you've now been told the money is gone -- you're being seriously lied to.  Find out what's going on, and get your piece of what's left of the pie.

Regardless of your political ideology,....when it is all said, and done, GOVERNMENT,  is a program, to fund them, and their favorite persons, (themselves,) and to do it with OUR funds/ taxes, and when that is not enough, they just borrow it from the so called Federal Reserve, who prints more money for them, and then sends us, and our children, the BILLS.





Political Cartoons by Gary VarvelPolitical Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel


Gohmert: Dems Will Drag Out Impeachment — Try To Get ‘Best Socialist’ Nominated For President

During an appearance on Huntsville, AL radio’s WVNN on Thursday, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) offered his best assessment of what House Democrats were trying to accomplish with their impeachment efforts.

Gohmert told WVNN’s “The Jeff Poor Show” impeachment could tie up the Democratic Party’s presidential campaign efforts but predicted Democrats would use the occasion to nominate “the best socialist” they can.

“They would lose in the Senate,” Gohmert said on impeachment. “And besides that, the entire time it was on trial in the Senate, the Democrats who are running for president wouldn’t be allowed to campaign. That’s in the Constitution. They wouldn’t be able to campaign. I just can’t imagine them wanting to do that because if they send it to the Senate, they have now perfectly set up the scenario of 1996, where they will reassure Donald Trump is reelected as president. They don’t want to do that. They’re probably going to drag this thing out as long as they possibly can … through Iowa, through primaries — try to get the best socialist they can to be nominated.”

“Then just end up and say, ‘Now we’re close enough to the general election. We’ve thrown mud at the president through the House,’” he continued. “What they’re really doing — they’re using taxpayer funds to campaign against Trump. That’s all this is — a campaign fund that taxpayers are paying for in order to try to throw mud at the president. I’ll be surprised if they have that vote, but I can’t imagine they want to set up this president for reelection by having a trial in the Senate where they lose.”

Veteran's Day Tribute

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service