Category: the Rant Board
The following is a translation of Barack Obama's remarks on healthcare that he made on Sunday night after its passage in the House of Representatives.
Good evening, everybody. After nearly 100 years of demagoguery, after decades of histrionics by my liberal colleagues like Jimmy carter and Bill Clinton, and a year of sustained bullying and intimidation of those who do not agree with my socialist agenda, the United States Congress finally declared the death of the Republic by denying America's workers and America's families and America's small businesses the right to choose healthcare options as they see fit, consequently, sapping the taxpayers of the money and financial security they worked a lifetime to achieve. Tonight, at a time when many freedom-loving journalists and concerned citizens thought it impossible to run roughshod over the Constitution, the Democratic Party and I circumvented this great document by bribing and buying votes. We ignored the groundswell of opposition by the people by calling it Astroturf and heaping insults upon them such as "tea bagger." As politicians, we heeded the call of special interest unions and trial lawyer lobbyests by doling out billions of dollars of pork in exchange for their support of this legislation. Additionally, we took away the capability of the American people to make these very personal decisions by nationalizing 1 6th of this nation's economy. We proved that this government -- a government which is supposed to be of the people and by the people -- no longer works for the people.
I want to thank every member of Congress tonight who sold out the founding principles of this nation to make this totalitarian nightmare a reality, and I know this was a natural and easy vote for a lot of people. It was also the right vote for those of us who hold the falsehoods of Marxism to be self-evident truths. I want to thank Speaker Nancy Pelosi for her extraordinary ability to deceive this country with guile and to browbeat the opposition into silence. I also owe a debt of gratitude to majority leader Steny Hoyer and majority whip Jim Klyburn for being my two most important yes men. I want to thank my servile and foolish Vice President, Joe Biden, and my incredibly inept Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, for scattering the concepts of liberty to the four winds and creating a crisis of chaos where none existed. I want to thank the countless numbers of government bureaucrats and my own propaganda team who have pulled the wool over your eyes during the past year in order that we may create a more imperfect union by fomenting anger and forcing a vision of class envy on this country which is completely unworthy of the lofty goals that our Founding Fathers had in mind.
Today's vote answers the dreams of tyrants everywhere who have labored since the beginning of time to enslave mankind. To every unsung American who took the time to sit down and write a letter or type out an e-mail hoping your voice would be heard -- it has been ignored tonight. To the untold numbers who knocked on doors and made phone calls, who actually thought that they could affect change on the grass roots level, let me disabuse you of that notion. This trillion dollar boondoggle was rammed down your throats despite your fierce objections.
Most importantly, today's vote satisfies the greedy blood lust of a few trial lawyers who are interested in a system that only enriches them monetarily by increasing mal practice lawsuits and guaranteeing that tort reform is not implemented, thus insuring that we have a system that doesn't work at all. For those of us on the far left, the debate needs to be obfuscated so that we can convince you to live in a false haze of non-partisanship. It is important for us to keep you ignorant of the checks and balances built into this nation's founding documents in order to advance our tyrannical efficiency. When I talk about premiums shooting up for most Americans including the poor little children that I always use to make my points when facts do not support my arguments, I purposely leave out the cost of defensive medicine built into every physician's practice. This allows me to pretend I am for the small business owners of this nation, for families, or for anything else that sounds as wholesome as mom, America, and apple pie.
Tonight's vote is a victory for those forces that seek to destroy the free enterprise system as we know it. It's a victory for big labor and a defeat for common sense and liberty.
Now, it probably goes without saying that tonight's sneak attack on our freedom will elicit righteous indignation from critical thinkers everywhere. There will be talk of the upcoming November elections, predictions of a republican midterm slaughter, a subsequent drop in my pole numbers, more critical analysis of my administration's ineptitude and bungling, but long after the debate fades away and the United States has been consigned to the ash heap of history, what will remain standing is not the utopian paradise that American leftists so naively or cynically desired, nor the greatest experiment in man's political life since the beginning of time, but the uncompromising judgment of history -- a history that knows no mercy after the rise and fall of once great civilizations.
If you had private health insurance, this bill just wrested control of your personal decision-making power from you by forcing you to purchase this service from the federal government. It also made sure that premiums will go up even higher due to the increased costs to insurance companies which will be passed on to you, the consumer so that you are never going to get what you pay for when you give your hard-earned money to Washington.
If you choose not to purchase insurance, we will punish you by fine or imprisonment, contrary to the United States Constitution's assurance of life, liberty, and property as stated in it's preamble. As a result, Washington will have a monopoly on healthcare and can engage in price-fixing whenever it wants. This will eliminate all meaningful private sector competition. Your taxes will be raised considerably to pay for this government takeover, and you will suffer from inferior care because human nature dictates that everyone wants a freebee. As a result, your average time with your physician will be less than 10 minutes per visit, but you are supposed to like the word "free." This way, I can ignore the fact that in countries like England, people are dying as a result of year-long waiting times for crucial life-saving procedures. You'll be so busy suffering from unnecessary pain or infection that you won't be able to start a new job, open a business, or have a good quality of life if you get sick, but it's free and that's all that should matter.
This bill is the right thing to do for our seniors because it makes sure that they will be the first to die as a result of being subjected to death panels, thus, decreasing the burden that they place on society. It makes sure that Medicare is weaker and less solvent by cutting its budget by half a trillion dollars. I intend to play shell games with the money and pretend that spending money is saving money by shifting the funds from one part of the budget to another.
In summary, the bill does radical and tragic violence to the economy as well as to the Constitution. This legislation will not fix anything that ails the system, but it moves us decisively in the leftward direction of socialism. This is what my version of change looks like.
couldn't have said it better my self!
It's people like those who wrote the above who make me more than glad that I'll be leaving this country one day. This is exactly what I mean by the stupidity of americans. Try to do something nice for them, and instead of them working with you, they bash you. Try to give them something that's every human being's right and they spit in your face. and that's with tons of consessions made to cater to those who, for whatever reason, are against the idea of socialised anything. The reason why it's taken 100 years to move this little step ahead is because of people who don't support progress and who want to keep America in the past, selfish, self-absorbed, with a superiority complex and with the image of freedom while it steals from everyone's pockets and smiles. The only things that were right in this post are that America will, one day, be an ash heap and not a eutopia. No such thing has ever or will ever exist. The government should provide a system of healthcare that people can use or they should be able to use a private one. People should not be fined if they don't wish to receive healthcare, since there are some who choose naturopathic and other alternative medicine that the government still doesn't recognise, even though some of it is based in hard medical science and has trained professionals who've gone to medical school. But given how long it's taken them to do this, I highly doubt such measures are being considered. So people who have no money to afford healthcare but who are extremely ill can start new jobs, open businesses and have good qualities of life? Hmm, perhaps, we should talk to some third world countries on that. I'm sure they have excellent healthcare, just as you'd like, the kind that no one can afford and that no one gets because the government and the people refuse to help them. Only in that case, they honestly don't have the money to do so. How much does america spend on foolish things like sports? How many times does it needlessly get itself involved in wars to prove one point or another/ That money could be used to feed the hungry, house the poor, provide healthcare and education etc. If medicare really is cut, than that is indeed a bad thing. But it's not as if Bush didn't have his people who were very vocal about caring less for the elderly. So in that sense, the it's just being continued here.
I saw this too, and it made me laugh. A little exaggerated maybe, as satire is meant to be, but with valid points.
This topic should be moved to the joke board... no, it isn't funny!
Well, then to the "let's talk" board... no, I'd rather not talk with such stupidity!
Ah, I have it: move it to the trash heap were it belongs.
Bob
The ironic thing is, it's probably people living on Welfare, taking everything they can get from the government, who complain the loudest when the government tries to make changes meant to help us all.
Hi Tiff. You address the stupidity of American people. What makes you think that America has the corner on stupidity just because it is America? I hear this every week from my band mates and it's the same old story. One of my fellow colleagues even has gone so far as to bash American architecture, saying that 50 percent of buildings in this country are new and that we have no historical sense of ourselves. Have fun in Greece when you leave this country. I hope you will enjoy the fact that the Greek economy is at a standstill because of government workers and the people having an entitlement mentality. This has caused the Greek treasury to be broke. Good luck. To Becky, I understand your point about people on government assistance complaining the loudest, yet this does not automatically nullify what I've written in this post because I know many people who would rather work than receive SSI or SSDI. The built-in disinsentives and punitive measures in these programs almost guarantee a much higher unemployment rate among the blind along with other factors that I can address in a subsequent post.
The fact that they try to defy logic and bawk at receiving things that could actually aid them is a pretty good starting point to explain it. I can't and won't say that america has no history at all, but I find it quite ironic when such a young country sticks it's nose in other people's cultures and forces it's political views on them. As for Hellas, you're absolutely right about the economy and i think that both PASOK and New Democracy are to blame. The former, during previous administrations, gave extraordinary amounts to the people when the government didn't have anything (and the latter simply stole, squandered, lied and who knows what they did in their policies? regardless, it's a very bad situation, so much so that we might have to call on the IMF to help us out of it if the EU leaders don't come up with something... And then I'm worried we'll have even more debt, since we'll owe whomever helps us... Ironically, we're having a similar debate in terms of unpopularity with the new tax and other economic measures recently proposed by Prime Minister Papandreou and Parliament. So we'll see how that goes. I don't know where the people think the money will come from.
I agree with blbobby.
This is delusional, pure and simple.
Hi Tiffanitsa. I would like to address the idea of America as the world police for a moment and ask the following question. How do you feel about President Obama telling Israel that it cannot expand Jerusalem or build anymore settlements in its own territory?
I think it's about time America stops kissing up to them. I side with Palestine on this issue in any case.
So can I interpret that to mean that you're in favor of the United States having a hand in Israel's policy as long as that policy is pro-palestinian?
I agree with Ocean Dream, <lol>.
Bob
No. They should stay out of it entirely. It has nothing to do with them, or at least, it shouldn't. But when do they ever stay out of anything?
They? Well Tiff, you're still part of this country whether you like it or not. I think the proper word in this case would be "we." Grins.
It's not my fault that I was born here or live here. How can I say "we" when I don't consider myself one? Okay, if I was getting really local, I might say we in this town or we in this house. But that's a bit different. And I certainly never approved of american actions. Saying we would imply either that I did or that I hold loyalties to the country.
The author of this post is obviously trying to fill our heads with a bunch of republican, Bible-bumping, hogwash. I am disgusted.
That is all.
Country Singer, just out of curiosity, what exactly is your objection to Obama's healthcare reform? And I don't mean the things you've been fed by others; we all have heard those lines too.
See, the problem with the healthcare bill, as someone pointed out, is that it is practically impossible to get a neutral, facts only, assessment of it. It always has to be painted in good vs evil colors, depending whose web site you read. America has the most expensive healthcare in the world, yet its quality is rated outside of the top 25. And socialism is such a dirty word even if it is, in fact, in some cases a very valid idea. No system of government is perfect. Yes, too much incentive to not work, too much catering to lack of ambition or lazyness can harm an economy, but here we live in a country where companies like IBM lay off 3000 workers in the last month alone, ship their jobs overseas and give their CEO 22 million dollars in sallaries, and the people site with freedom and dignity and let this go without a complaints. I´d like to see the idea of freedom feeding you or aiding you while you starve while the rich corporate guy at IBM buys his third island and a jet to get there.
Communism is a beautiful idea in theory, we are all equal and so on and so forth, but people do not work like that, we are inherently lazy and need incentives, to work harder will earn you more, and here is the balance you must find. To charge the middle class 3000 or 4000 or 300000 dollars for a hospital bill while the drug companies return record profit and give millions of dollars to the politicians and political campaigns, that is called briary and corruption. It exists everywhere, but here it seems to be condoned, as long as it is rich people who do it.
May be the bil goes too far, or not far enough, but it is time to change things around, try something new, the old system is not working.
As for Israel, they are building in a piece of land that no one excepts themselves, and perhaps the U.S., consider theirs, so by definition it is not their internal affair.
I have often little sympathy with what many muslims are doing either, so sometimes I just wish they´d figure this out and let the rest of us worry about our own problems, because no one is interested in peace, not the Israelis and not the Palestinians either, or at least those in power aren´t.
truly a beautiful post. It was well-balanced, well thought-out and explained alot. I agree with everything that you've said, including the internal affair remark. what I meant by it not being america's problem is just that. however, it certainly does involve the neighbouring countries etc and the fighting could have devistating affects on the region I'm sure. As for the healthcare bill, like I said, that was beautifully put, so I really have nothing else to add at this point.
thank you, Margorp; I agree completely!!
If we looked at facts rather than bashing each other's brains out, we could find a good balance.
Thank you Margorp. I'd have to say, if this argument were totally based on just opinion, I might consider it more. I don't completely agree with the Democrats myself, but I'm definitely, so far, in support of this bill. Presenting it as if it were hard fact just ruins the credibility to me. Just my thoughts.
Margorp you're making some sense.
However all of ya go online and look it up, I had a copy of last November's version. You don't have to believe, just get the document and read what it says. There aren't any death panels or other bogeyman stories in there. The crying shame is the bleeding heart republicans who "identify with the rich" like a pack of sixties overfed privileged radicals did for their groups, won't do anything useful, aka contribute to the debate with a plan of their own which addresses the concerns of middle income.
And make no mistake about it: They don't really think the CEO types are competent or they would be expecting more from them. Nope, they treat them as a very thpecial group of window lickers.
They don't represent capitalism, they represent a mercantile system of economy. Instead of a country colonizing and sponsors being paid from the profits, we have corporations colonizing instead. Other world powers have emploded for this, so why not join them, I guess.
And this third-world boom is gonna blow up in these lickers' faces, because as I said in another post, China and India and the like aren't going to stay on the bottom. They're already working on investing in education and healthcare. The citizens won't work for dirt for long. But since these wankers can't really produce, but are just using a loophole while it exists, it'll blow up like the frozenBroccoliOnAStick.com fly-by-nights of the late nineties.
The only thing that's changed is instead of the poor being the victim, in the minds of the Right - I dare not call them either conservative or capitalist - the rich are the victim. The way they play up the victim really gives those elitists at university from twenty years ago a run for their money.
It really does make me sick.
There's a reason I don't get more involved in politics...
I see your point. There's a reason why I stick to Greek ones. One set of headaches is enough for me.
haahahahahaha country singer that is the 100 percent truth. ahhahahah good one :).
Interesting thread. I disagree with the person who said that people living on Welfare are the ones who speak up the loudest during times of change. If you ask me, I think it is those who are not even registered to vote who seem to make the loudest complaints. I simply do not understand how these people feel as though they have the right to complain when they are not even registered to vote in the first place.
That, I agree with. If you don't take the time out to vote, and get your word in, how can you complain if and when things don't turn out how you would like?
you stupid bunch of selfish fools. that's all i got to say on the matter. denying people health care whilst others get it who can afford it? with your way of thinking why not just round up the poor and kill them then you won't have to worry at all! jees i can't believe the abject crap i'm hearing from people who are supposed to have a brain. you stupid selfish self-absorbed bunch of fools you should be ashamed of yourselves.
I'm not going to be ashamed of myself for having an opinion, or let myself be called basically a murderer, which is what you are doing. To get a good look at some of the affects of socialized medicine on a nation, look at the Los Angeles Times article written on October 12th, 2007 which talks about how people are dying in their own excrament while waiting to be operated upon. I'm amazed at the vitriolic invective brought on by this post, but it is the rant board after all. Let's also address the question of unions that was brought up earlier in this thread and take one example. The automobile industry implimented the 30 and out provision which provides workers with a life-long pension after being at the job for only 30 years. Potentially a worker could leave the industry at 48 after working there for 30 years and receive life-long benefits that could be better spent on research and development and perhaps investment as well as hiring new people who actually wanted to work for more than 30 years. It's no wonder why the auto manufacturors collapsed under their own weight.
Eddie
I wasn't going to waste my time with this thread, chocking it up as a lost cause.
However, Lord Voldemort's post prompted me to say: "right on"!
If we want to pay for health care, cut out the corporate welfare and bailouts and it'll be a breeze.
And: while we aren't on the subject, the t-baggers want government out of their lives while they cash their social security checks. How many of you are on the government dole? I am.
Bob
well lets face it with every person you deny access to medison you may as well give them a mercy killing. the poor, the turminally ill, nice to know that in the name of liberty they are going to die just so that you don't have to pay.
sorry but i live in the UK i know what our nhs is like thanks and i can't believe some people believe some crap that they read. again, what a complete bunch of fools. no it's not perfect but it's a damb site better overall than just saying to people fend for themselves? what about cancer sufferers? oh why not just kill them as it's too expensive for them to live they can't pay the pain is too much so why not just kill them. ok so that's them sorted who shall we target next?
Ya all you UK lot could use some free dental coverage next! Got some of the nastyest looking teeth on the planet or maybe that's because they hadn't invented tooth paste over there yet.
actually it's heavily subsidised. so come on then try and come out with something really intelligent i'll give you a decade to come up with something although i might get bored between now and then.
Lord voldemort, while I'm completely in agreement with you that allowing people to not receive healthcare is barberic and wrong, there are far better ways of expressing this than simply insulting the other side as you did in your first post. this is a logical fallacy (ad hominem) and weakens our argument. that said, you do make good points. I, for one, do believe in euthanasia in extreme cases, but never simply as a means to avoid expense.
eddie, what is wrong with working for 30 years, so long as you're not a slacker? Some people would actually like to enjoy their lives when they're young, and it's not as if they haven't put in any effort at all, especially in an industry like that. Also, they could spend their time, if they wanted, raising children and being their for them, helping the community, maybe even starting a business of their own.
Texas Shawn: I'm committing said fallacy but... I think you should look more closely at what your state is doing to education before putting anyone else down. I'd rather have bad teeth and be intelligent than have perfect teeth and have no clue what's going on because my state legislature decided to ruin public education by picking and choosing what should be taught in schools to meet their religious agenda while ignoring facts and culture. Sorry for the red herring.
Last time I checked, having bad teeth didn't have anything to do with health care. Sorry, but if you want to prove a point, saying your opposition has bad teeth really shows that you don't have anything else to say that is valid to the argument.
Hello Tiffanitsa. Though I disagree vehemently with you, I would like to thank you for pointing out some of the ad hominum attacks that have been going on and trying to debate on the merits of the subject. The problem with labor relations in this country is that employers are often painted as greedy bastards who care absolutely nothing for the workers. There is a constant push and pull with employees being whipped up in a hysteria of resentment and bitterness. This gives rise to a let's screw the rich man mentality in which people will come to work and drink on the job, ETC. My father worked as a freight driver at American Airlines for 10 years and saw first hand what union picketters are capable of. Let us remember that in 1973, the Supreme Court authorized violent union action and intimidation tactics as a legitimate recourse in labor disputes.
Eddie
Here's a documentary on Canada's health care system.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/54d2hp
Try looking at Japan or Korea.
All the countries coming up in the technology sphere either have, or are putting in place, some form of standardized health care systems. That's one reason companies go over there; there's no burden of insurance on the employer.
But the problem is, you who tow this particular line, tend to drag out the worst example you can find and highlight that. That's like earning a D minus in class, and telling your father you're just fine because Johnny earned a zero.
Uh-uh.
Ah, but listen to the documentary I just uploaded and there is another example of a health care system gone broke. In Canada, people have to go through red tape to get emergency or life saving care, such as the man who had multiple heart attacks or the woman who has breast cancer as detailed in this program. I'm sorry that these examples aren't good enough for you simply because you disagree with their perspective on the issue. How can you say that there's no burden on employers in countries such as South Korea and Japan when the funds for these systems come from taxes?
Eddie
As I've said earlier, I don't follow american politics 99% of the time. However, this is truly tragic, the fact that any government would allow a union to act violently and to use intimidation tactics to get their way. It reminds me of spoiled children throwing a tantrom. But I do know about picketters, since they've brought greece to a stanstill several times during general strikes that have lasted at least 24 hours and smaller ones which, along with protests, have blocked the roads. . I'm very much against this, particularly in areas like transportation, where the service in question affects not only the jobs of the picketters but other jobs and tourism as well. This is not! the way to fix the economy and help us out of this mess. anyway, what are taxes for, if not to help the people? Right now, there's a bill that's just passed parliament which has raised taxes in order to help the economy and people are bawking. In america, they bawk over healthcare reform. Yes, I can certainly understand the need and desire to take home every cent or euro that you make. I also know that, in the U.S. the federal incomes tax isn't technically legal or on the books. But if people in any country wish to receive things and to have a high standard of living, or sometimes, if they want a way out of a major national crisis with as little help from other countries as possible, they need to make sacrifices. all of us who receive anything from the government do so from tax payer's money.
I have yet to say those examples aren't good enough. I believe I compared your D minus to Canada's Zero. I think even for the outcome based oddballs, zero is pretty bad, so not sure where you get me defending them.
I've heard this line going upwards of thirty years now, ever since 1980 when Reagan took office.
And they are right, about the worst example in class *Canada*.
Now, many modern health systems use not a single payer like your pet Canada (the earner of a zero, didn't I say?) but they use private carriers in a managed atmosphere. That means unified standards, for one, and any time you unify standards on anything, immediately profits go up because you are working with one set of parts.
What happened after the fight between Edison and Westinghouse? AC won out and New York went electric in short order.
This allegation of destroyed systems came up when a man probably both you and I could respect, Dwight D. Eisenhower, in the 1950s did the unthinkable "big-government" act and installed an interstate highway system. It's not single-payer, but companies bid into the system and do construction.
Immediately, transcontinental transport of goods was possible, immediately rendering profit.
In a similar manner, if you read the health bill itself (aka download it and read it), you will note that private carriers will bid into the system and provide coverage. This is *not* a Hillary Clinton 1993 bill which crashed as it only could have in an economy structured as ours is.
And I will tell you this, as a software engineer, when unified standards are applied (tcp/ip, xml, xslt, even html, just to name a very few), companies profit massively, and innovation is not stifled but encouraged. Imagine where the Internet would be now, if every few server hops you had to change protocols. OK most people don't know what that means, but it would be confusing, expensive and very inefficient.
If you have ever worked for an employer that has employees nationwide, you see in an insurance meeting just how nonstandardized the care we now have is. Even definitions of some rather basic terms vary from state to state; your son or daughter goes to another state and gets injured at a sporting event, the coverage in that state may well be different than in yours. That's far from your employer's fault, and often not even the fault of the insurer. If you call yourself a conservative, you probably laughed at Clinton's sorry confusion over the meaning of the word "is" during the Kenneth Starr hearings.
Well the health care system is worse. Definitions of terms all over the place, contradicting by jurisdiction, man, my predecessors in software from the 1980s with all their proprietary formats that gave people headaches could never be said to cause this level of havoc.
You ask a great point: Tax burden.
You're paying for it, right now. Every time your premium goes up, it's because of the many uninsured Americans you pass on the street. Some on here have tried to make you not look at it phiscolly, I won't do that. contrary to what you may believe, I'm no bleeding heart. But there is a problem with our system, and systems with bugs in them need to be fixed. Unified standards is a great way to unveil untold innovation, for which this country has been known.
Do I wish it could have been different? Absolutely, and here's how. I wish the republicans had engaged in the debate by putting forth ideas to rectify the situation. They had two branches of government and some rather ambitious people, for six out of the eight years of the Bush administration, during which government grew, it did not shrink. Incidentally where were you when they grew Medicare in 2003? That, I'll tell you, resembles far closer to the European model than anything put forth in this bill.
As to what you said about 2010, I think you're right: we'll get the checks and balances in by having some of the seats taken by the Right. That is exactly the type of friction which can result in compromises targeting the widest possible audience. If they want my vote, they need to innovate. And this time around, probably quit horsing around, sit down and get to work. Get some solutions out that *fix* the problem.
Did you look at McCain's plan? I'll give him credit where it's due. It was pretty well laid out. Minor problem: Most of the country's working population wouldn't be able to afford it.
However, stop looking at Johnny Canada who got a zero and trying to tell your father that your D minus is just fine. Start taking a look at other health care systems in the developing world, and if you really call yourself a conservative, take a look at Dwight D. Eisenhower from the 1950s - the man who put more money into math and science education, more into domestic labor, and who started the Space program.
Kennedy didn't put the man on the moon; Eisenhower did.
He was man enough to realize you have to invest in order to get your return.
The argument could easily be made that the success of the arms race in the 1980s was not Reagan, but Eisenhower's investment in engineering and science in the 1950s, a time when some major discoveries and innovation were made. All of which took, you guessed it, investment.
As it is, you're paying for the health caresystem you have now. It's not a matter of "Can we afford to do this?" It's a matter of how, because guess what: You already are doing it, and have been for a long time.
Another perfect example of this is the so-called Junta of 1967-74. They were extremely conservative by many standards, even during the time of failed normalisation and liberalisation, before Mr. papadopoulos was overthrown by one of his own colleagues who was, in my opinion, a true monster. But despite what anyone might say about them in general, Mr. Makarezos, who headed the economy during all seven years, did an excellent job with it, providing jobs, construction, tourism and electricity, plumming and roads to the places that didn't have them. He did this by, yep, investing. I didn't quite understand what this meant until reading this post, though I'd tried to find more info on the economic school being followed. I was very confused, wondering why/how on earth they'd do something seemingly so socialistic when they were totally against socialism and the word communism could get you imprisoned. But apparently, they must've had companies invest as is being proposed now in this american healthcare bill, instead of taking directly from the people. Sorry, but if the ultraconservative Junta could do something like this, Republicans in america, who aren't even close to that, don't have a leg to stand on.
I understand that bashing weakens the argument...but you republicans are nothing but of greedy, money-grubbing, pompus bastards. You can just take the old testamint, bend over, and cram it up your ass. Ah, but first you'd have to remove your heads from that particular body cavity.
For those of you who happen to vote republican and are not a bunch of conservative nut jobs, I apologize for this whole topic as it is a disaster.
I feel the love in the air and give margorp a big wet sloppy kiss on the cheek!
lol
That was harsh of me...but I just cannot stand the bullshit.
No political party is perfect, but this is just crazy.
no nore can i. it's pothetic and childish and i can't believe that so-called sivelised people will even defend this crap.
So long as you remember that not all republicans (or independent sorts like myself booooohahahaha) follow this new thinking.
This new mechanism, started by Fallwell and kind in the 1980s was originally funneled by, and supportive of, the tobacco industry. Ironically, all their religious institutions had smoking bans on campus that would make you think 'Hello California', - not the least of which was Bob Jones University, the primary donations funnel from Phillip Morris to the Pat Robertson campaign of 1988. And it was the Democratic President Clinton, who, in his own state did not pardon or commute a death sentence on a mentally retarded individual. Common in the South, perhaps, but what is the line you generally hear from the left?
And when NAFTA was passed in 1993, it was not republicans. Remember this is before the supposed dawning of reforms in 1994. Nope, the Labor Union left voted for free trade, aka export of labor jobs overseas.
I use these apparent contradictions to illustrate an aspect to our political system: Watch how your people (if you have a people) vote, rather than listen to what they say. The left is no more in real support of the labor unions or the disenfranchised than is the right in real support of your religion or family "values".
Nope, the left will sell your jobs overseas, and the right will contribute to family breakups via financial disincentives aka a very broken health care system. Finances is the number one reason couples break up, and health care costs have surpassed food costs for the average family. All this while insurance companies (not doctors, or hospitals, or even pharmaceuticals) have profited to untold proportions.
As I've said, I'm a classic capitalist (real Adam Smith / Thomas Payne, not this mercantile business we have now). so I'm by no means against incentive by profits.
There are specific
However the reason the right may tell you these things, is the only control mechanism they have on the American population is via faith, perhaps Christianity 5.0 or something, whereby they have extracted certain paragraphs and eliminated others, to support their end.
Us independent sorts are not really the wishy washy sorts we're made out to be, generally we are waiting to be convinced by compelling evidence.
This may backfire on the Right at some point if people of faith ever figure out their personal faith is being used to lead them around like a bull with a ring through the nose. If and when that happens, the elite right will be in for a backlash they didn't expect.
Look at what happened on the left with Obama: Everyone thought the old guard Clinton getup was a shoe-in, the stylized pretext at pseudo-marxist leanings. BTW, there's lots of corporate money over there, do you a Google and find out), and you have a relatively centrist left democrat, Obama. Anyone referring to him as a Marxist or socialist may well be good at calling names, but hasn't read Karl Marx, or studied socialism.
There are new faces on the Right as well, now, look at Romney, look at the new governor of Louisiana (his name escapes me right now). These are innovators who are not married to the 80's propaganda machine called the 'christian right' and if you're using speech, I spelled that with a small c.
Reagan's money paid to medical personnel to conduct ads about how superior our health care system is did work ... until recently when those same people have come out and said they were embarrased to have been involved. Look and see where the AMA and similar organizations stand on health care.
Also, all bills are subject to subsequent amendments, so nothing is set in stone. Remember this is a house resolution (HR), this was not an executive order. In other words, it came from the second branch of your government, the legislature. This was not Obama's sole act; this was the work of your local representatives.
Another one for the argument your vote for your local reps is more important than the President, but I digress. Anyway, look it up, give it a read.
The era in which the priests and apothecaries known as Fox, CNN, or TBN, or Any other media outlet are your primary source of information is over. You now can get direct access to original documents.
They can scare you about the size of the bill, when they conveniently leave out that much of legislative action is similarly large, to clarify points for the courts to interpret, and provide concessions via phillabuster and amendment, which have been with parlimentary law since at least the 12th century in England and the Magnecarta, from which we got our Constitution.
Firstly I'd like to say thank you to Eddie for that informative documentary on the current state of health care in Canada. I can't say as I necessarily learned a great deal, but certainly it confirmed some suspicions that I already had. For one thing it confirmed that all is not perfect with health care in Canada. Though I I wasn't ever under the illusion that things were perfect. After all, that's something that I doubt any nation could claim.
however the biggest thing it confirmed to me was how ill-informed you, and indeed most anti health care reform supporters actually are. You offer this documentary by way of showing that what the Democrats are trying to do now will ruin the nation but completely fail to grasp the fact that what's being proposed for America is nothing like the system that Canada has. It's a bit like trying to prove that an apple isn't green by holding up a banana. America isn't getting universal health care in the sense that it is meant in countries like Canada or Britain. What you are actually going to have is an all-inclusive private system and the only exceptions to that are going to be the extra people on medicair who will be getting something like what us Brits would call nationalized health care.
You see I've been doing a lot of reading about this issue, I've asked questions and I've watched TV debates and here's the thing, the one thing that nobody seems to be able to do is tell me what is so wrong with these proposals. And by that I don't mean satiring a political speech to offer a bias opinion as to what this means for America, or spouting all the nonsense about this being against the constitution etc. I mean real concrete reasons as to what is wrong with the idea of health care reform in this country. What is it that you actually have against it? Because I've heard a lot from people who're against it yet, at the same time I've heard nothing. Or at least nothing that means anything to me.
Last Monday on Facebook for example I saw a number of statuses of my friends making statements along the lines of "president Obama is destroying this country" yet nobody was willing to say anything more substantive than that. So after a couple of weeks of this I can only conclude that you lot that are against reform in this country aren't really against it at all. how can you be, you clearly have no idea of what it actually means. I mean it isn't much to ask is it? Tell me why health care reform is bad. What is it that you as an individual don't like. is it the thought that taxes will go up some? Is it the thought that all those damned Mexicans might now be entitled to something in this country? hell is it just that you don't see why richer people in this nation should be forced to contribute some more that the countries poorer citizens might have some decent health care? I mean come on. Don't spout platitudes at me, stuff you've heard on the TV but don't really understand what it means and can't be bothered to research because if it's being said by a republican politician then it must be right. Tell me, Why don't you like the idea of health care reform.
Dan.
I've got a headache. Going back to greek politics. Americans confuse and frustrate me.
We do? Well we are confusing and frustrating people...wait, you were born in America so aren't you one of us? Oh my you're stuck!
llol
And I apologize for my ranting but I am sic of the right wingers ranting and raving about things they do not understand.
I'm legally one but that's all. You all know where my loyalties lie. If someone doesn't feel commeradery with or doesn't feel any kind of love or patriotism for a nation, I don't think they should call themselves that nation's ethnicity unless it's in legal terms. It would be disrespectful to do so otherwise I think. I'll be leaving as soon as I'm able, so I'm not stuck for good, just for now. Also, I'm sick of the right wing bullshit too. got more of it on facebook.
You can get the bills here
HRs 3590 and 4872 ...
I totally agree with Harp. Come on, now. Your side of the argument really needs to at least make us think a little.
O no, the health care system in Canada is nowhere near perfect. I live here, so I would know, but it's quite nice to be able to go to the doctor without stresing about an outrageous bill. It's nice to know that we're not going to die if we can't afford surgery.
I echo Margorp's last post completely; I'm sick and tired of right wingers bitching about things they obviously don't understand.
Everybody's take on everything is going to be different. That doesn't mean others are wrong just because they have a different opinion.
Man, some people just really can't seem to handle any kind of change.
Of course it's gonna be a separate opinion/view from my own but I get these people hollering in my face about all this crap.
exactly.
well that's what it is basically crap. from the lets get richer croud only. like i said, this is the mentality who is quite happy to kill off the terminally ill just so they don't have to pay for it. sorry but am totally baffled by people's ability to be outright stupid and selfish.
In answer to Harp’s post, I think the biggest opposition I have seen regarding health care reform comes from those who actually have decent health care coverage and are afraid they are going to lose their coverage. For example, if someone is taking a rare cancer drug, they may be afraid that they will no longer have access to this expensive drug if major changes were made to the health care system. Research and new technology both contribute to the rising costs of health care. When universal designs are put in place to curb spending, I think it is only natural that people will wonder if the funding for the new expensive treatment they are on will be eliminated as a way to reduce the costs associated with providing health care.
I also think that some people are afraid of what will happen with more government control over our health care system. I mean the government already plays an important role in regulating our health care system and it’s already messed up. So what exactly is going to happen to our health care system when the government will play an even bigger role in regulating it? Will the health care system become an even bigger mess when the government becomes more involved in it? Those who have been living under the status quo for the past twenty or thirty years will naturally be resistant to change no matter what those changes might be. So I think a simple fear of change plays a part in it as well.
And then there are those who are skeptical that the reforms will actually work to help solve the problems of our current health care system. Some people believe the way to change the health care system in the United States is through a change in our cultural values rather than sweeping regulation reforms. I think the way we view life as well as death plays a significant role in how we view health care in our country. In some societies death is viewed as a part of life, while in our society it seems to be seen more as an end to life. And therefore, more emphasis is placed on saving a person’s life rather than simply allowing a person to die of natural causes.
I hope this post answers your question about why someone would be opposed to health care reform. Personally, I’m still debating how the new bill will affect the health care system in our country. I definitely agree with those who say that something needed to be done, but only time will tell if we have made the right choice.
Wow. I never thought of it that way.
What an eloquent and well-thought-out post. I like how you presented the ideas of those opposed to the bill without bashing etc. Very clear and it does make alot of sense. I've never understood the fear that so many Americans have of dying, just as I've never understood their obsession with never showing signs of age or of women never teling their ages. Death and old age are normal parts of life.
People fear death because they fear an afterlife. Isn't it silly?
why fear an afterlife? that's the best and most interesting part of it all.
I guess if you believe in such things, that is true.