A politician who portrays himself as "caring" and "sensitive" because he wants to expand the government's charitable programs is merely saying that he's willing to try to do good with other people's money. Well, who isn't? And a voter who takes pride in supporting such programs is telling us that he'll do good with his own money-if a gun is held to his head." P.J. O'Rourke, Rolling Stone Magazine
"The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant." John Stuart Mill (1806-1873), "On Liberty", 1859
I read a very interesting article a couple of days ago. It has a very different take on what is happening within the United States right now. Actually, perhaps not so different that others haven't thought the same as well. Here is the article.http://www.qando.net/?p=3931&cpage=1#comment-13504. Hat tip to Q and O for this thought provoking piece.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Sunday, August 16, 2009
the fallacy of what is being called racism in America
"Censorship reflects a society's lack of confidence in itself. It is the hallmark of an authoritarian regime." U.S. Justice Potter Stewart
The above quote is a good lesson for those of us in the United States today. I have been reading some incredibly disturbing news stories and op ed pieces on the internet lately. It seems that the MSM (main stream media) has taken steps to demonize the conservatives lately. Those people who only watch the news and read the paper, don't have the full picture. It is disturbing to me, because they don't realize how much the MSM is directing their thoughts. The MSM doesn't want you to know that what is being said and done through the grassroots movements is not the result of some crazy mobs. They have accused the conservatives of being racist, because of signs that they have seen in these protests. Though the MSM hasn't done a thorough job of fact checking before accusing. Then after finding out that they are wrong, they haven't taken steps to show the real truth behind these signs. The one in particular that I am thinking of is the Obama picture with a Hitler type moustache drawn into it. This sign was actually made by members of La Rouche. They were mad and protesting because they felt that Pres. Obama wasn't going far enough to the left in the liberal agenda of Universal Health Care. In spite of that, the MSM has allowed people to assume that this sign was being held by a conservative, racist, right-wing lunatic. To be honest with you, I sincerely believe that dissent is the truest form of patriotism. To here the left tell it though, we are racist if we don't support Pres. Obama and his far left liberal agenda. Now, I want you to think back to when Pres. Bush was in office. People protested him all the time and with much more hateful diatribe than what most of these protesters on the right have done. There were posters of Bush calling him BusHitler with Hitler type moustaches on his picture. There were VERY disturbing signs of pictures of Bush with a gun to his head. They were very rude to President Bush, but he never once suggested that it was criminal in the way that they were acting. He took it in stride, while I sat at home fuming and wanting to kick some liberal hind end. Now Pres. Obama wants to silence us by calling us racist and by sending union thugs to these townhall meetings to cower us by intimidation.
Really, what can you say to someone who calls you a racist? I am in fact white, but my husband and my daughter are minorities. If you want to call me a racist, I am fine with that, because there really is no way to argue against that statement. If I say that I am not racist, then I'm a racist. If I say that I am racist, then I'm a racist. But I say to you, take a look at my life, my friends, my loved ones, etc. then tell me I am a racist. But don't look at me because I may be carrying a sign that says don't tread on me or has Obama portrayed as the Joker, and call me a racist. You don't know me from the man in the moon. When you do, then you can call it as you see it.
Also, if it was okay, to protest Pres. Bush, then it too is okay to protest the policies of Pres. Obama. DISSENT IS THE PUREST FORM OF PATRIOTISM.
The above quote is a good lesson for those of us in the United States today. I have been reading some incredibly disturbing news stories and op ed pieces on the internet lately. It seems that the MSM (main stream media) has taken steps to demonize the conservatives lately. Those people who only watch the news and read the paper, don't have the full picture. It is disturbing to me, because they don't realize how much the MSM is directing their thoughts. The MSM doesn't want you to know that what is being said and done through the grassroots movements is not the result of some crazy mobs. They have accused the conservatives of being racist, because of signs that they have seen in these protests. Though the MSM hasn't done a thorough job of fact checking before accusing. Then after finding out that they are wrong, they haven't taken steps to show the real truth behind these signs. The one in particular that I am thinking of is the Obama picture with a Hitler type moustache drawn into it. This sign was actually made by members of La Rouche. They were mad and protesting because they felt that Pres. Obama wasn't going far enough to the left in the liberal agenda of Universal Health Care. In spite of that, the MSM has allowed people to assume that this sign was being held by a conservative, racist, right-wing lunatic. To be honest with you, I sincerely believe that dissent is the truest form of patriotism. To here the left tell it though, we are racist if we don't support Pres. Obama and his far left liberal agenda. Now, I want you to think back to when Pres. Bush was in office. People protested him all the time and with much more hateful diatribe than what most of these protesters on the right have done. There were posters of Bush calling him BusHitler with Hitler type moustaches on his picture. There were VERY disturbing signs of pictures of Bush with a gun to his head. They were very rude to President Bush, but he never once suggested that it was criminal in the way that they were acting. He took it in stride, while I sat at home fuming and wanting to kick some liberal hind end. Now Pres. Obama wants to silence us by calling us racist and by sending union thugs to these townhall meetings to cower us by intimidation.
Really, what can you say to someone who calls you a racist? I am in fact white, but my husband and my daughter are minorities. If you want to call me a racist, I am fine with that, because there really is no way to argue against that statement. If I say that I am not racist, then I'm a racist. If I say that I am racist, then I'm a racist. But I say to you, take a look at my life, my friends, my loved ones, etc. then tell me I am a racist. But don't look at me because I may be carrying a sign that says don't tread on me or has Obama portrayed as the Joker, and call me a racist. You don't know me from the man in the moon. When you do, then you can call it as you see it.
Also, if it was okay, to protest Pres. Bush, then it too is okay to protest the policies of Pres. Obama. DISSENT IS THE PUREST FORM OF PATRIOTISM.
Friday, August 14, 2009
Taxes.
"How can we live in freedom and maintain that we are entitled to *anything* that we can't get without the labor of others? Remember, if we are entitled to the labor of others, that makes slaves of those others." Marilyn vos Savant, Parade Magazine, 12/31/95 - Marilyn vos Savant is listed in "The Guiness Book of World Records" Hall of Fame for the "Highest IQ".
How is it that someone ends up paying around 30% of their income to taxes? I have been thinking about it a lot lately. I don't believe that I have ever made more than about $30,000 a year, and that was when I had a really good job for me. Yet, I pay about 30% of my income to various taxes. I can tell you honestly that if I were able to keep that money rather than it going toward taxes, I would have virtually no debt. I would also have a savings account that I could rely on when emergencies pop up, as well as probably enough to keep me going in my retirement years by the time that I retire.
I can understand paying some income taxes. If it were up to me, we would only have income taxes to pay for our military. I can even understand paying some income taxes towards a modest stipend for our Congress and Representatives. I do not believe that they should have the virtually limitless resources that they currently have. Why should they and the President as well be able to go anywhere anytime with no thought to saving the taxpayers some money. They are not royalty, though they do at times present themselves this way. I am not a serf that I should be expected to work hard all my life and they get to enjoy the riches that we have made for them. I don't see why they need to take private jets everywhere. I think that at the very least, they could fly on regular flights with everyone else. If they want to take family members along on these trips, then they should pay for those out of their own pockets. It shouldn't be on the taxpayers dime.
I have been reading a lot about taxes lately. I think that if we, as U.S. citizens, got together and made our wishes known, we could probably boost the economy by proposing a flat tax. A flat tax would help those people like me who don't have a lot of money to spare. It would make it so that the tax code isn't so difficult to understand, and less able for those with a lot of money to be able to manipulate it. I, for one, would be ecstatic with a flat tax. I would be able to save money both for retirement and those odd emergencies. I would also be able to spend money on retail items that I now cannot afford. Retail, and in turn, the economy would jump right back into a more normal level. This would also help the unemployment problem, because those companies that are slow to hire for fear they will not be able to stay in the black would be able to go back to hiring employees as needed.
How is it that someone ends up paying around 30% of their income to taxes? I have been thinking about it a lot lately. I don't believe that I have ever made more than about $30,000 a year, and that was when I had a really good job for me. Yet, I pay about 30% of my income to various taxes. I can tell you honestly that if I were able to keep that money rather than it going toward taxes, I would have virtually no debt. I would also have a savings account that I could rely on when emergencies pop up, as well as probably enough to keep me going in my retirement years by the time that I retire.
I can understand paying some income taxes. If it were up to me, we would only have income taxes to pay for our military. I can even understand paying some income taxes towards a modest stipend for our Congress and Representatives. I do not believe that they should have the virtually limitless resources that they currently have. Why should they and the President as well be able to go anywhere anytime with no thought to saving the taxpayers some money. They are not royalty, though they do at times present themselves this way. I am not a serf that I should be expected to work hard all my life and they get to enjoy the riches that we have made for them. I don't see why they need to take private jets everywhere. I think that at the very least, they could fly on regular flights with everyone else. If they want to take family members along on these trips, then they should pay for those out of their own pockets. It shouldn't be on the taxpayers dime.
I have been reading a lot about taxes lately. I think that if we, as U.S. citizens, got together and made our wishes known, we could probably boost the economy by proposing a flat tax. A flat tax would help those people like me who don't have a lot of money to spare. It would make it so that the tax code isn't so difficult to understand, and less able for those with a lot of money to be able to manipulate it. I, for one, would be ecstatic with a flat tax. I would be able to save money both for retirement and those odd emergencies. I would also be able to spend money on retail items that I now cannot afford. Retail, and in turn, the economy would jump right back into a more normal level. This would also help the unemployment problem, because those companies that are slow to hire for fear they will not be able to stay in the black would be able to go back to hiring employees as needed.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Politics in general.
"Why is history important? Without history, many people have no idea how many of today's half-baked ideas have been tried, again and again - and have repeatedly led to disaster. Most of these ideas are not new. They are just being recycled with re-treaded rhetoric." Thomas Sowell
"Politicians never accuse you of 'greed' for wanting other people's money -- only for wanting to keep your own money." Joseph Sobran
"There is no talent so ardently supported, nor generously rewarded, as the ability to convince parasites they are victims." Thomas Sowell
I read these quotes today and thought how meaningful they are to our U.S. society today. First of all, history has shown us time and time again that a single payer healthcare system does not work. In the second quote, it says that we aren't greedy if we want others to pay for something that we want, but we are greedy if we want to hold onto our own hard earned money. The leftist tendencies accuse those of us who are fiscal conservatives of this exact thing. We, the conservatives, are cruel because we don't want the "poor" or "needy" to get free healthcare. Why is it that I am cruel if I want to hold onto the money that I earned? If I can't afford to pay for my own healthcare, how can I afford to pay for yours?
Supposedly, under Obama's plan, only people making over a certain amount will have to pay for this plan. How is that going to work? I have a lot of questions about this. I don't see how that will work. Most of those poor people who can't afford healthcare are already on Medicaid. We know that Medicaid is already unable to sustain itself and will be in the red within the next 10 years. Everyone who has a job is already paying for this Medicaid system. If Medicaid, is unsustainable, how is it going to work when you add another 40 million people? We already can't pay for Medicaid, but there isn't going to be more taxes added to those of us who make less than a certain amount? How is that possible? The math doesn't add up to me.
The more that I see and read about this proposition on a public health insurance option, the more wary I grow of it. I am one of the common people. I probably would qualify for this healthcare option, but to me it doesn't seem like the best thing for the U.S.
I think that what we really need to do is focus on getting more tort reform for the already existing plans that we have. Make it much harder for patients and lawyers to sue a doctor for unnavoidable problems. I see people suing the doctors for the most idiotic things. Things that most of the time you are cautioned about before the issue arises. Make extremely difficult and non cost effective for people and their lawyers to go after doctors. This would, in essence, push cost back down to where people could afford healthcare again because the insurance companies as well as the doctors wouldn't have to pass those costs onto us the consumer.
"Politicians never accuse you of 'greed' for wanting other people's money -- only for wanting to keep your own money." Joseph Sobran
"There is no talent so ardently supported, nor generously rewarded, as the ability to convince parasites they are victims." Thomas Sowell
I read these quotes today and thought how meaningful they are to our U.S. society today. First of all, history has shown us time and time again that a single payer healthcare system does not work. In the second quote, it says that we aren't greedy if we want others to pay for something that we want, but we are greedy if we want to hold onto our own hard earned money. The leftist tendencies accuse those of us who are fiscal conservatives of this exact thing. We, the conservatives, are cruel because we don't want the "poor" or "needy" to get free healthcare. Why is it that I am cruel if I want to hold onto the money that I earned? If I can't afford to pay for my own healthcare, how can I afford to pay for yours?
Supposedly, under Obama's plan, only people making over a certain amount will have to pay for this plan. How is that going to work? I have a lot of questions about this. I don't see how that will work. Most of those poor people who can't afford healthcare are already on Medicaid. We know that Medicaid is already unable to sustain itself and will be in the red within the next 10 years. Everyone who has a job is already paying for this Medicaid system. If Medicaid, is unsustainable, how is it going to work when you add another 40 million people? We already can't pay for Medicaid, but there isn't going to be more taxes added to those of us who make less than a certain amount? How is that possible? The math doesn't add up to me.
The more that I see and read about this proposition on a public health insurance option, the more wary I grow of it. I am one of the common people. I probably would qualify for this healthcare option, but to me it doesn't seem like the best thing for the U.S.
I think that what we really need to do is focus on getting more tort reform for the already existing plans that we have. Make it much harder for patients and lawyers to sue a doctor for unnavoidable problems. I see people suing the doctors for the most idiotic things. Things that most of the time you are cautioned about before the issue arises. Make extremely difficult and non cost effective for people and their lawyers to go after doctors. This would, in essence, push cost back down to where people could afford healthcare again because the insurance companies as well as the doctors wouldn't have to pass those costs onto us the consumer.
Hat tip to American Elephant commenter to Michelle Malkin for this wonderful poster on ObamaCare.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Conservatives for Health Care Reform
I know that the title may confuse some of you, but if you think about it, they stole our wording from us. I saw this comment on my favorite website today and thought I would pass it on. Maybe if the word gets out, more people will see that conservatives are not against healthcare reform. We are Pro tort reform, PRO patients rights, PRO free-market solutions. The thing that we are not for is a single payer or public option. Hat tip to ted c at HotAir. We, the hard-working citizens of the U.S., do not want to pay for healthcare for those in the U.S. who do not work. I think that the government needs to keep its hands out of my pocket and my bank account. The government does not need to take anymore money from me. They already take about 30-35% of what my husband and I make. We make enough money to pay most of our bills and put food on the table. I don't need them to make me give more of my hard earned money to something which I do not agree with.
Please check this link for more information on tort reform.http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/tort-reform-aids-health-lowers-cost-why-isnt-it-in-obamacare/. Hat tip again to PJ Media.
Please check this link for more information on tort reform.http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/tort-reform-aids-health-lowers-cost-why-isnt-it-in-obamacare/. Hat tip again to PJ Media.
Today is a new day.
"Politicians never accuse you of 'greed' for wanting other people's money -- only for wanting to keep your own money." Joseph Sobran
Today, I have found that this notion of ObamaCare, is completely unacceptable to me. I have read that there is a provision in this plan that allows the government access to my personal bank account if ObamaCare is passed. I will not allow this to happen, and follow like a sheep to the slaughter. The government needs to stay out of my business and my personal life. I have never really been an active political person. I am an average citizen of the U.S. I lost my job a year ago. I have a mortgage and bills just like everyone else. I do not have healthcare and I can not currently afford it. I do not, however, believe that the government owes me healthcare. I have not been to a doctor in 7 years. I am in my mid thirties, unemployed, and without healthcare. I am not on Medicaid, nor do I receive unemployment benefits. I work through a temp agency whenever they can find me a job. I do not think that getting something for nothing is the way to go. I firmly believe that hard work leads to a successful life. I have had a job since I was fifteen years old. I worked hard and paid for my first car with very little help from my parents. I paid for the things that I wanted with my own money from that time forward. Coming from a poor family, I was taught that if I worked hard I would be successful. Successful means different things to different people. To me, being a success means owning my own home, having a family who loves and supports me, as I do them. Success is not being rich and famous. What do the rich have that I don't. They usually do not have happy family lives or good marriages. Why would I want that? That doesn't mean though that I wouldn't be very happy to have a little extra money laying around, or a brand new car. It just means that I wouldn't want to have those things without the kind of family life that I do have.
President Obama says that he wants us all to be able to have healthcare, but mostly he means that he wants the poor to have healthcare. We already have a government program for that. It's called Medicaid, and it is failing miserably. When I was younger, I had a situation where I had to go on Medicaid for a short period of time. It was easily the most awful experience I could go through. I had to find a doctor first who was accepting new patients and who accepted Medicaid. The only one I could find was an hour away from me. Then, when I would get an appointment with him, I would specifically tell the nurse that I wanted to speak to the doctor and ask some questions. I would then get to his office, where I would usually wait for an hour or more, only to find out once I was taken to an exam room that the doctor wasn't available and I would be seeing only his nurse. She would do the tests required, leave me in the room for 15 to 20 minutes at a time, then come back to tell me to get dressed and I could leave. First of all, I believe that if you ask to speak to the doctor, then your appointment should be made when the doctor is in the office. I don't care if you're the poorest person ever or the richest person ever. You should be able to request a visit with the doctor, and have that request taken seriously. Second of all, when I actually did get to see the actual doctor, he didn't have time for me and treated me as if I was sub-human. I saw him one time in the six months that I was seeing that doctor, and that was for about 2 minutes. That is not my view of a great public health system at work.
Another point to make on a public health system. I was in the army. The military basically has this public health system that Obama and his fellow Democrats are trying to push. It is not a fun experience. You go to the doctor. You sit in the office all day waiting and hoping that they will be able to see you that day. Sometimes they can and sometimes you have to go back the next day and start the process all over again. Then when you tell the doctor what is wrong, they make an appointment with a specialist for you. This appointment can be up to six months down the road. If you are in pain, they hand you a prescription for the only drug approved for pain, 500 mg Motrin. If you are like me, Motrin doesn't help anything except for maybe a slight headache. Needless to say, these are two examples of completely ineffective public healthcare. Both are run by the government, and neither are very good at it.
Do you think that ObamaCare would be run any differently? What about the fact that you will only get "approved" drugs? Don't you think that the "approved" drugs will be the ones that are supporters of this healthcare system? These are some great things to think about. I am not above listening to arguments opposite of mine, and if they are able to be proved, then I may be convinced to coming around to a different way of thinking. For now though, my opinion is NO to ObamaCare.
Today, I have found that this notion of ObamaCare, is completely unacceptable to me. I have read that there is a provision in this plan that allows the government access to my personal bank account if ObamaCare is passed. I will not allow this to happen, and follow like a sheep to the slaughter. The government needs to stay out of my business and my personal life. I have never really been an active political person. I am an average citizen of the U.S. I lost my job a year ago. I have a mortgage and bills just like everyone else. I do not have healthcare and I can not currently afford it. I do not, however, believe that the government owes me healthcare. I have not been to a doctor in 7 years. I am in my mid thirties, unemployed, and without healthcare. I am not on Medicaid, nor do I receive unemployment benefits. I work through a temp agency whenever they can find me a job. I do not think that getting something for nothing is the way to go. I firmly believe that hard work leads to a successful life. I have had a job since I was fifteen years old. I worked hard and paid for my first car with very little help from my parents. I paid for the things that I wanted with my own money from that time forward. Coming from a poor family, I was taught that if I worked hard I would be successful. Successful means different things to different people. To me, being a success means owning my own home, having a family who loves and supports me, as I do them. Success is not being rich and famous. What do the rich have that I don't. They usually do not have happy family lives or good marriages. Why would I want that? That doesn't mean though that I wouldn't be very happy to have a little extra money laying around, or a brand new car. It just means that I wouldn't want to have those things without the kind of family life that I do have.
President Obama says that he wants us all to be able to have healthcare, but mostly he means that he wants the poor to have healthcare. We already have a government program for that. It's called Medicaid, and it is failing miserably. When I was younger, I had a situation where I had to go on Medicaid for a short period of time. It was easily the most awful experience I could go through. I had to find a doctor first who was accepting new patients and who accepted Medicaid. The only one I could find was an hour away from me. Then, when I would get an appointment with him, I would specifically tell the nurse that I wanted to speak to the doctor and ask some questions. I would then get to his office, where I would usually wait for an hour or more, only to find out once I was taken to an exam room that the doctor wasn't available and I would be seeing only his nurse. She would do the tests required, leave me in the room for 15 to 20 minutes at a time, then come back to tell me to get dressed and I could leave. First of all, I believe that if you ask to speak to the doctor, then your appointment should be made when the doctor is in the office. I don't care if you're the poorest person ever or the richest person ever. You should be able to request a visit with the doctor, and have that request taken seriously. Second of all, when I actually did get to see the actual doctor, he didn't have time for me and treated me as if I was sub-human. I saw him one time in the six months that I was seeing that doctor, and that was for about 2 minutes. That is not my view of a great public health system at work.
Another point to make on a public health system. I was in the army. The military basically has this public health system that Obama and his fellow Democrats are trying to push. It is not a fun experience. You go to the doctor. You sit in the office all day waiting and hoping that they will be able to see you that day. Sometimes they can and sometimes you have to go back the next day and start the process all over again. Then when you tell the doctor what is wrong, they make an appointment with a specialist for you. This appointment can be up to six months down the road. If you are in pain, they hand you a prescription for the only drug approved for pain, 500 mg Motrin. If you are like me, Motrin doesn't help anything except for maybe a slight headache. Needless to say, these are two examples of completely ineffective public healthcare. Both are run by the government, and neither are very good at it.
Do you think that ObamaCare would be run any differently? What about the fact that you will only get "approved" drugs? Don't you think that the "approved" drugs will be the ones that are supporters of this healthcare system? These are some great things to think about. I am not above listening to arguments opposite of mine, and if they are able to be proved, then I may be convinced to coming around to a different way of thinking. For now though, my opinion is NO to ObamaCare.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)