Ok so here is the thing. It has come to my attention that the liberals want to “have their cake and eat it too.” That was a statement once used to indicate that people are greedy and selfish and they don’t want to use something because they like having it but the whole point to having it is to use it.
Better yet let me use the Bible for an example.
In the old testament we read about how David lusted after another man’s wife (Uriah). Now this woman was, Apparently, quite the “hottie” and so David conspired to kill Uriah so that David could have Uriah’s wife.
One day a prophet came and confronted David over his sinful behavior but used an allegorical tale to get the point across.
The prophet told David a story about how there was a man who had a whole bunch of sheep; this man had a neighbor who only had one sheep.
One day the man with a whole bunch of sheep wanted to throw a party, in order to feed his guests he stole the one sheep from his neighbor and killed and cooked that sheep instead of one of his own.
When David declared that to be a heinous act the prophet pointed out to David that the man with many sheep was David himself, the man with one sheep was Uriah. Because David, even though he had a lot of wives AND concubines, stole the ONE wife of Uriah (in such a way that there was no way to return the stolen property).
You see? The man in this story, much like David himself, but more importantly to MY purpose this is the same concept of having it and eating it too. (or maybe it’s “the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence“…?)
David had everything he could want and then some. Uriah had only the one wife. But David was not content to enjoy what he had, he had to have everything of everyone else‘s.
That is what I see the liberals doing. They make claims and accusations about what horrors the conservatives are unleashing, wanting the people to “rise up” against the “totalitarians” of conservatism. (Hillary Clinton was quoted as saying “it is good for the American people to be able to question their gov’t” during Bush‘s presidency)
But when they do EXACTLY the same thing/s that they whined about conservatives doing they claim that they only have the best interests of the people in mind and any move to challenge the appropriateness of their actions are all just scare tactics and conservative bullying. (and we need to stop all these hateful people who dare to speak out against the government as per Hillary Clinton et al)
Which is to say… Why is it o.k. for Hillary Clinton to question and cast aspersions on Bush and his administration but it is NOT o.k. to do the same now that a democrat is in office? When she did it to Bush it was patriotic. When it is done to Obama it is terrorism or racism. I mean what is up with that?
Points in case…
Q: Why was President Bush so “evil”?
A: he got us into a war in Iraq. (but wait we are still there a year and a half after Obama took over) yeah but he is doing it for the “right reasons”. HUH?
Or…
A: Bush paid off those big banks and fat cats on wall street. (re: T.A.R.P. and stimulus)
Well now wait a minute, Obama spent TWICE as much or more, in his first two months, on exactly the same thing.
How about…
A: Bush put in the patriot act and listened to our phone calls.
Well now there you have me yeah he did that, oh but wait, Obama REINSTITUED the patriot act and now he listens to our phone calls AND reads our emails.
(that’s right the patriot act was due to expire and Obama not only went out of his way to continue it, he expanded it.)
A: Bush had prisoners at Guantanamo bay. Yep and they are still there under Obama’s watch too
A: There was not enough transparency in Bush’s admin. And Obama’s health care bill was all out in the open? I don’t think so. Even the liberal media hacks had to admit that Obama was not having an open gov’t there.
A: There isn’t enough bipartisanship in Bush’s admin.
Again looking at the healthcare bill which was passed without A Single republican vote…
A: Bush forced congress to pass bills he wanted but congress wanted to look at closer.
Funny but while I do not remember Bush “forcing” anything through congress, I DO remember Obama PUBLICLY berating congressional republicans that they “HAD TO” pass his stimulus package because “every day that we wait a million more Americans suffer” and then after he PUBLICLY FORCED congress to pass the bill HE wanted over their objections he took a three day vacation before he signed it. So apparently it was O.K. by him that three MILLION Americans (his hubris not mine) would suffer so he could have a vacation two months into his presidency. But congress HAD to pass it RIGHT AWAY without really looking at it so “Americans would not have to suffer” ?
So I guess in the end I have to say… I do not understand. Why was Bush so awful, while Obama is so great? They did the same things they do the same things, the same problems exist. And that is what makes me think the democrats are all simply hate filled.
Think about it. If Bush was evil for it then Obama should be even more so. I do NOT think that Bush did everything right but I do think he did a reasonable job under trying circumstances. But Obama is doing all the things wrong that Bush did wrong, he isn’t facing the same problems (he has it easy) and he is getting a pass where Bush didn‘t but Obama has none of the redeeming qualities of Bush.
He is a poor leader where I thought Bush was a good one, Obama has shown himself to be filled with deceit and coercion while I believe Bush treated us as fairly and honestly as he could.
May 19, 2010
you GO Arizona. you totally rock.
About three weeks ago I heard about a new law in Arizona that dealt with the subject of illegal immigration. The gist of what I heard was that Arizona had passed a law to try to stop the Illegal Immigrants from, well, breaking the law. And I applauded Arizona. I was proud again to be able to claim Arizona as my home state.
Then, almost immediately, The rest of the country started in on Arizona. “this law is racist and will lead to profiling.” “This is akin to the old soviet union or east Germany.” “papers please.”
These were the kinds of things they were saying. I was proud to see Arizonans standing up to the rest of the country/world and standing firm.
I was also disappointed in the rest of the country and in certain parts of Arizona where they were so vehemently attacking what Arizona was trying to do. But I started wondering, “what does that law really say?” so I researched it.
I found Arizona sb 1070 and read it. And now even more than before I applaud what Arizona has done.
When I read the law the very first thing I thought was “all the people griping about it clearly have not READ it.” But then I thought that can’t be true. Well last night I found out that sadly I was right. I heard interviews done with several politicians including Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano and they all said “I have not read it.” or “I have not reviewed it” or some other statement to that point. And yet, to a man (as it were), they all denounced it.
“This law is evil.” “It is unconstitutional.” “It is a travesty.”
No I will tell you what is the travesty. Our federal government who understands, even though they have NOT read the bill, that the reason the bill was passed was because they were not doing their job and they are offended that anyone would call them on it like this. In other words they’re pride was hurt. They are ashamed and so they are lashing out. This is not the way that our government is supposed to work.
I am ashamed that we have politicians in Washington who are so self centered that they would respond like this.
What I find offensive is that the “ruling elite” think they know better.
I am reminded of an episode of Frasier. Frasier is supposed to be this great mind, educated at Harvard super smart. At least that s what he thinks. But in this one episode he is proven *GASP* Wrong. And he makes the comment that “when [he] is wrong the world doesn’t make sense.” after all he is the snobby upper crust ultra smart ultra learned elite.
That is the way our government seems to think. “I went to Harvard (or Yale or Brown or whatever snobbish school.) so I ALWAYS have to be right. And if I am always right then if you disagree with me then you are wrong.”
The thought that they could be wrong NEVER occurs to these people. And so since they are always right then when the MAJORITY of the country disagrees with them then that is merely proof that all those people are even incapable of caring for themselves. So “we must do it for them.” And we are seeing this in their attitudes even now. “we have to pass health care because we know what they need.” “We have to stop this silliness in Arizona because they do not know better.” and so on. Never mind that people are LITERALLY dying due to the inaction of these people. That must be what is best because that is what they have deemed.
I read an article posted by someone from the New York Times. The article tried to downplay the events going on in Arizona. But I was very gratified to see that the majority of the people who responded to his article were not so easily taken in and they challenged him on several of his “mistakes” like how when he used statistics to back himself up by showing how there has been a “decline” in crime rates while there has been a jump in illegal aliens, the figures he used were from two different sources with the source from “back when it was bad” being specific to Phoenix Arizona and the source from Now that it is good being a general survey of the country. Actual sources that were from the same time frame and same area would have shown a marked increase.
Then, almost immediately, The rest of the country started in on Arizona. “this law is racist and will lead to profiling.” “This is akin to the old soviet union or east Germany.” “papers please.”
These were the kinds of things they were saying. I was proud to see Arizonans standing up to the rest of the country/world and standing firm.
I was also disappointed in the rest of the country and in certain parts of Arizona where they were so vehemently attacking what Arizona was trying to do. But I started wondering, “what does that law really say?” so I researched it.
I found Arizona sb 1070 and read it. And now even more than before I applaud what Arizona has done.
When I read the law the very first thing I thought was “all the people griping about it clearly have not READ it.” But then I thought that can’t be true. Well last night I found out that sadly I was right. I heard interviews done with several politicians including Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano and they all said “I have not read it.” or “I have not reviewed it” or some other statement to that point. And yet, to a man (as it were), they all denounced it.
“This law is evil.” “It is unconstitutional.” “It is a travesty.”
No I will tell you what is the travesty. Our federal government who understands, even though they have NOT read the bill, that the reason the bill was passed was because they were not doing their job and they are offended that anyone would call them on it like this. In other words they’re pride was hurt. They are ashamed and so they are lashing out. This is not the way that our government is supposed to work.
I am ashamed that we have politicians in Washington who are so self centered that they would respond like this.
What I find offensive is that the “ruling elite” think they know better.
I am reminded of an episode of Frasier. Frasier is supposed to be this great mind, educated at Harvard super smart. At least that s what he thinks. But in this one episode he is proven *GASP* Wrong. And he makes the comment that “when [he] is wrong the world doesn’t make sense.” after all he is the snobby upper crust ultra smart ultra learned elite.
That is the way our government seems to think. “I went to Harvard (or Yale or Brown or whatever snobbish school.) so I ALWAYS have to be right. And if I am always right then if you disagree with me then you are wrong.”
The thought that they could be wrong NEVER occurs to these people. And so since they are always right then when the MAJORITY of the country disagrees with them then that is merely proof that all those people are even incapable of caring for themselves. So “we must do it for them.” And we are seeing this in their attitudes even now. “we have to pass health care because we know what they need.” “We have to stop this silliness in Arizona because they do not know better.” and so on. Never mind that people are LITERALLY dying due to the inaction of these people. That must be what is best because that is what they have deemed.
I read an article posted by someone from the New York Times. The article tried to downplay the events going on in Arizona. But I was very gratified to see that the majority of the people who responded to his article were not so easily taken in and they challenged him on several of his “mistakes” like how when he used statistics to back himself up by showing how there has been a “decline” in crime rates while there has been a jump in illegal aliens, the figures he used were from two different sources with the source from “back when it was bad” being specific to Phoenix Arizona and the source from Now that it is good being a general survey of the country. Actual sources that were from the same time frame and same area would have shown a marked increase.
SB 1070 thoughts
Okay so people are getting up in a tizzy about the Arizona law sb 1070.
They say such things as…
“oh this will lead to profiling”
“oh no it’s discriminatory.”
“ what about these people’s constitutional rights?”
Here’s the thing, first of all I do want to apologize if you are profiled. BUT I remember one time I was “pulled over” by a police officer because I was a young guy who was dropped off by my mother to go to work at Burger King. He stopped me because he thought I might be a runaway because of my age… isn’t that profiling? I was stopped because of my age! He said so himself. But I recognized, even then, that what he was doing was important!
He was trying to serve and protect. What if I really was a runaway? What might have happened to me? Or to others around me?
This is the same thing. Only instead of age discrimination it would be “racial profiling”. If it serves the public by protecting them or even makes the citizens of this country a little safer isn’t that a good thing?
As to the second point there are two issues there.
ONE These are illegal aliens we are dealing with. NOT citizens of the United States. And last I checked the Constitution only applies to citizens of the United States. (remember? This is a government Of the people by the people and for the people?) if it is our government then it is here to serve US not everyone else. By the way for the record I am consistent on this and I do not expect my constitutional freedoms when I am in another country, they have not ascribed to the U.S. Constitution so I do not expect them to do the things promised me in there. Although I do expect them to honor their treaties and agreements they made with my country. That is why when I go to other countries I first make sure they are on good terms with the U.S. and that there is some form of promise from those countries to mine that I will be treated well.
TWO: as I recall there are three human rights that are so basic that they are called inalienable. Those three rights, in order of importance, are…
“Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Now in the past few months there have been several incidents along the Mexican American border. And due to some of those events Actual honest to goodness citizens of the United States of America have lost their lives their liberties and been denied their chances at happiness. So these illegal aliens are denying us the rights promised to us at the same time they are demanding those rights for themselves even though they are not citizens and these promises made to the citizens of America not them!
I think Arizona is RIGHT to have pushed this law and I think that if the federal government would have done it’s job in the first place to enforce the laws in question then we would not now be in this screw up.
If the federal government is unable or unwilling to provide the promise made then it is up to the states to do it.
They say such things as…
“oh this will lead to profiling”
“oh no it’s discriminatory.”
“ what about these people’s constitutional rights?”
Here’s the thing, first of all I do want to apologize if you are profiled. BUT I remember one time I was “pulled over” by a police officer because I was a young guy who was dropped off by my mother to go to work at Burger King. He stopped me because he thought I might be a runaway because of my age… isn’t that profiling? I was stopped because of my age! He said so himself. But I recognized, even then, that what he was doing was important!
He was trying to serve and protect. What if I really was a runaway? What might have happened to me? Or to others around me?
This is the same thing. Only instead of age discrimination it would be “racial profiling”. If it serves the public by protecting them or even makes the citizens of this country a little safer isn’t that a good thing?
As to the second point there are two issues there.
ONE These are illegal aliens we are dealing with. NOT citizens of the United States. And last I checked the Constitution only applies to citizens of the United States. (remember? This is a government Of the people by the people and for the people?) if it is our government then it is here to serve US not everyone else. By the way for the record I am consistent on this and I do not expect my constitutional freedoms when I am in another country, they have not ascribed to the U.S. Constitution so I do not expect them to do the things promised me in there. Although I do expect them to honor their treaties and agreements they made with my country. That is why when I go to other countries I first make sure they are on good terms with the U.S. and that there is some form of promise from those countries to mine that I will be treated well.
TWO: as I recall there are three human rights that are so basic that they are called inalienable. Those three rights, in order of importance, are…
“Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Now in the past few months there have been several incidents along the Mexican American border. And due to some of those events Actual honest to goodness citizens of the United States of America have lost their lives their liberties and been denied their chances at happiness. So these illegal aliens are denying us the rights promised to us at the same time they are demanding those rights for themselves even though they are not citizens and these promises made to the citizens of America not them!
I think Arizona is RIGHT to have pushed this law and I think that if the federal government would have done it’s job in the first place to enforce the laws in question then we would not now be in this screw up.
If the federal government is unable or unwilling to provide the promise made then it is up to the states to do it.
I don't understand
Let me explain… Obama stated that the point behind the health care plan was to cut the costs of the health care system. But recent reports by various groups and agencies, including the C.B.O. (Congressional Budget Office), state that, apparently, this will cost the government $115 BILLION (with a B) more than was originally projected.
(the original numbers showing that although this will initially cost 1.5 Trillion but it was going to be offset to break even in a decade? Nope. We will be at least 115 BILLION dollars in the hole.)
Also, about a third of the current providers for government insurance (AKA Doctors taking medicare etc…) will only be able to break even on costs, if that, under the new payment plans,. This means they cannot stay in business. Which means lower coverage, and speaking of lower coverage… In order to make the numbers look good to begin with the government had to cut the Medicare plus plans that actually help people because Medicare alone doesn’t.
Out of the uninsured people, whom this is supposed to help, approximately $33 Billion will be spent by them, per year!, to pay the fees and charges because the uninsured fee will be less than a private individual health care plan AND they will still be uninsured, And businesses will pay out about $70 to 80 Billion dollars more, same way, Which means they will have to get rid of employees in order to break even and again that will be without increasing coverage for any one at all.
“But look at all the good it does!”
(a) “Now a child cannot lose insurance just for turning 18 they are still covered.”
Insurance Companies have admitted that now if you add a child to an existing policy they are going to have to charge you so much more on your policy that it would be cheaper to just go out and buy the child their own policy.
(b) “But all those 30 million uninsured Americans will now have coverage.”
As pointed out already. No they won’t because, surprise, surprise they STILL cannot afford the health care policies. Wow imagine that! The government plan does NOTHING to actually lower any costs, so all those who couldn’t afford health insurance before? Well they STILL can’t! so no insurance for them.
(c ) “In the end it lowers costs, Obama said so.”
As already shown it will not lower costs it only lowers coverage. There will be less doctors because they are getting paid less, and it will cost more in the long run because as I have pointed out before you cannot pay for more people and have it cost less. If that was the way it worked then I would be going out to eat all the time because all I have to do is pay for everyone in the restaurant and I will be able to afford it.
Think about it people use your brains.
Now what I do not understand is how anyone can think that this bill is a good idea?
We have NO benefits from this until 2012 but we are paying for it now and yet even when it kicks in it will be a failure of spending.
What proof do I have about businesses having to increase their spending by too much?
Immediately after this bill was passed several companies including AT&T and Verizon reported to their shareholders that they were going to have losses this fiscal year. Losses they were not reporting until this bill was enacted, indeed they made no bones about it; this was a direct result of the health care bill put into place by congress.
Now a certain Government type person (congressman Henry Waxman), was livid that they were doing this “you are being anti government, how dare you make such statements, you are making this up, we are going to call you on the carpet and you are going to have to explain yourselves to this congress.” and indeed Mr. Waxman went to the trouble to set a time and date for the companies in question to come in front of a congressional hearing. Oddly enough a few days later that meeting was canceled. Apparently Mr. Waxman found out that…
(a) The companies were reporting REAL losses due to the bill, not made up numbers.
(b) The companies did not announce publicly to give the government a black eye. (that was a side benefit)
No apparently it is the law that in order to avoid another scandal ala Enron, businesses are required by law to make public all losses expected
( c) If Mr. Waxman were to pursue such a course it would only serve to make MORE public the fact that this health care bill was an unmitigated disaster.
So there you go. This November let’s send our message and get rid of these idiots in our government… before we end up like Greece and we all are doomed.
(the original numbers showing that although this will initially cost 1.5 Trillion but it was going to be offset to break even in a decade? Nope. We will be at least 115 BILLION dollars in the hole.)
Also, about a third of the current providers for government insurance (AKA Doctors taking medicare etc…) will only be able to break even on costs, if that, under the new payment plans,. This means they cannot stay in business. Which means lower coverage, and speaking of lower coverage… In order to make the numbers look good to begin with the government had to cut the Medicare plus plans that actually help people because Medicare alone doesn’t.
Out of the uninsured people, whom this is supposed to help, approximately $33 Billion will be spent by them, per year!, to pay the fees and charges because the uninsured fee will be less than a private individual health care plan AND they will still be uninsured, And businesses will pay out about $70 to 80 Billion dollars more, same way, Which means they will have to get rid of employees in order to break even and again that will be without increasing coverage for any one at all.
“But look at all the good it does!”
(a) “Now a child cannot lose insurance just for turning 18 they are still covered.”
Insurance Companies have admitted that now if you add a child to an existing policy they are going to have to charge you so much more on your policy that it would be cheaper to just go out and buy the child their own policy.
(b) “But all those 30 million uninsured Americans will now have coverage.”
As pointed out already. No they won’t because, surprise, surprise they STILL cannot afford the health care policies. Wow imagine that! The government plan does NOTHING to actually lower any costs, so all those who couldn’t afford health insurance before? Well they STILL can’t! so no insurance for them.
(c ) “In the end it lowers costs, Obama said so.”
As already shown it will not lower costs it only lowers coverage. There will be less doctors because they are getting paid less, and it will cost more in the long run because as I have pointed out before you cannot pay for more people and have it cost less. If that was the way it worked then I would be going out to eat all the time because all I have to do is pay for everyone in the restaurant and I will be able to afford it.
Think about it people use your brains.
Now what I do not understand is how anyone can think that this bill is a good idea?
We have NO benefits from this until 2012 but we are paying for it now and yet even when it kicks in it will be a failure of spending.
What proof do I have about businesses having to increase their spending by too much?
Immediately after this bill was passed several companies including AT&T and Verizon reported to their shareholders that they were going to have losses this fiscal year. Losses they were not reporting until this bill was enacted, indeed they made no bones about it; this was a direct result of the health care bill put into place by congress.
Now a certain Government type person (congressman Henry Waxman), was livid that they were doing this “you are being anti government, how dare you make such statements, you are making this up, we are going to call you on the carpet and you are going to have to explain yourselves to this congress.” and indeed Mr. Waxman went to the trouble to set a time and date for the companies in question to come in front of a congressional hearing. Oddly enough a few days later that meeting was canceled. Apparently Mr. Waxman found out that…
(a) The companies were reporting REAL losses due to the bill, not made up numbers.
(b) The companies did not announce publicly to give the government a black eye. (that was a side benefit)
No apparently it is the law that in order to avoid another scandal ala Enron, businesses are required by law to make public all losses expected
( c) If Mr. Waxman were to pursue such a course it would only serve to make MORE public the fact that this health care bill was an unmitigated disaster.
So there you go. This November let’s send our message and get rid of these idiots in our government… before we end up like Greece and we all are doomed.
Health care, shmealth care
O.K. I want to get one thing straight here.
I am exactly who Obama was referring to when he was talking about the 34 million Americans who needed or wanted health care.
But the funny thing is that there is NOTHING in the health care package that Obama put out there for me.
Obama keeps using rhetoric about how all the things people say about it that are negative. But when I use Common sense as I try to do, I see that they are not scare tactics.
Rationing? It HAS to happen or the costs of health care will supersede the G.D.P. of the whole world, forget the U.S. in fact it is happening already just ask my 5 month old daughter who now cannot get the prescription she needs because the state cannot afford it with the new health care plan of Obama’s.
Death panels? Same thing I mean think about it if you are going to ration anyway (as you have to) then doesn’t it make sense to be sure you are getting the most bang for your buck? So sorry all you 70 year olds out there who need a heart transplant, but those are too expensive to waste on you.
What about the claims about the lies of Obama re: keep your doctor, have access to doctors that didn’t exist before, and so on?
Well let’s look at it this way. When I was able to use the Medicare system it still didn’t help ME because there were not enough doctors taking the Medicare. The ones that were taking Medicare were so busy and inundated with patients that they could not take anymore patients.
Also now the government is going to tell them that they are going to get LESS reimbursement for the ones they do see… is that really going to make them want to see MORE patients?
So what is The Great Obama’s plan? Make me buy something I can’t afford or punish me for not. Even though I will get no benefit from the money I pay out. How is this better?
What we NEED is a plan that LOWERS cost and raises access. But that is exactly what we did NOT get from Obama’s health care plan.
I am exactly who Obama was referring to when he was talking about the 34 million Americans who needed or wanted health care.
But the funny thing is that there is NOTHING in the health care package that Obama put out there for me.
Obama keeps using rhetoric about how all the things people say about it that are negative. But when I use Common sense as I try to do, I see that they are not scare tactics.
Rationing? It HAS to happen or the costs of health care will supersede the G.D.P. of the whole world, forget the U.S. in fact it is happening already just ask my 5 month old daughter who now cannot get the prescription she needs because the state cannot afford it with the new health care plan of Obama’s.
Death panels? Same thing I mean think about it if you are going to ration anyway (as you have to) then doesn’t it make sense to be sure you are getting the most bang for your buck? So sorry all you 70 year olds out there who need a heart transplant, but those are too expensive to waste on you.
What about the claims about the lies of Obama re: keep your doctor, have access to doctors that didn’t exist before, and so on?
Well let’s look at it this way. When I was able to use the Medicare system it still didn’t help ME because there were not enough doctors taking the Medicare. The ones that were taking Medicare were so busy and inundated with patients that they could not take anymore patients.
Also now the government is going to tell them that they are going to get LESS reimbursement for the ones they do see… is that really going to make them want to see MORE patients?
So what is The Great Obama’s plan? Make me buy something I can’t afford or punish me for not. Even though I will get no benefit from the money I pay out. How is this better?
What we NEED is a plan that LOWERS cost and raises access. But that is exactly what we did NOT get from Obama’s health care plan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)